(Ed. Note: This article is a shortened version of the article published in the International Journal of Unmanned Systems Engineering (IJUSEng) – 2014, Volume 2, and is in part reprinted by written permission. See
http://dx.doi.org/10.14323/ijuseng.2014.1)
T
he latest technological advancements in re- mote electronic sensing, along with major strides in aircraft automation and miniaturization, have allowed a surge in the implementation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) in law enforcement missions. The UAS is a formidable asset that is already being implemented in hostage crises and other law enforcement situations. Although domestic Un- manned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) use is strictly curtailed by the FAA, the advantages of UAV usage are inarguable.
The advantages of airborne assets are numerous for law en- forcement: rapid deployment to and from a site, expeditious search of a large area, and the ability to track a subject through traffi c or in a wooded area. Compared to helicopters, UAVs get the job done better, cheaper and faster. Small UAVs are now able to provide law enforcement with nearly the same eye- in-the-sky capabilities as that of manned aircraft at a fraction of the cost. Even more compelling, small police departments that could never afford a manned aviation department could implement an unmanned aviation division with many of the same benefi ts at a fraction of the cost.
Hostage Crisis Scenario
What is an appropriate UAV platform for a hostage crisis standoff? Here is the scenario: The police are attempting to end a hostage crisis and need to know how many hostages and hostage takers are present, as well as the types of arms that are employed by the hostage takers. Important questions need to be answered regarding the situation and the environment in considering additional mission requirements. The tactical questions include: How many hostage takers are there? Are they traveling (train, car, plane) or are they station- ary (in a building)? Are the hostages and hostage takers spread out or located in defi ned areas? What kind of material is the building or vehicle made out of? What is the environment (day or night, dark or light, inside or outside)? What sensors would be most effective in the given situation?
Certain assumptions must be made in order to properly address the specifi c hostage crisis situation. We assume the hostage location is a single-family, wooden-framed house in a suburban neighborhood. The time is early evening, before dusk, 45° F with 50-percent cloud cover.
Concept of Operation (CONOPS)
The fi rst task is to gather intelligence on the hostage scene using UAS with appropriate sensors in order to determine the number of people involved, their locations, their role (hostage or hostage taker) and what weapons are being used. With the given scenario, we develop a CONOPS for the mission.
The goal of the hostage crisis team is the safe recovery of all hostages with no fatalities and minimal injuries. The strategy of the UAS team is to implement UAS assets to gain such in- telligence. The tactics include the use of one or more UAVs to gain intel using electro-optical (EO) systems while remaining covert and relay the intel to the crisis coordinator for use in deploying and managing ground tactical forces. The UAS consists of a UAV, Ground Control Station (GCS), UAV pilot and sensor operator. The UAS team deploys from an area clear of trees within a one-block radius of the hostage scene, which is out of sight and earshot of the scene. The team deploys the UAV from the launch site and the UAV approaches the hos- tage scene just over trees to within usable sensor range. The sensor operator instructs the pilot to position the UAV in various locations to maximize scene coverage until suffi cient intel is attained. The UAV remains covert using stand-off tactics and cover behind trees and obstacles. The engine and propeller noise is masked using lawn mowers and/or leaf blowers. The UAS remains operational during ground tactical opera- tions, relaying real-time operational status to the crisis coordina- tor. Rescue efforts launch a quickly developing dynamic response, involving hostage and taker movement, infi ltration of a rescue team, and possible weapons exchange. The UAS team continues to update the operation coordinator throughout, identifying hostages, takers, rescue team members,
www.lawandordermag.com 17
The ARA Nighthawk. Photo courtesy of Applied Research Associates.
The Draganflyer X6. Photo courtesy of AP/Mesa County Sheriff’s Department.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68