5 ms·

I can't really see any wide-scale drone operation operating in a residential areas. The decibel output of a single delivery drone similar to a delivery van ~70-

I can't really see any wide-scale drone operation operating in a residential areas. The decibel output of a single delivery drone similar to a delivery van ~70-80 decibels (hard to get comparable decibel output). A delivery truck driver averages around 120 deliveries from one van. A drone can carry one (or maybe a few packages at a time). There would need to be many more round trips for drones meaning far more distance covered by drone. This would require more drones than vans to complete deliveries. Drones sound has a much higher frequency than a van, and to me, drones are more noticeable than the similar decibel output of a van. To be fair, drones have one advantage and that is that they can cover most of the range between the pickup and drop-off points at higher altitudes that would decrease decibels at ground level. Edit: Every 6 decibels sound aptitude doubles so 70-80db is a big difference. Would need to get more reliable and comparable dBA readings.

_rpd 5y ago
Workhorse has full on plans for drone delivery that use the van as a base: https://workhorse.com/horsefly.html https://workhorse.com/horsefly.html
nostrademons 5y ago
Yeah, I don't see why drones and vans would be mutually exclusve. You drive a van down the main road and have it spin off a fleet of drones for individual residential deliveries. They do their thing in 1-2 minutes - far less time than it would take for the driver to get out of the van and walk the package to the door - and then return to wherever the van is currently driving to recharge and pick up the next delivery. The drones never need more than a 1-2 mile range, they recharge while the van is going to the next neighborhood. You avoid all the congested residential streets, the need to find parking or double-park, the risk of hitting kids that run out into the street to catch their ball, the difficulty finding houses, plus all the hard work drivers need to do to walk up driveways and carry heavy packages. Also is very amenable to self-driving trucks, since the delivery van only needs to navigate the main arteries and they have drones acting as the capillaries.
- TheOtherHobbes 5y ago
  Truck + driver means you have a real person who can kick boxes around and find stuff in the back. Add drones and you have to create an automated drone loading system which works on multiple drones simultaneously. Otherwise you have truck + 2 (3? 4?) drones + person, and the person loads one drone while the other is/others are delivering. That will save some time, but not enough to be a game changer. There will still be kicking of boxes. Meanwhile drones will have to autodock to a charging cradle, land, be loaded, deliver, and then either repeat or autodock again. The system breaks down badly if there's any kind of issue.
- waste_monk 5y ago
  >and then return to wherever the van is currently driving to recharge and pick up the next delivery Are battery charging times fast enough to support this? I thought we're still at the "5 minutes flight = a couple of hours charging" stage, but I haven't used anything more advanced than one of those miniature toy quadcopters so I'm not sure how more serious drones (DJI etc.) handle it.
  - jnwatson 5y ago
    They simply have easily replaceable batteries. For a major event, they’d have lots of batteries charging.
    - pempem 5y ago
      Simply worse for the environment?
      - munk-a 5y ago
        Replaceable doesn't mean one-time-use necessarily - it might just mean that the recharge time is longer than the downtime expected between deliveries so you'd need to swap out a new battery after each run while you recharge the used one. There are a lot of assumptions here but it seems sane.
    - 5y ago
conductr 5y ago
Glad to see this. I've been making the sound pollution argument since the original Amazon commercial.
- liquidityhole 5y ago
  My lab neighbors a drone research lab. The noise from a single drone is surprisingly distracting even with the door shut. The HOAs would be in the streets the first week.
  - jbay808 5y ago
    Volume aside, a lot of the annoyance comes from the unnatural sound of four motors running at slightly different speeds, going in and out of tune with one another.
- throwawayzRUU6f 5y ago
  Unfortunately, noise pollution is at the very bottom of public agencies' priority list. Even in Europe, with stricter regulators and less tolerance towards loud and obnoxious behavior, it's way too common to hear tuned motorcycles blasting 110dB engine screeches at 2AM, keeping everyone in the neighborhood awake. In theory it's not allowed, in reality the bikers can do it with impunity any time they please. Drones would at least provide some beneficial service.
  - adrianN 5y ago
    It's a lot easier to get a small handful of delivery companies to comply with noise pollution regulations than it is to get a large number of motorcyclists to comply. It's also easier to write very strict noise pollution standards for new technology like drones than it is to write very strict standards for existing popular technology like cars and motorcycles.
HALtheWise 5y ago
