{"id":688,"date":"2017-03-24T11:07:22","date_gmt":"2017-03-24T09:07:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/?p=688"},"modified":"2019-07-23T11:45:01","modified_gmt":"2019-07-23T09:45:01","slug":"drones-artificial-life-savers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/?p=688","title":{"rendered":"Drones: Artificial Life Savers"},"content":{"rendered":"The media, egged on by pilots and the rest of the manned aviation community, has done a good job of broadcasting potential risks posed by Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Whether it is contraband delivered to prisoners, possible collisions with aircraft or peeping toms peering through windows, drones get a bad wrap.\r\n\r\nIn fact, UAVs provide far greater reward than cost, social or otherwise. Despite vast commercial benefits (PwC estimates that the UAV market will be worth USD 127 billion<\/a> by 2020), the greatest rebuttal to fear-mongers may be the advantages of drones to humanitarian aid. What better response to those who claim drones put people in danger than evidence of drones saving lives?\r\n\r\nDrone technology is not at the stage of saving lives autonomously, but watch this space<\/a>. Rather, the new technologies enable humanitarian workers to do their jobs better. The Swiss Foundation for Mine Action has catalogued how in its 2017 report: Drones in Humanitarian Action<\/a>.\r\n\r\nDrones have on board video cameras to enable both aerial photography and Beyond Visual Line of Sight flight. It is with this technology that UAVs have been aiding search and rescue teams in humanitarian missions.\r\n\r\nIn June 2016, the Migrant Offshore Aid Station deployed two drones<\/a> to patrol the \u2018dead zone\u2019 \u2013 a notoriously lethal stretch of water off the Libyan coast. With the migrant crisis showing no signs of abating, drones provide cheaper, more efficient and safer, alternatives to additional patrol vessels.\r\n\r\nSituational monitoring \u2013 a key aspect of humanitarian aid \u2013 has been bolstered by drone technology. When Typhoon Haiyan struck the Philippines in 2013, local topography was destroyed, rendering maps obsolete. Medair teamed up<\/a> with Swiss-based Drone Adventures to assess disaster damage and support shelter reconstruction activities.\r\n\r\nFollowing a devastating 2010 earthquake in Haiti, the International Organization for Migration used drone imagery to generate 3-D maps to assist local government officials with census mapping<\/a>. This technology was again deployed for damage assessment<\/a> and to manage camps<\/a> for displaced persons after storms from Hurricane Sandy struck the island.\r\n\r\nYou likely have seen recent drone delivery trials by Amazon<\/a>, UPS<\/a>, DHL<\/a> and even Domino\u2019s Pizza<\/a>. In Papua New Guinea, M\u00e9decins Sans Fronti\u00e8res deployed drones<\/a> in the fight against tuberculosis. To avoid geographical constraints, drones were used to deliver diagnostic samples from remote health centers to an MSF laboratory in the shortest amount of time.\r\n\r\nIn a previous article<\/a> we wrote about Zipline, an American company using drones to deliver blood to Rwandan hospitals. Since then, Zipline has attracted vast media attention and raised more than USD 40 million<\/a> \u2013 proof that this is a field reserved not only for charities.\r\n\r\nThe UK and US governments recently held talks<\/a> on using UAVs for food and medicine airdrops to besieged civilians in Syria. As of yet, the discussions have not borne fruit. They highlight, however, that authorities have taken note of drones\u2019 potential for humanitarian aid.\r\n\r\nSomewhat controversially, drones have also been trialled for peacekeeping operations. Recently, the Genocide Intervention Network and the Sentinel Project (co-founded by George Clooney) have been advocating<\/a> the use of drones to track suspicious persons and provide an early warning system for peacekeepers. Human Rights Watch too is looking at what drones can do in their work. The United Nations have already<\/a> used drones in the Democratic Republic of Congo, not only for surveillance, but also as a deterrent against \u201cpeople who move around with bad intentions\u201d.\r\n\r\nWhat is clear from these examples is that drones have already been instrumental in helping humanitarian aid workers across the globe. Yet, they are still a long way off from realising their full potential.\r\n\r\nThe absence of a legal framework on drone use has hampered their application, limiting their use in humanitarian aid. In the Philippines, special permission<\/a> was needed before workers were able to put UAVs into action. Given the time-sensitive nature of humanitarian crises, this is problematic.\r\n\r\nGovernment reaction to humanitarian drone missions following the 2015 earthquake in Nepal was less than constructive<\/a>. Nepalese officials saw drones as an added burden and passed draconian laws limiting their use. This is a stark contrast to government action in Rwanda, where a willingness to cooperate to reform drone regulations allowed Zipline to start their work.\r\n\r\nThe Drone Alliance Europe \u2013 full disclosure, Aviation Advocacy does work for DAE \u2013 advocates proportionate and consistent regulatory frameworks across Europe. It should be recognised that consistent regulations across jurisdictions is neither merely a European issue nor merely a benefit for consumers and commercial operators. Implementing a coherent drone framework allows organisations such as MSF, MOAC, IOM and the UN to perform live saving operations.\r\n\r\nThe message is clear: drones can save lives, but we must create the regulatory conditions for that to happen.","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The media, egged on by pilots and the rest of the manned aviation community, has done a good job of broadcasting potential risks posed by Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Whether it is contraband delivered to prisoners, possible collisions with aircraft or peeping toms peering through windows, drones get a bad wrap. In fact, UAVs provide far […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[21,19,20,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-688","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-disaster-relief","category-drones-and-uavs","category-humanitarian","category-safety"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/688","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=688"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/688\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":689,"href":"https:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/688\/revisions\/689"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=688"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=688"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aviationadvocacy.aero\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=688"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}