kentb

kentb

Well Known Member
The thread about the Boeing UAV got me to thinking.

What would be the difference between an UAV and a RC airplane?

If you were to build an RC airplane, what would cause the FAA to need to classify it as an UAV?

Kent
 
I have been building and flying R/C since 1963.

When I build one it is called a Radio Controlled airplane. I can build a flying R/C for a few hundred $$. I do it for fun.

When the Government builds, or pays someone to build one, they call it an "UAV", and the cost goes way up. Although the folks flying them might be enjoying themselves, it is still called "work".

Other than that, cant think of any differences.
 
I think it has to do with the weight. 70 lbs comes to mind, but I could (more than likely) be wrong.

Cheers
 
UAV

Weight is not used in military definition of UAV since all sizes and types are used. Backpack-sized UAV to 'look over the hill' all the way up to extremely large birds used to conduct long range recon, etc.

Smaller UAV are similar in size to some RC, but the comparison ends there.

UAV I've worked with have longer range (both in terms of endurance and comms) than RC since RC are usually limited by FCC radio specs.

Not unusual to operate for many hrs and cover a lot of territory, day and night. Are they expensive? Yes-and much of the cost is for payload, not the airframe. Fun to operate? Yes. Toys? Definately not-and I'm glad we have them.

Back to RV stuff!
Regards,
Mike
 
An RC airplane is a UAV which simply means Unmanned (or uninhabited for the PC crowd) Aerial Vehicle. However, most military UAV's are not RC. They generally have at least some level of autonomous control, aka the computer is the pilot not the guy on the ground.
 
Generally, the distinction between a UAV and an R/C airplane come in the form of visual contact and whether the vehicle is being flown for commercial or private purposes. Radio Control planes, generally speaking, always have the pilots eyes on them. A UAV, being autonomous, can fly far enough away that the "pilot" (aka, ground station operator) cannot actually see the vehicle. Without seeing the vehicle, the pilot cannot 'see and avoid' other traffic (like real airplanes), and that's what gets the FAA's attention. There are also some regs about flying for commercial purposes... that is, flying a UAV with visual contact at all times still might not make it the equivalent of an R/C airplane because the flight is commercial, not recreational (I doubt anybody's out there designing proper UAV's for fun). A lot of this is detailed on the FAA site, if you search for UAV registration.

Paul
 
My cousin flew UAV's in Iraq a couple of years ago. They were RC. One forward-looking camera, one side. They call them UAV's whether they're RC or semi-autonomous, at least the SEALs did 2 years ago.

L.A. County Sheriff's Dept. was going to deploy similar models here as a cheap alternative to helicopters to assist in foot chases, but ran afoul of the FAA.
 
UAV

For a look at the small UAVs we use in the army...google RQ-11A. It's called a Raven and we had a couple in my unit in Iraq that I was in charge of. It's a great system that will basically fly a pre-planned route via GPS. All you do is launch and set the mode to auto and you're good to go. Pretty cool that we have them down to company sized units. Another reason it's good to be on our side! ;) Of course, it's all fun when there is no GA flying around the airspace. Hard enough to keep the helicopters and Ravens out of the same airspace.
 
Last edited:
key distinctions

As Paul said the key distinction for the AMA and FAA is whether the vehicle is within sight while it is controlled. I suppose you could extrapolate from this that RCs thus need to be controlled with a direct radio link from a ground operator.

RCs also have a weight limit.

On a slight (okay not so slight) tangent, one bone I have to pick is when my fellow full scale pilots dismiss the RCs as toys. In many cases our stuff is more sophisticated than the recon vehicles flown by the military. In some cases the RCs are also more expensive than a basic 172, 152 etc. Do I consider the stuff we fly "toys?" In the sense that we go out and have fun with them, then yes. But if that's the definition then my RV will partially be a toy, race cars are toys, boats . . . you get the idea. Stop by a jet rally or IMAC contest sometime and check out the carbon fiber airframes, programmable radios, turbine engines with onboard starting, 200 mph passes and let me know which looks more like a toy -- the single engine plane you flew in on, or the 10 foot long turbine jet packed to the gills with technology. While you are at it, ask someone who flies both full scale and models which is harder -- flying an ILS or landing a scale replica of an F4 Phantom.

Antony
 
More Differences

There are some other differences that need to be included or added to.

The American Modeler's Association (AMA), which is the governing body for RC aircraft in the US has some rules that clarify what's an RC plane or a UAV. It should be noted that the AMA is not a regulatory agency.

There is a maximum weight for RC planes which is about 50 pounds. I believe it's actually 55 pounds. The AMA rules also state that any RC plane with an autopilot is not covered by AMA rules or insurance. This is to stop modelers from making their aircraft in to UAVs and hurting someone.

There is also a document created by the FAA and AMA that "limits" the altitude that RC aircraft are suppose to fly to less than 500ft. This is to insure that RC aircraft and manned aircraft do not mix. I know frequently modelers fly higher than that, and manned aircraft go lower than 500 ft, however that's the reason the rule is there.

UAVs by definition have some sort of autopilot, and/or autonomous control on board. The level of autonomy varies depending on size, mission, age, and cost. Many older UAVs have some sort of manual mode where an external pilot is flying the aircraft visually just like an RC plane for take off and landing. Then once the aircraft is required to go "down range" an internal pilot takes over and flies the aircraft via instruments and moving map. Most UAVs today do not use external pilots because autopilots can land the aircraft with the same precision and accuracy as humans. Flying a plane RC style is also a unique skill that is difficult to train. Using an external pilot brings much more risk to the flight.

With technology increasing as it has, aircraft of all sizes can be fully autonomous. They can all be capable of autonomous takeoff and landing on their own with the right avionics on board. The level of autonomy is another discussion that could carried on forever. How much human control is needed or desired is something that is being debated over every day in UAV circles.

UAVs are capable are flying in the National Airspace under three conditions.
1. They have an airworthiness certificate. Either the UAV has been certified to the same standards as commercial manned aircraft (ex. Global Hawk) or they are applied for and received and experimental airworthiness certificate (like an RV) I'm not as familiar with that method but I know a few UAVs have gone that route.

2. The UAV operator applies for a Certificate of Authorization (COA). A COA allows a specific type of UAV to fly at a specfic location. COAs are valid for one year and can be reapplied for 2 months before they are due. COAs are specific about routes and what procedures must be in place to avoid other aircraft. For example, either ground observers or a chase plane must be used to insure the UAV doesn't hit a manned aircraft. COAs are designed for limited range work or transit from an airport in the National Airspace System to a military restricted area.

3. The UAV operator can fly illegally. UAV Company A can go to the local general aviation field and fly their UAV. The FAA is starting to crack down on these people.

Hope this clears up some more differences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.