Drones and Online Video

Guest blog post by Matthew A. Borten, Multimedia Content Development Lead at the Federal Aviation Administration, Office of Communications

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UASs, or “drones” as most people call them) are a topic of much concern, debate and passion these days.  So what do UASs have to do with online video management and what does a guy who works in the FAA’s Office of Communications have to with any of this?

Well, first, let’s talk about how we at the FAA intersect with this wonderful world of online video content creation and distribution.  We create a lot of video content and we’re looking at ways to incorporate uStudio's video tools into our workflow – both for presenting key video communications content to end-users, stakeholders, clients, aviation enthusiasts, and the general public, and for streamlining our internal production processes within our multimedia operations.   So, that’s it for my “bonafides.”  [For the record, these musings are my own and are not endorsed by or have any official FAA capacity whatsoever …  I was invited to share my thoughts as someone who works with uStudio in a client capacity and has a unique perspective to share.]

Now, what about UASs?  As many of you are aware, capturing moving images (film or video) using a variety of flying devices has been going on since the beginning of filmmaking in the early 1900s.

From the 1960s through the early 2000s, gyro stabilized cameras mounted on helicopters or elaborate film rigs in the bellies of small airplanes have been used routinely in news reporting and shooting incredible scenes for documentaries and blockbuster feature films (especially amazing for chase scenes or other action sequences).

But increasingly since 2005, due to cost, insurance issues, ease of use and greater capabilities, smaller size and so on, filmmakers are relying on new miniature camera platforms on unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for capturing scenes from above.  In sports applications alone there are hundreds of devices in use (a few that were shown in all their glory during the Sochi Olympics in Feb. 2014).  Small-scale UAV camera platforms have become so ubiquitous that the average consumer (with a thick wallet or a large credit limit) can buy mini quad copters with built-in HD cameras that allow amateur filmmakers or hobbyists to download their incredible aerial footage onto their computers via USB connections.

What many people don’t know, and even what some of us at the FAA are just learning about, are the cool commercial applications for these devices that are being tested and are beginning to be used more regularly as new rules permit.  UAVs are especially effective in agriculture for applications of pesticides and fertilizers, mapping or inspecting fields and livestock; in the utilities arena for inspecting power lines and towers; and in the manufacturing and energy production world for inspecting smokestacks or vent systems; as well as other industrial or commercial uses. In the government arena, UAVs are often preferred for missions that are too "dull, dirty or dangerous" for manned aircraft.  These missions include fighting forest or brush fires, search and rescue, and long-term surveillance.

The FAA is still determining what and how such uses of UAVs for video capture will be regulated and enforced, with rules to be in place by the end of 2015.  The FAA is looking at several aspects:

• coming up with standards for UAV airworthiness certification (are UAVs safe to fly from an engineering perspective, especially when new aircraft are developed)
• coming up with certification requirements for pilots of small UAVs  (including medical requirements, training standards, and coordinating with other government agencies on security/vetting requirements)
• determining how UAVs will sense and avoid ground, terrain, structures, buildings, etc. and other flying objects
• control and communications with the unmanned aircraft and their pilots
• and most importantly, the FAA is figuring out how to integrate UASs into the National Airspace System (NAS), in terms of where, when, how high, how fast, and so on a UAV can fly if it is going to be anywhere near conventional civil and commercial aircraft.

A few cases of UAVs being used for video capture that have sparked a lot of public debate recently (I’ll get to the whole spying, law enforcement and military aspects in a bit) are for high-end real estate visualization and filming in major cities (high above or even between skyscrapers) for commercials or beauty shots. Use of UAVs for filmmaking is generally easier on large private lots or in rural and exurban areas with fewer space and safety concerns. In Los Angeles and New York, authorities have actively shut down UAV filmmaking efforts because of safety or terrorism concerns.

According to a Feb. 15, 2012 “Fast Company Magazine” article, in Jan. 2012, the Los Angeles Police Department issued a warning against the use of UAVs by real estate agencies.  The LAPD sent a letter to the California Association of Realtors stating that realtors “who hire unmanned aircraft operators to take aerial photographs for marketing high-end properties” were in violation of FAA rules and local motion picture filming ordinances. Users were warned that the LAPD's Air Division intended to prosecute violators.  But, nothing much came of it and the practice has not been drastically curtailed.

Now, about those pesky military, law enforcement and spying aspects of UAVs.  The FAA has nothing to do with those uses, other than to make sure that if any object is flying in the NAS, it is accounted for and doesn’t impose a danger, in terms of interacting with conventional aircraft that we control in our skies or anyone on the ground.  When these systems are used by a local law enforcement agency for instance, the appropriate FAA facility coordinates with that agency to make sure there will be no safety issues or impact on commercial and civil aviation in the area.

And of course, we’ve all read or heard on talk radio about how freaked out people are concerning UAVs’ spying capabilities.  Again, the FAA has nothing to do with this, but it’s worth keeping in mind that the vast majority of UAVs are in the hands of private individuals and industry; so, if anyone's spying on us it’s either an unscrupulous person behind the controls or it's the companies we do business with on a regular basis.

Another concern for many people is the fact that UAVs can fly in much more populated areas (not now due to testing restrictions, but eventually) and can crash, or cause other aircraft to crash, thereby injuring or killing people on the ground.  The most qualified professional UAV pilots, and thoroughly trained, diligent amateur UAV pilots, have a profound respect for how their actions can potentially impact the rest of the NAS.  However, there are a growing number of amateur UAV pilots (many of whom are very skilled) flying these things around thinking they’ve taken all safety matters into account, but who may accidently fly within dangerous proximity to conventional aircraft.  These “big birds” aren't nearly as nimble in terms of avoiding crashes.  In situations like this, we could end up with some unfortunate, avoidable accidents.

Here at the FAA, we've created several productions in the past 2 or 3 years about UAS activities and how we’re trying to integrate them into the National Airspace System in a safe but "open" way.  As an executive producer who polishes these videos, I’ve had to think long and hard about all the issues surrounding UAVs to make sure we’re presenting the matter as accurately and adeptly as possible.  I think there are lots of good uses for UASs, but that we need to put some important restrictions in place and that integrating UASs into the NAS has to be carefully controlled.  Too much "freedom" in this arena could lead to some pretty horrible accidents.

I guess that makes me sound like a "pro government regulation" guy, and I suppose overall that's really where I fall on most things like this -- often private industries try too hard to have no controls, and the government, in my opinion, just tries to regulate things where it is prudent and needed for the greater good (government is really us, the "people," trying to have rules in place that keep things safe, fair, and not abusive to the "average Joe.")

So, next time you consider getting that amazing aerial shot and think, “Hey, how ‘bout using one of those new super small drones to shoot it,” make sure you do it safely, with as much good planning as possible.  The last thing any of us in this business needs is to have a stupid, avoidable disaster on our conscience.  Just ask anyone involved in the filming of The Twilight Zone.

[For those who don’t remember, a horrible accident happened ending the life of actor Vic Morrow and two children, Myca Dinh Le (age 7) and Renee Shin-Yi Chen (age 6).  John Landis, the director, along with others faced legal and civil difficulties for years for unsafe practices undertaken during the filming -- a helicopter flew too low, at an altitude of only 25 feet and was damaged by pyrotechnics used on set; the helicopter lost control and crashed down on Morrow and the two children crushing them to death. The pilot and the passengers of the helicopter survived with minor injuries].