Noise pollution may be a reason drone delivery _shouldn't_ happen, but don't confuse that with an actual practical obstacle. In the US, at least, the airspace (including drones) is regulated at a federal level by the FAA, and their mandate doesn't really include residential noise levels. For example, I've never seen noise levels discussed when it comes to private aviation, even though small planes can _definitely_ be loud enough to affect quality of life (they don't even have mufflers...) Drone regulations seem to be following a similar trajectory, with categories and rules based on mass and prop guards, and no formal measurements of perceptual noise at all. For stationary noise concerns like a highway being built, it's possible for local communities to rally and be heard, but it's entirely possible that drones will be regulated purely on safety grounds with minimal conversation about noise levels. This is the point where I should end with a call to action, but I'm honestly not sure what the path is to resolving this sort of structural blindness. If anyone with experience working in government or advocacy wants to chime in, I'd be curious to hear.
- smhost 5y ago
  noise pollution laws already exist. why wouldn't drones be subject to them?
- octoberfranklin 5y ago
  The FAA's immunities do not apply to noise sources less than 400 feet above non-airport property.
  - jfrunyon 5y ago
    But the FAA does not have rules against it, nor do many localities.
- krisoft 5y ago
  > " For example, I've never seen noise levels discussed when it comes to private aviation,..." Then you must not have looked very much. Noise was the primary reason cited why the Concorde was not allowed to travel supersonic above the continent. But if you want something fresher then you only have to look at the Airport Noise and Capacity Act (ANCA) of 1990. Or the many airports where they have nighttime curfews because of noise concerns. It is also an everyday concern while you are learning to fly. I was doing my PPL in Europe, so my anecdote is not directly related to FAA, but I remember a ton of "local rules and customs" around noise. Think about things like "at this airport we only do engine run-up at the far end to not disturb those people", or "at this (other) airport we only use the left pattern to avoid spooking the horses on that field there"
jsjohnst 5y ago
> Every 6 decibels sound aptitude doubles so 70-80db is a big difference. It’s every 3db the sound intensity doubles. At 6db, the sound pressure level doubles. Loudness (aka the perceived volume to a human) however only doubles every 10db, so the difference in this context is 80db is 2x louder than 70db. Not the best link, but skimming it it seems to do an ok job explaining the difference: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-levelchange.htm http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-levelchange.htm
- jstummbillig 5y ago
  It correctly explains that loudness is an arguable concept, that depends as much on the subject as it does on other qualities of the sound (for example the frequency makeup)
- mrinterweb 5y ago
  Thanks for the link and the explanation.
  - jsjohnst 5y ago
    Yup! Happy to help. To further break it down: sound intensity increase of 10db: 10x increase sound pressure level increase of 10db: ~3.5x increase loudness increase of 10db: ~2x increase It sucks that there’s so many variations that all use decibels as their unit of measurement with different rates of change. I had to research it years ago because I’d always been told 3db = 2x, yet found it odd that 3db didn’t seem 2x louder. Now I understand.
jfrunyon 5y ago
The major expense for deliveries is the man-hours needed, NOT the truck (or drone). You also get time savings from traveling in a straight line between point A and point B.
taneq 5y ago
A drone's only in earshot for 10-15 seconds if it's doing a drop off, and will usually be flying high enough to be inaudible. At 200m you can barely even see them.
- C19is20 5y ago
  200m high object you can't hear or see loses power....
- JohnFen 5y ago
  > At 200m you can barely even see them. But you can certainly still hear them.
  - taneq 5y ago
    Do you actually know how high 200m is? Hint: If you've seen a consumer drone it's probably not at 200m because in most regions their ceiling is 120m.
    - JohnFen 5y ago
      Yes, I do know how high 200m is.
stevekemp 5y ago
It's only today I read a story suggesting that delivery bikes (electric) would be better for the environment and throughput than delivery vans: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/05/cargo-bikes-deliver-faster-and-cleaner-than-vans-study-finds https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/05/cargo-bikes-de...
- Emma_Goldman 5y ago
  This only holds, if it holds at all, for the delivery of low-weight packages in the city centre of major metropolises like London. And everyone in London already knows it's often faster to cycle than drive short distances.

_rpd 5y ago

Workhorse has full on plans for drone delivery that use the van as a base: https://workhorse.com/horsefly.html https://workhorse.com/horsefly.html

nostrademons 5y ago

Yeah, I don't see why drones and vans would be mutually exclusve. You drive a van down the main road and have it spin off a fleet of drones for individual residential deliveries. They do their thing in 1-2 minutes - far less time than it would take for the driver to get out of the van and walk the package to the door - and then return to wherever the van is currently driving to recharge and pick up the next delivery. The drones never need more than a 1-2 mile range, they recharge while the van is going to the next neighborhood. You avoid all the congested residential streets, the need to find parking or double-park, the risk of hitting kids that run out into the street to catch their ball, the difficulty finding houses, plus all the hard work drivers need to do to walk up driveways and carry heavy packages. Also is very amenable to self-driving trucks, since the delivery van only needs to navigate the main arteries and they have drones acting as the capillaries.

