Posted on 05/02/2013 8:54:46 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
Just as terrorists can use GPS guided drone/UAVs to target jet turbines in the Runway Kill Zone (RKZ) as explained in earlier posts to this blog (here), the quad-copter drone that was hovering in the JFK landing approach of an Alitalia jetliner on March 5, 2013 may have been the first terrorist attack in a Landing Approach Kill Zone (LAKZ). News coverage of the story can be seen here.
Using Jeppesen maps, a terrorist can determine the altitude that jetliners are supposed to fly at for each descending leg of a landing approach to a specific runway. At JFK on March 5, 2013, the Alitalia jet was approaching runway 31R. Going on the internet a recent Jeppesen map for that runway shows a leg approximately a mile in length right before Long Beach, NY (where the multi-copter drone was hovering) during which the airliner is supposed to hold steady at 1,900 feet.
Using newly available First-Person View (FPV) “video piloting” (here) the multi-copter’s remote pilot could hover the drone at 1,900 feet at the GPS coordinates of the Jeppesen landing approach to JFK runway 31R and visually guide the drone to target one of the jet turbine intakes on the Alitalia airliner.
“The odds of bringing down the aircraft are almost zero because they can land just fine on the other engine. But the fear factor would be great.”
True. But two terrorists operating two drones could knock out both engines. This JKF drone event on March 5, 2013 could have been a proof of concept.
The cost of drones is now so low and drone swarming software is now available so that a swarm of drones could be maneuvered into the GPS coordinates for ZULAB in the Jeppesen. This would reverse-engineer a bird-strike crash such as Captain Sully experienced.
Here is a video of coordinated drone swarming recently achieved which terrorists could soon be bringing to the Runway Kill Zone (RKZ) or the Landing Approach Kill Zone (LAKZ) near you!:
Video: Swarm of Tiny Quadcopters Do a Delicate Dance
“Towards a Swarm of Nano Quadrotors”
Alex Kushleyev, Daniel Mellinger, Vijay Kumar, GRASP Lab, University of Pennsylvania
“Perhaps it’s somewhat hyperbolic, but seeing the ease and grace with which these things move in and out of formation, negotiating obstacles and ducking seamlessly between each other as they execute a figure eight really tickles the fanciful, sci-fi-friendly part of the brain. GRASP Lab creations have already shown us how quadcopters can work together to manipulate objects and even build structures together. The idea of looping more than a dozen of these things together—as we see in the video below—and putting them to work on complex projects makes this kind of precision performance feel very much like the future.”
Think of PacMan at 10,000x normal speed. Doesn’r sound easy; you’re right.
“As a former dispatcher, I hav always felt that approach plates should be controlled..”
These Jeppesen runway approach maps seem to be widely disseminated to all pilots these days in digital files that terrorists could likely have no problem obtaining.
That being the case it would seem to be most practical to defend runway and approach “kill zones” and alert officials and the public to observe and report drone activities near airports as well as develop drone counter-measures for military bases and VIPs like the POTUS.
“Thought provoking links. Very instructive. Thanks for posting!”
Thanks, Old Sarge!
The author of the blog, “2branta” (gee, I wonder who that could be?) took that name to memorialize crash of AWACS Yukla 27 which was brought down by as few as two Canada Geese, aka Branta Canadensis, thus 2branta.
Canada Goose (Branta canadensis)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Geese
“This species is 76–110 centimetres (30–43 in) long with a 127–180 centimetres (50–71 in) wingspan. The male usually weighs 3.2–6.5 kilograms (7.1–14 lb), and can be very aggressive in defending territory. The female looks virtually identical but is slightly lighter at 2.5–5.5 kilograms (5.5–12 lb), generally 10% smaller than its male counterpart, and has a different honk.”
Captain Sully hit several of these and suffered a total loss of thrust. A cartoonist pictured terrorists directing trained Canada Geese to bring Sully down, so the concept of reverse-engineering bird-strike aircraft destruction is out there for any alert terrorists to pursue.
Terrorists are already known to be experimenting with drones and thinking about how to kill large numbers of Americans with them:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/22/armed-drones_n_2527242.html
WASHINGTON — As the technology for arming drones spreads around the world, terrorists could use the unmanned, missile-firing aircraft to attack and kill the president and other U.S. leaders, the former chief of U.S. intelligence said Tuesday.
Retired Adm. Dennis Blair, who served as President Obama’s first director of national intelligence, told reporters he was concerned that the proliferation of armed drones — a potential outgrowth of the U.S. reliance on drones to attack and kill terrorists — could well backfire.
“I do fear that if al Qaeda can develop a drone, its first thought will be to use it to kill our president, and senior officials and senior officers,” Blair said during a conference call with reporters. “It is possible without a great deal of intelligence to do something with a drone you cannot do with a high-powered rifle or driving a car full of explosives and other ways terrorists now use to try killing senior officials,” he said.
The U.S. development and growing use of armed drones has not “opened a huge Pandora’s box which will make us wish we had never invented the drone,” Blair said. But he said if drones are acquired by terrorist groups, it would force the U.S. to take defensive measures. Yet, the U.S. already has extensive surveillance of its airspace and sophisticated weapons designed against a variety of airborne threats.
Brighter minds than mine, etc....
