FAA restrictions bar wider use of drones to patrol border

GovExec.com ^ | November 30, 2005 | Greta Wodele

[DumpsterDiver]

President Bush wants unmanned drones used along the U.S.-Mexican border as part of his broader immigration initiative unveiled this week, but border patrol officials are still negotiating with the Federal Aviation Administration about where and when it can deploy the systems.

"We're going to use drones to be able to help enforce the border in rural Texas and in rural New Mexico and rural Arizona," Bush said Tuesday. "Slowly, but surely, technology is being employed up and down the border, and that's a key part of our strategy." The president's proposal also includes a guestworker program and bolstering immigration laws.

After more than two years of negotiations, the Homeland Security Department's U.S. Customs and Border Protection Directorate recently finalized a deal with the FAA to fly one drone in the Tucson, Ariz., area.

CBP also issued an environmental impact study in September that helps clear the way for an expansion of UAV operations from the western corner of Arizona to the eastern corner of Texas, but the agency still needs to work out a deal with the FAA to fly the drones outside restricted military airspace. Because of the restrictions, CBP officials have been forced to deploy a fleet of Blackhawk helicopters to patrol the rest of the southern border.

A CBP spokesman said Wednesday that the agency has recently received the "green light" to buy its second UAV early next year and plans to deploy the drone in the Tucson area until CBP and FAA officials reach additional agreements.

"We have to talk and ask for permission, but FAA is very strict," he said. "We're looking at what we can do to get exemptions" from FAA regulations or maximize the requirements set by FAA for UAVs.

Lawmakers this year repeatedly called on the Homeland Security Department to buy UAVs for border security after the successful conclusion of a trial program in Arizona. The department signed an initial contract in September with General Atomics Aeronautical Systems to buy its first UAV and support services for $14 million.

The second UAV is expected to cost half that amount, and the agency could spend up to $59 million for four UAVs under the contract, said the spokesman. Congress provided $10 million for the agency's UAV program in the recently enacted fiscal 2006 Homeland Security appropriations measure.

"Ideally, with UAVs, the focus is to create a virtual curtain of air detection," said the spokesman about deploying the drones from Arizona to Texas.

The agency argues the drones provide significant financial savings compared to operating and maintaining its fleet of helicopters. The agency spends $4,000 every time it launches a Blackhawk and must pay additional labor costs.

The drones, called "Predator B," have the capacity to fly 30 consecutive hours without refueling at 230 miles per hour and over remote land border areas. The UAVs are equipped with electro-optic sensors, radar and infrared cameras and can immediately and automatically transfer images to ground controls.

[Travis McGee]

Exactly. It's all a matter of will. In ten or twenty years, the invasion will be an irreversible fait accompli, and "realistic" politicians will all agree that we have no alternative but to join Mexico, America and Canada into one nation. That is the game being played under the surface.

[Mulder]

They can't spare drones for the border.

They need them to spy on Americans hundreds of miles away from the borders and to catch speeders.

[cripplecreek]

Visualize America as a mixture of Mexican feudalism and Canadian socialism. I don't know what you would call it but it ain't pretty.

[planekT]

Serfdom.

[socketsquirrel]

constant maintenance, constant monitoring, the threat of having an American wander into the field, you name it. There are easier and more effective ways to get it done that DON'T include a minefield.

Poison snakes?

[Ramius]

I'll bet it isn't as simple as we might suppose.

Pilotless aircraft mixing with ordinary civilian traffic does make for some peculiar issues and risks. In a battlefield situation... it's one thing, but mixing it up with general aviation should be done with eyes open... not in a panic.

They'll figure it out, but perhaps we should not pretend that snapping fingers will fix everything instantly.

[MikefromOhio]

LOL

ummm no

[Ramius]

What's wrong with a simple minefield??

Blown up children's body parts on CNN, for one. Do that, and kiss any dream of border security goodbye.

[antaresequity]

constant monitoring

Gee...I guess if constant monitoring is in issue with you, just about any method is out of question...be it a minefield or fence.

We sure wouldnt want to come up with a solution that requires constant monitoring...

[MikefromOhio]

They'll figure it out, but perhaps we should not pretend that snapping fingers will fix everything instantly.

Nah let's keep pretending :-)

[MikefromOhio]

ok look at it this way....you will have to constantly monitor the mines to make sure they aren't shifting and would still be effective ON TOP OF monitoring to see if you have any hits.

We sure wouldnt want to come up with a solution that requires constant monitoringWOULD ACTUALLY WORK...

There I fixed your inaccurate statement for you.

[planekT]

Not even a big secret. It's all in writing already. Amazing isn't it how CAFTA was passed on one vote.

Amazing how the LOST is still alive after being rejected years ago by Reagan. Evils never dies.

[Ramius]

Roger that. :-)

[mark502inf]

Our covert open borders Quislings love to talk about drones and sensors and other crap they can delay, underfund or hamstring

Or that sounds good, but just does not work. I've had real-life experience with UAVs and border surveillance. It was a fiasco--they just can't see that much. Even with the advances we're making with our Iraq experiences, they are really only good for surveillance of one or two POINTS, not wide areas.

A fence with human observers augmented by routine surveillance technology and some type of reaction element can shut the border down cold. I'll bet there are more survillance cameras in use in 7-11 stores throughout America right now than we'd need to work the border.

[MikefromOhio]

hehe

[MikefromOhio]

I'll bet there are more survillance cameras in use in 7-11 stores throughout America right now than we'd need to work the border.

And redlights....

UAVs are great, but to get a wide angle, they have to be pretty high up, which does kind of bring the FAA problems to light. I am sure there are commercial flight paths over sections of the borders and all that. The fact that they can't be worked around is ludicrous, but the basics make sense at a certain higher flight level....

[Travis McGee]

Which is exactly why they will NOT build a fence system: it would work.

[Travis McGee]

Powerful forces are at work.

[B4Ranch]

See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1531592/posts?page=18#18

[B4Ranch]

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $