Additionally, the article pointed out that a couple of weeks ago there was a department issuedRequest for Information that canvassed industry for commercial-off-the-shelf “total solutions” for “automated, persistent wide area surveillance for the detection, tracking, identification, and classification of illegal entries."
According to the blog's author, "In other words, don’t bother submitting technologies that Secretary of Defense Gates might refer to as “exquisite.” Just stuff that works.
"It also sounds like the government is taking the exact opposite approach to acquisitions than it has in recent decades, where unique solutions were eagerly sought. This time, it’s all about what works, and works now."
Founder's Note:
I'm trying to not be jaded about this so if I sound a little bit obtuse about it, please bear with me and hear me out.
For the past three years, we've privately funded the design and development of an affordable, lightweight and man portable tactical aerostat system that can provide individual border security officers with an aerial coverage system for communications relay, aerial imagery or other applications.
We have not received one penny from the federal government to design and build this device and to get this device to where it is today including the painful process of building and testing and iterating 18 differerent versions.
We've anticipated and have an answer to the problems with integrating Unmanned Aerial Systems into the national airspace. We've anticipated and have an answer to the SBINet failure. We've anticipated and have an answer to issues with inflatable aerial devices. We've anticipated and are aligned with the shift toward pragmatic answers borne at the expense of the private sector.
We have an answer that makes sense and can change lives.
The question is this.
With all of the noise about "creating jobs" and "investing in the future", is the Department of Homeland Security and the US Border Patrol going to pay any attention to Sofcoast, a Small Disadvantaged Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business with industry leading knowledge in the area of Unmanned Aerial Systems and tactical operations on the front-line?
Or is this simply more hype? And are we going to have more of the same old business as usual?
So far we haven't had much success in simply getting someone at the US Border Patrol or DHS to simply come and see a demonstration of our system and we're not sure why.
Thank you to the STAR-TIDES organization which allowed us to co-exhibit with them.
Here's a little bit of information about them:
Sustainable, Affordable Support to Stressed Populations
TIDES is a research project dedicated to open-source knowledge sharing to promote sustainable support to populations under severe stress—post-war, post-disaster, or impoverished, in foreign or domestic contexts, for short-term or long-term (multi-year) operations. The project provides reach-back "knowledge on demand" to decision-makers and those working in the field. It helps catalyze public-private, whole-of-government, and trans-national approaches to encourage unity of action among diverse organizations where there is no unity of command. TIDES maintains this website, where anyone in the project’s network (called STAR-TIDES) can publish their work for feedback and critique.
Also, I want to thank everyone who stopped by to express interest, give us words of encouragement or just to show their support, we greatly appreciate it.
(CNN) -- Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on Friday canceled the controversial virtual fence along the U.S. border with Mexico, citing technical problems, cost overruns and schedule delays since its inception in 2005.
The Secure Border Initiative-network, a high-tech surveillance system to reduce border smuggling, so far has cost taxpayers almost $1 billion for two regions in Arizona, covering just 53 miles overall on the 2,000-mile border, according to a homeland security report.
Napolitano announced "a new path forward for security technology" along the border that is tailored to the needs of each region and provides "faster deployment of technology, better coverage, and a more effective balance between cost and capability," she said in a prepared statement.
"There is no 'one-size-fits-all' solution to meet our border technology needs," Napolitano said about her decision to end the problem-plagued virtual fence.
Her new plan would use mobile surveillance systems, drones, thermal imaging devices, and tower-based remote video surveillance, she said.
"Where appropriate, this plan will also incorporate already existing elements of the former SBInet program that have proven successful, such as stationary radar, and infrared and optical sensor towers," Napolitano said.
"The secretary's decision to terminate SBInet ends a long-troubled program that spent far too much of the taxpayers' money for the results it delivered," Lieberman said in a written statement. "From the start, SBInet's one-size-fits-all approach was unrealistic. The department's decision to use technology based on the particular security needs of each segment of the border is a far wiser approach, and I hope it will be more cost effective."
