亚马逊认为无人机也需要独立空间？你认为了？

By Tekla Perry28 Jul 2015 22:55 GMTDrone Control: Here’s How Amazon Thinks Drones Should Fit Into U.S. Airspace

Photo: Tekla Perry

Create a drone zone—a dedicated piece of airspace for drones—and separate them within that space by speed and capabilities. That’s how Amazon thinks drones can best be integrated into our busy airspace, says Gur Kimchi, vice president and cofounder of Amazon Prime Air. Kimchi laid out this proposal today at UTM 2015, a three-day convention focused on Unmanned Aerial System Traffic Management, being held at the NASA Ames Research Center this week.

Specifically, Amazon’s vision starts by blocking out airports and other areas that demand complete exclusion of drones, either permanently or temporarily. Everywhere else, Amazon is considering the airspace below 400 feet drone territory. Amazon sees 400 to 500 feet as a buffer zone, no drones or manned aircraft. The company would then like to see the FAA designate the airspace from 200 to 400 feet as a fast lane, reserved for the higher speed, longer distance drone travel, with below 200 feet for slower, more local traffic.

Amazon also thinks it makes sense to divide aircraft up according to their capabilities into four classes. At the bottom is the most basic hobbyist drone with no automatic capabilities, though the operator can receive via smart phone and act on general alerts about traffic and other hazards in the area. Operators of these drones will likely have to follow line of sight rules. Next come drones with “good” command and control capabilities—they communicate with a ground station and can act on information received from that ground station to self-separate from nearby objects. Even “better” are drones that communicate directly with the Internet and other vehicles in the sky and can automatically take evasive action. And the “best” drones can also dodge non-communicating flying objects.

“We’d like to equip every seagull in the San Francisco Bay Area (with vehicle to vehicle communications), but that isn’t going to work,” Kimchi said.

In Amazon’s vision of airspace (photo), the less well-equipped drones stay out of high risk and high speed situations; the greater the complexity of the environment, the better equipped a drone needs to be to fly there.

Making it all work, Kimchi says, will require more automation of general air traffic control, standards that make sure all drones can communicate with each other and the Internet, classes of equipment that clearly define what drones can fly where, and drones designed to be safe and secure. As all this is developed, he urged for the adoption of performance-based standards, not technology-based standards, in order to allow the technology to continue to develop unimpeded.

Will this proposal get off the ground? It just might, based on the reaction of a panel of experts including representatives from the National Transportation Safety Board, the insurance industry, and law enforcement, along with two lawyers specializing in aviation law. When asked an hour or so after Kimchi’s presentation if any members of the panel had a strong objection to the plan—none did.

翻译仅供参考

无人机管理：亚马逊认为无人机应进入美国空域 drone控制：这里是亚马逊认为无人机应该融入美国airspace

创建一个无人区&mdash；专用件为无人机&mdash空域；并将其内的速度和能力，空间。这就是亚马逊无人机；认为最能融入我们繁忙的空域，说古尔泡菜，副总裁和亚马逊的Prime Air的创始人。泡菜放这个建议今天在UTM 2015，为期三天的会议集中在无人机系统的交通管理，被关押在美国宇航局艾姆斯研究中心本周。

具体而言，亚马逊&rsquo；的视野开始由封闭机场和其他地区的需求无人机完全排除，临时的或永久性的。在其他地方，亚马逊正在考虑在400英尺以下的无人机领域内的领空。亚马逊认为400到500英尺的缓冲区，无人机或载人飞机。公司就喜欢看FAA指定空域从200到400英尺的快车道，保留在更高的速度、长距离的飞机旅行，在200英尺以下的慢，更多的本地交通。

亚马逊也认为它是有意义的将飞机上根据自己的能力分为四类。底部是没有自动能力最基本的爱好者使用的无人机，虽然可以接收通过智能手机和行动对该地区交通和其他危害一般警报。这些无人驾驶飞机的运营商很可能必须遵循一系列的规则。接下来是与“无人机；好&rdquo；指挥与控制能力&mdash；他们与一个地面站，可从地面站自独立于附近的物体接收到的信息。是无人机直接沟通与互联网和其他车辆在空中，可以自动采取行动。无人机可以躲避不连通的飞行物体。

我们想让每一个海鸥；在三藩湾地区（与车辆间的通讯），但这并不是；不去工作。

亚马逊&rsquo；空域的视觉（图片），不齐全的无人机远离高风险、高速度的情况；环境的复杂性更大，更好的装备无人机需要飞往那里。

使所有的工作将需要更多的自动化通用航空交通控制、标准，确保所有无人机可以相互通信和互联网，类设备，明确什么DRones可以飞到哪里，和无人驾驶飞机的设计是安全的。由于所有这一切，他呼吁采用基于性能的标准，而不是以技术为基础的标准，以使该技术继续开发畅通。这可能是基于一个专家小组的反应，包括来自全国运输安全委员会、保险业和执法部门的代表，以及与航空法有关的两家律师。当被问到一个小时左右的泡菜'后的表现；如果任何小组成员都强烈反对该计划&mdash；没有。