search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
SEE the Airtruck and Sprayhawk in action


spraying—operations that involve applying pesti- cides, herbicides, and fungicides to row crops and orchards—as a primary market in the midwestern United States. “Ag is somewhere where there’s a clear use case for this today and people who want it. It’s kind of that simple,” Frank says. Only “a small fraction” of aerial applicators


want BVLOS operating capability, Xu says, which simplifies the regulatory and technical hurdles for remotely piloted helicopters. “The thing that they really want is high levels


of automation,” Xu notes. “They don’t want to be hand-flying this thing around. What they want is to click a button and it’ll spray the field. We’ve seen a shift toward high levels of automation for this specific use case and stripping back some of the more technically challenging things, like very long-range flight.” In recent years, farmers have flocked to


remotely piloted UAVs from companies such as DJI and Yamaha to apply chemicals to their crops. Still, UAVs, which are far smaller than traditional aircraft, remain a tiny part of the overall mix for row-crop spraying and other work in agricultural aviation, says Andrew Moore, CEO of the National Agricultural Aviation Association (NAAA). For most ag-spraying operations, growers


provide size and shape files to load into computer programs or apps that design aerial treatment plans. Once they’re completed, pilots download the programmed plans to USB drives and feed them to the UAV. This process will work just as well with the Sprayhawk, Frank says. “We’re not trying to reinvent the wheel with


everything here,” Frank says. “We’re trying to make use of the existing systems, tools, and pro- cesses that people already have in place.” More than a quarter of all US cropland, or


about 127 million acres, is sprayed, according to NAAA data. Helicopters make up about 16% of the domestic fleet of aerial applicators, with fixed- wing aircraft making up the bulk of the field. “Nothing beats the speed and hopper [pay-


load] capacity of a manned helicopter or fixed- wing aircraft flights,” Moore says. About 900 agriculture operators are currently


registered with the FAA to fly UAVs under Part 137 regulations, with about 1,940 vehicles registered


YOUR TRAINING NEEDS ARE OUR UNIVERSE


Sustainable training solutions ele vating the standards of safety and efficiency in helicopter operations.


www.reiser-st.com RST_VAI_Q3-24_QuarterPage_RZ.indd 1


SEP 2024 POWER UP 17.07.24 09:47


45


for aerial application. These UAVs are almost exclusively a “complementary addition” to the same operators’ manned-helicopter and fixed- wing aircraft flights, Moore says. “I do think there’s some competition [with tra-


ditional helicopters], but you’re seeing uncrewed aircraft treating areas you typically wouldn’t try to get [a crewed] aircraft into for safety reasons,” Moore continues. “And that’s what some of the hybrid operations are doing.” One of the operational issues smaller UAVs


confront is the sheer size of most midwestern fields that grow corn, soybeans, and other crops. The industry requires multiple manned assets to accomplish the needed spraying, Moore says. “There’s no way that acreage can be treated


by current commercial UAVs,” Moore adds. “It’s manned aircraft because of their speed and capacity. [Because of] the amount of corn in Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Nebraska, and other corn states, you have [manned] ag aircraft coming in from other states” in high season to meet the demand. Current UAV operations also require workers


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  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76