Thompson said he is glad that homeland security officials are "finally listening to what we have been saying for years -- that the sheer size and variations of our borders show us a one-stop solution has never been best," he said in a prepared statement. "I applaud them for taking this critical step toward using a more tailored technologically based approach to securing our nation's borders."
The decision ends the work of federal contractor Boeing (NYSE:BA) to build the virtual fence, and the homeland security agency will conduct open bidding for the new border plan, agency officials said.
Boeing spokeswoman Jenna K. McMullin said in a statement that the firm remains "committed to providing valuable solutions and supporting" the federal agency.
"We appreciate that they recognize the value of the integrated fixed towers Boeing has built, tested, and delivered so far," McMullin said. "We are proud of the accomplishments of our team and of the unprecedented capabilities delivered in the last year that provide Border Patrol agents increased safety, situational awareness, and operational efficiency."
Napolitano said "unprecedented" manpower, infrastructure and resources along the border will complement her new border security plan.
The U.S. Border Patrol is better staffed than at any time in its 86-year history, having nearly doubled the number of agents from approximately 10,000 in 2004 to more than 20,500 in 2010, according to a homeland security report.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement has increased the number of federal agents deployed to the Southwest border, with a quarter of its personnel currently in the region.
President Obama has also deployed 1,200 National Guardsmen to the border.
In fiscal years 2009 and 2010, federal agents seized more than $282 million in illegal currency, more than 7 million pounds of drugs, and more than 6,800 weapons along the border -- increases of more than $73 million, more than 1 million pounds of drugs and more than 1,500 weapons compared with 2007-2008.
Also, the Border Patrol's nationwide apprehensions of undocumented immigrants decreased from nearly 724,000 in 2008 to about 463,000 in 2010, a 36 percent reduction, indicating that fewer people are attempting to illegally cross the border, a homeland security report said.
Do you think five years meets the definition of "soon"?
I've spent quite a lot of time working with Small Unmanned Aerial Systems both tethered and untethered. I (and others on our team) have worked very hard with extraordinarily bright end users, engineers, scientists and program managers to improve system designs and performance. We have also worked diligently to increase awareness and to develop new area's, methods and techniques for advancing these systems.
The primary issue was, is and remains to be "low altitude access for small unmanned aerial systems". In other words, operating these drones in the national airspace.
I have said it before and I'll say it again, I believe this is a national issue and of great importance and interest to every American. I've spent hundreds (if not thousands) of hours working unmanned systems issues in my career both as a military member and now as a civilian. The most difficult set of issues that I have personally dealt with (and still deal with) are not technical. They are regulatory and legal issues. Specifically, the issue of unmanned systems access to the national airspace in the United States.
Last year, in a thoughtstream titled "Redux: Put it on a tether", I made the following statement:
"My professional assessment is that the United States is at least five years (yes, I said FIVE years) away from any meaningful remedy that will enable rapid, ad-hoc, low altitude national airspace access for Small Unmanned Aerial Systems (SUAS)."
Today, I was interested and pleased to see the front page article in USA Today titled "Police turn to drones for domestic surveillance". So, I read the article which was very well written and precisely articulates the present situation.
With one exception.
What caught my attention was how "soon" the word "soon" was used in the article, which was the 6th word of the article.
"Police agencies around the USA soon could have a new tool in their crime-fighting arsenal: unmanned aircraft inspired by the success of such drones on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan."
Here's what webster's says about the definition of the word "soon".
within a short period after this or that time, event, etc.: We shall know soon after he calls.
before long; in the near future; at an early date: Let's leave soon.
promptly or quickly: He came as soon as he could.
readily or willingly: I would as soon walk as ride.
early in a period of time; before the time specified is much advanced: soon at night; soon in the evening.
Later in the article a University of Auburn expert makes the following statement,
"Wesley Randall, principal investigator on an FAA grant awarded last year to researchers at Auburn University to study the risks associated with unmanned aircraft, predicts drones will be used by police departments in five to 10 years."
