[twoplanekid]

Was discussed in detail by this thread (Drone delivery in the Villages starting soon)-> Drone delivery in the Villages starting soon

see post #11 & #24

[Microcodeboy]

Wonder how they will keep the drone in visual site by a human as required... Also the hesitation to embrace the idea may have something to do with liability. Seems new things always attract a team of lawyers ready to sue everyone.

I agree with all you wrote, Goldwing and love your videos and the lights you have in your screened in space. Thanks for all you do.

[Goldwingnut]

Originally Posted by Microcodeboy

Wonder how they will keep the drone in visual site by a human as required... Also the hesitation to embrace the idea may have something to do with liability. Seems new things always attract a team of lawyers ready to sue everyone.

I agree with all you wrote, Goldwing and love your videos and the lights you have in your screened in space. Thanks for all you do.

Line of site is not required. They are operating as an airline under Part 135 not a sUAS under Part 107. Under 135 they have more requirements prior to takeoff but less restrictions when airborne than 107. This is also why they will lower the package to a wait employee instead of landing; if the land then they need a licensed pilot rated on that aircraft to do the preflight checks prior to taking off again.

The drones they fly are quite a bit different than the one I fly. With 6 or 8 props they can sustain a loss of up to 3 props/motors and still complete their mission and return home. For me (and any other) with 4 props, a loss of one and Newton wins.

[UpNorth]

Unfortunately, drones use 10x more energy than delivery vans:

Delivery drones will use 10 times more energy than vans around town

[JoMar]

Originally Posted by UpNorth

Unfortunately, drones use 10x more energy than delivery vans:

Delivery drones will use 10 times more energy than vans around town

Did you not read the entire article or just forgot the part "Naturally, energy usage isn't the only thing to consider; there's the cost of staffing, the fact that electricity generation creates less pollution than diesel automobiles, driver pay rates, maintenance, downtime for battery charging and many other factors. But on a purely environmental analysis it seems electric vans are by far the best solution for or getting a lot of things to a lot of tightly packed places, efficiently and quickly:. There is never just one factor to consider.

[tophcfa]

One of the reasons they make shot guns is if one of those things flys low over ones house.

[Goldwingnut]

Interesting article but only half the picture and the study was of a very limited scope. The assumption in the article is that the UAS (drone) being used is a vertical flight only aircraft (much like a helicopter), while very versatile their lift system are, as the article points out, relatively inefficient. This design, while versatile, greatly limits the range of the aircraft due to battery capacity limitations. All of the companies looking to develop UAS based delivery systems know this and take this into consideration.

All (including UPS) are looking at, developing, or are using VTOL aircraft which takeoff and land vertically but once airborne transition to a fixed wing flight mode, like the MV-22 Osprey. While takeoff and landing is done with brute force, once airborne and transitioned to horizontal flight the energy demand is about 5% (or less) of the requirements for takeoff and landing. Very long distance flights are possible (>100 miles) with these aircraft. However, even on shorter flights the energy savings are tremendous. Vertical flight operation is only needed for takeoff, landing, and delivery, perhaps 2-3 minute of the entire flight. This alone negates the majority of the argument the article attempts to make.

The article also assumes a non-feasible delivery model of the UAS delivering to each house. The flight logistics of this model are incredibly complex, difficult to manage, and would necessitate a complex (and expensive) aircraft design to manage delivery of each package. This is not the model UPS is using.

For the sake of argument I can discuss the capabilities of my Phantom 4 Pro aircraft in a delivery model. With the normal high capacity LiPO battery it uses (89.2 watts/hrs) the P4P can carry a 2 lbs payload (about 10 prescriptions) a distance of 5 miles at 400 ft altitude, land and deliver the payload, takeoff and return to its starting point with 15% battery capacity remaining. To put that into perspective that would be sufficient to make a delivery from the CVS at 466 and Belvedere Blvd to just about anywhere in The Villages between SR42 and CR466A, including the east side of 27/441. This is of course under ideal conditions of zero winds and peak battery capacity. While such a flight would be theoretically and technically possible it does not leave much safety margin and would require multiple waivers under Part 107 rules. Under Part 135 rules that UPS is flying under it would be completely legal.

While I haven't and wouldn't undertake such a flight, empirical data supports the feasibility with such a flight with a current high end consumer drone with about 80 watts of power. The custom designed UAS UPS will be employing are capable of much more and in a safer manner.

[Goldwingnut]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

One of the reasons they make shot guns is if one of those things flys low over ones house.

Go for it!
You'll need to move after doing it, but not far, Coleman USP is right near The Villages. Interfering with the operation of an aircraft, including a drone/UAS is a felony offence (18USC32) with a prison term of up to 20 years. It is treated the same as if you tried a similar stunt on a commercial aircraft. The FAA takes this very seriously.

The US Supreme Court ruled in United State v. Causby (1946) that the land owner does not own or control the airspace in the "immediate reaches above the land" and that sole control of the airspace belongs to the federal government unless otherwise delegated by the controlling federal agency.

Just remember, if it's low enough for a shotgun to take out then it's also low enough for the camera on the drone to clearly see you, and the operator not only get a live feed back at their remote controller that is recorded there, it also has a GPS/GLONASS system accurate to within about 6 inches that is also continuously reporting the aircraft's location to the operator. Those that have tried such a stupid stunt have a very low success rate of outwitting and eluding law enforcement and the FAA.

So go ahead smart guy, take a shot, I dare you to.