James Carlson
| 注册时间： | |
| 最后在线时间 | |
| 飞行执照 | Private/IFR |
| 语言 | English (USA) |
That's a pretty good AP article.
(Written on 2018年 05月 11日)(Permalink)
Looks like they fixed the wording; it no longer says "runway." Though "gated area" still sounds a bit odd, especially in Baltimore. It's not San Diego.
(Written on 2018年 05月 11日)(Permalink)
Given that the article itself says that they're going for EASA approval, it certainly sounds like the studies you're talking about are part of the program.
(Written on 2018年 04月 13日)(Permalink)
Can you see IR or UV illumination? I'm pretty sure I can't, but I know a camera will. Do you know what the performance characteristics of that camera are compared with the naked eye? I'm pretty sure I don't know -- they didn't publish any specs here -- but I do know there are cameras that have far higher spacial and color resolution than any human eye. And what makes you think it would be returned to service *before* reviewing the data? Nothing in that video or article suggested in any way that you'd just fly the UAS, take some pictures, and then sign off without review. I'm sure you have experience in MX. I'm not doubting that for a moment. But I do think this complaint is ill-founded.
(Written on 2018年 04月 13日)(Permalink)
Neither the article nor the video explain the details of the equipment carried by that UAS. I think that with the right instrumentation and data processing, this could be a significant advancement over standard visual inspections. Given that they're apparently seeking certification for the system, I'd expect there's more to the picture here than a simple remote camera. I'd have no problem stepping on board an aircraft that was inspected by an automated system, especially if they can prove that it catches things that humans can't catch.
(Written on 2018年 04月 13日)(Permalink)
Article claims no transponder, but they clearly had both a squawk code (0027) and an altitude (FL370) from secondary, and those are different encodings. I think someone doesn't quite know how this works.
(Written on 2018年 02月 23日)(Permalink)
I was replying to the original poster, who asked if it was en-route. It seems like sort of an odd question, no? If I'd wanted to reply to your comment then ... wait for it ... I would have replied to your comment.
(Written on 2017年 12月 01日)(Permalink)
En-route at 3000 feet?
(Written on 2017年 12月 01日)(Permalink)
I think it'll be easier to get used to "airprox" in place of "NMAC" than it was to say "apron" instead of "ramp."
(Written on 2017年 11月 03日)(Permalink)
登录