What this means is that "soon" to you and I and Mr. Webster is not the same definition of "soon" used by this author or others. I guess that's the benefit of having an infinite amount of time to do something. Unlike the average American living and working to pay their taxes and bills in a timely manner.
Why is this relevant to us you might ask? Because, frankly timeliness is what matters when critical incidences happen. People value timeliness.
Imagine that a Police Officer has a small drone in the trunk of his or her car. He or she receives a call that a person is lost in the woods. They respond by driving to the approximate last known location of the lost person and park their vehicle. They pull out their small drone system with a camera onboard, launch the system and begin a hasty search of the area.
It seems to me, in this situation, an effective and swift response could make all the difference.
Today, this Police Officer wouldn't have the equipment because no administrator or councilmember or city manager in their right mind would (or perhaps could?) approve purchasing equipment that is illegal to operate in the United States.
When I say "illegal" I am describing the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) regulations that specify and permit equipment to be operated in the United States National Airspace System every moment of every day at every altitude everywhere in the United States.
To wit, in large part,the FAA does a fantastic job, considering all of the complexities and issues that they deal with minute by minute with regards to ensuring a safe aviation transportation system.
Put simply, the US national airspace management system (designed in the 1940's) that the FAA uses to keep America's skies safe actually limits and restricts our safety in other ways.
When filing a Flight Plan (or COA) isn't an option
It doesn't help that said police officer may not know specificallywhere or when he or she might need to begin a hasty search for that lost person.
Presently, in order for that Police Officer (end user) to operate equipment (e.g., Small Unmanned Aerial Systems) in the National Airspace, they are required to have a Certificate of Authorization (COA) Waiver, which is a license of sorts that allows "specific persons with specifically certified and approved equipment with specified and special permissions to deviate or depart from existing FAA regulations for a specific period of time at a specific location".
Currently, the FAA prefers that all Unmanned Aerial Systems operations (Small, Medium and Large) be confined to Warning Area's and Restricted Area's airspace, Non-Joint use Military Class D airspace and in some cases Class G airspace for "low altitude" access provided that that airspace is owned/controlled by the Federal Government.
Again, unfortunately, this doesn't do the lost person or the first responder much good.
Put another way, Imagine filing a flight plan that takes two years to be approved.
The problem is that it can and does take years to be granted these permissions. (If you can get them). If you live in area's that are "unsuitable" from the FAA's perspective, your request will be denied or rejected.
Again, unfortunately, this doesn't do the lost person or the first responder or taxpayer much good.
The present (and even proposed) regulatory requirements for having pre-approved (Certificate of Authorization Waivers) COA's (as well as emergency COA's) essentially eliminates (or at a minimum heavily prohibits) the possibility for "rapid and ad-hoc" access to low altitude airspace in the US. (In other words getting a camera in the air as quickly as possible).
These requirements also eliminate certain US citizens from the value and benefit to
compete in a burgeoning industry
benefit as tax payers and citizens from the protections and capabilities these systems can provide to all of us.
I and most of my peers have accepted this to be the present situation for now and into the foreseeable future that we find ourselves in.
What's a true "soon" or "now" solution? (not a five year "soon" solution)
Putting it on a Tether
The primary reason we decided to design and build an inflatable device on a tether is a very practical one.
We truly "get" that "soon" isn't really "soon".
The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) allow moored and tethered equipment (e.g., lighter than air balloons) to operate at or below 500 ft. above ground level (AGL).
So we're developing ASAP XP "Mako". On one hand Mako is an interim solution (product substitute) that can serve to provide "rapid and ad-hoc access" to low altitude airspace in the US. On the other hand Mako is a new kind of capability (new product) that has merit on its own and in the process, it just might democratize the very undemocratic process of accessing low altitude airspace in the United States and around the world.
One of the biggest benefits of Mako is actually being able to easily (and legally) get payloads airborne, thereby allowing for low altitude airspace access for numerous reasons, one of which might be searching for that lost child in the woods.