Posit two scenarios. The bad guys are using aviation frequencies and their locations can be determined.
They use hobby frequencies and whatever may be affected would be momentary and inconsequential to legitimate users. Radio control models will just be unable to operate within x miles of airports, and surveillance cameras can be set up near all the likely places the bad guy would pick to do the deed.
“These are coming at you at 400+ miles an hour, you have 1.5 seconds to aim, your hovering drone moves 10 foot per second.”
No problem.
Approaching runway 31R a mile out from Jeppesen point ZULAB at 1,900 feet for which I have GPS guided coordinates and onboard autopilot navigation on my drone, the C-17 will be maintaining a contant 315 degree ILS bearing at a constant 1,900 foot altitude heading straight at my drone that will be pre-positioned directly in front of it give or take a few meters.
Multi-drone autonomous navigation is so sophisticated now that the drone can autocorrect for wind-drift! Note that a huge jet turbine, some in excess of 3 meters in diameter, is not only a relatively large target, but a huge suckion machine!
Here is a video of a GPS controlled copter proceeding to a three-dimensional waypoint and holding despite wind. The latest remotely piloted systems allow for waypoint guidance with remote pilot override:
“Piccolo Autopilot - UAV Helicopter VTOL Demonstration”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3bsME6wORU
“Why aren’t all the possible frequencies these minidrones can operate on determined, and 2-second bursts of ‘control’ commands transmitted at intervals to freak out the drones?”
Drone countermeasures, especially against hobby-type RC drone aircraft are probably employed near aircraft used by VIPS and the military. There is no sign that these types of protection are in use at civilian airports, which are a big soft target for terrorists.
You have a facination with technology that does not translate well in the real world. Note in the picture I gave you, ALL the planes are on the flight plane. Note that the flight plane is not 6 inches wide but about a half a mile wide or more.
Watch planes coming into or out of an airport, do they line up like little ducks?
Thats ok, enjoy the technological fantasy, it is how you invent things that do work. A stage or two beyond where you are at is called invention or genius.
The latest drones use GPS-guided autonomous navigation which uses NO radio control. All GPS units in cars would be disabled near airports if GPS were jammed.
Here is a basic description of new inexpensive navigation available to you and to terrorists now which could be used to "mine" the runway kill zone or landing approach kill zone:
http://diydrones.com/profiles/blogs/ardupilot-mega-home-page
"Just add the ArduPilot Mega autopilot to any RC aircraft and it becomes a fully-programmable flying robot with a powerful ground station and Mission Planner. Features include: ■Return to Launch with a flick of your RC toggle switch or a mouse click in the graphical Ground Station ■Unlimited 3D GPS waypoints ■Built-in camera control ■Fully-scriptable missions ■One-click software load, and easy point-and-click configuration in the powerful Mission Planner. NO programming required! ■Replay recorded missions and analyze all the data with a graphing interface ■Supports two-way telemetry with Xbee wireless modules. ■Point-and-click waypoint entry or real-time mission commands while the UAV is in the air ■Fly with a joystick or gamepad via your PC--no need for RC control! ■Built-in failsafe will bring your aircraft home in the case of radio loss"
CBDR
Constant Bearing Decreasing Range
“Watch planes coming into or out of an airport, do they line up like little ducks?”
When they are in a landing approach following ILS, yes they do...usually with one mile separation, IIRC!
Taking off, not at all, but each airframe passes through a very predictable runway kill zone on take-off.
It appears that Harry Potter fans have become interested in remote control aircraft and doomsday tales. So far, birds are more likely to be dangerous FOD than slow, short range, inaccurate toys easily affected by winds, etc.
And we're currently only talking about inert hobby drones.
Consider a drone carrying few pounds of nitroglycerin or acetone peroxide hitting a wing fuel tank or the cockpit.
“CBDR
Constant Bearing Decreasing Range”
There you go. This is what my Navy dad was trying to explain...as opposed to “increasing range” which would avoid collision, of course.
In our scenario with a jet aircraft approaching Jeppesen point ZULAB at 160 knots with the remotely piloted drone held nearly stationary on autopilot, “decreasing range” is a given!
Most aircraft hit in engines by such FOD would land anyway.
Pursuant to international treaties, navigation data such as approach procedures are generally available for all. Just FYI, approach procedures are published as textual procedures first and the graphical part produced later. They're available from numerous vendors in all sorts of forms. Same with a variety of aeronautical navigation charts.
After 9/11/01 they removed the directional sign from Rte 3 in Nashua, NH that showed the exit for ZBW, the Boston ARTCC. Good example of security theater that has no practical effect.
Like trying to keep teenage boys from searching the net for porn. Not practical.
No longer being a teenage boy, here's what 30 seconds of searching for nav/porn found for Moscow.
Yeah, I was able to find the river approach to KSTL with time and DME markers as well. I stand corrected.
Incidentally, Domodedovo, one of four Moscow area airports, was targeted by Chechen terrorists. It was two women who had, uh, secreted their explosives..
“Most aircraft hit in engines by such FOD would land anyway.”
Yes, but loss of an engine could prevent the aircraft from “going around” or responding to numerous situations optimally requiring two engines. Terrorists deploying multiple drones or even coordinated swarm could cause pandemonium, which is, of course, what they seek.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.