A new piece of technology may soon be coming to South Florida, but is already raising concerns from residents.
The Miami-Dade Police Department recently finalized a deal to buy a drone, which is an unmanned plane equipped with cameras. Drones have been used for years in Iraq and Afghanistan in the war against terror. Many residents are concerned that the new technology will violate their privacy.
MDPD purchased a drone named T-hawk from defense firm Honeywell to assist with the department's Special Response Team's operations. The 20-pound drone can fly for 40 minutes, reach heights of 10,500 feet and cruise in the air at 46 miles an hour. "It gives us a good opportunity to have an eye up there. Not a surveilling eye, not a spying eye. Let's make the distinction. A surveilling eye to help us to do the things we need to do, honestly, to keep people safe," said Miami-Dade Police Director James Loftus.
The ACLU is one of the organizations that is concerned about the drone that may soon be coming to Miami-Dade County. Howard Simon, the executive director of the ACLU of Florida approves of the drones but also advocates strict regulation of the drones. "Technology: there's no reason not to embrace technology if it makes the streets safer, if it helps the police. The concern is, though, that every new technology also has within it the capacity to threaten people's privacy," he said.
Terrorism expert Douglas Haas, however, believes that the drones will help in many ways, including fighting crime. "This has unlimited capabilities," said Haas. "Not only is it good tactically for a SWAT call out or any tactical situation, there's numerous search and rescue applications for it after a hurricane. They could send one of these up fast and assess damage."
Residents have also questioned whether or not Miami-Dade Police can afford to purchase the drone, especially since the department has recently made a lot of budget cuts. "Nothing happens quickly in the purchasing process, and that's something that really was in place, the funds for that, a couple of years ago," Loftus said.
The purchase of the drone may have been made possible through a federal grant; however, this has not been confirmed.
Honeywell has applied to the FAA for clearance to fly the drone in urban areas. This has never been allowed before, but if it does happen, the Miami-Dade Police Department will be the first police agency in the US to use the technology.
(Copyright 2011 by Sunbeam Television Corp. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)
In order to describe and understand the level of readiness or maturity the Department of Defense and other federal agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security use a "TRL" (short for Technology Readiness Level) framework. I thought it might be helpful to share a slide I found in a DHS S&T presentation that quickly and efficiently depicts these different "TRL" levels. What this means for us is that when I describe to someone that Mako (our product) is at a "TRL 6" , the meaning is that "the system/subsystem model / prototype has been demonstrated in a relevant environment" - in our case this meansMako has flown and performed as advertised in wind, rain, snow, dust, mountains, etc... not just on a sunny day or inside of a building on a bench.
Image courtesy of The Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate
Why this is relevant is because as a team, we have been and are continuing to attempt to blend the best of both processes and deliver as much value to end users on the frontlines as quickly as possible while not asking tax payers to bear the highest risk but provide investors an opportunity to benefit from large returns on investment by providing us with the highest risk capital which is the earliest capital with no revenue and no product. Our private investor funding has enabled us to rapidly iterate (18 turns over three years) and to advance our product development much faster than any government agency would have allowed up to this point.
Why this is valuable is that while our private investors have borne much of the early risk (and stand to benefit the most over time) with their capital to enable us to rapidly iterate in very short cycles, we believe that we are now in transition from product R&D (lots of cash out) to a go-to-market strategy (lots of cash out with cash starting to come in). We have made our first product sales to the commercial market, we have additional interest from partners and service providers and are targeting these commercial sales and services revenue opportunities in the first quarter of 2011 while we continue our efforts to pursue and win federal funds for continued product improvements and program insertion to meet both recognized and unrecognized needs of Department of Defense and other federal customers.
I couldn't help but chuckle at this slide while reviewing a DHS S&T presentation. I think Steven Gary Blank should incorporate these pictures in his book the four steps to the epiphany.... it might make it very easy for people to understand.
Image via Wikipedia