TheOtherHobbes 5y ago
Truck + driver means you have a real person who can kick boxes around and find stuff in the back. Add drones and you have to create an automated drone loading system which works on multiple drones simultaneously. Otherwise you have truck + 2 (3? 4?) drones + person, and the person loads one drone while the other is/others are delivering. That will save some time, but not enough to be a game changer. There will still be kicking of boxes. Meanwhile drones will have to autodock to a charging cradle, land, be loaded, deliver, and then either repeat or autodock again. The system breaks down badly if there's any kind of issue.
waste_monk 5y ago
>and then return to wherever the van is currently driving to recharge and pick up the next delivery Are battery charging times fast enough to support this? I thought we're still at the "5 minutes flight = a couple of hours charging" stage, but I haven't used anything more advanced than one of those miniature toy quadcopters so I'm not sure how more serious drones (DJI etc.) handle it.
- jnwatson 5y ago
  They simply have easily replaceable batteries. For a major event, they’d have lots of batteries charging.
  - pempem 5y ago
    Simply worse for the environment?
    - munk-a 5y ago
      Replaceable doesn't mean one-time-use necessarily - it might just mean that the recharge time is longer than the downtime expected between deliveries so you'd need to swap out a new battery after each run while you recharge the used one. There are a lot of assumptions here but it seems sane.
  - 5y ago

conductr 5y ago

Glad to see this. I've been making the sound pollution argument since the original Amazon commercial.

liquidityhole 5y ago
My lab neighbors a drone research lab. The noise from a single drone is surprisingly distracting even with the door shut. The HOAs would be in the streets the first week.
- jbay808 5y ago
  Volume aside, a lot of the annoyance comes from the unnatural sound of four motors running at slightly different speeds, going in and out of tune with one another.
throwawayzRUU6f 5y ago
Unfortunately, noise pollution is at the very bottom of public agencies' priority list. Even in Europe, with stricter regulators and less tolerance towards loud and obnoxious behavior, it's way too common to hear tuned motorcycles blasting 110dB engine screeches at 2AM, keeping everyone in the neighborhood awake. In theory it's not allowed, in reality the bikers can do it with impunity any time they please. Drones would at least provide some beneficial service.
- adrianN 5y ago
  It's a lot easier to get a small handful of delivery companies to comply with noise pollution regulations than it is to get a large number of motorcyclists to comply. It's also easier to write very strict noise pollution standards for new technology like drones than it is to write very strict standards for existing popular technology like cars and motorcycles.

HALtheWise 5y ago

Noise pollution may be a reason drone delivery _shouldn't_ happen, but don't confuse that with an actual practical obstacle. In the US, at least, the airspace (including drones) is regulated at a federal level by the FAA, and their mandate doesn't really include residential noise levels. For example, I've never seen noise levels discussed when it comes to private aviation, even though small planes can _definitely_ be loud enough to affect quality of life (they don't even have mufflers...) Drone regulations seem to be following a similar trajectory, with categories and rules based on mass and prop guards, and no formal measurements of perceptual noise at all. For stationary noise concerns like a highway being built, it's possible for local communities to rally and be heard, but it's entirely possible that drones will be regulated purely on safety grounds with minimal conversation about noise levels. This is the point where I should end with a call to action, but I'm honestly not sure what the path is to resolving this sort of structural blindness. If anyone with experience working in government or advocacy wants to chime in, I'd be curious to hear.

smhost 5y ago
noise pollution laws already exist. why wouldn't drones be subject to them?
octoberfranklin 5y ago
The FAA's immunities do not apply to noise sources less than 400 feet above non-airport property.
- jfrunyon 5y ago
  But the FAA does not have rules against it, nor do many localities.
krisoft 5y ago
> " For example, I've never seen noise levels discussed when it comes to private aviation,..." Then you must not have looked very much. Noise was the primary reason cited why the Concorde was not allowed to travel supersonic above the continent. But if you want something fresher then you only have to look at the Airport Noise and Capacity Act (ANCA) of 1990. Or the many airports where they have nighttime curfews because of noise concerns. It is also an everyday concern while you are learning to fly. I was doing my PPL in Europe, so my anecdote is not directly related to FAA, but I remember a ton of "local rules and customs" around noise. Think about things like "at this airport we only do engine run-up at the far end to not disturb those people", or "at this (other) airport we only use the left pattern to avoid spooking the horses on that field there"

jsjohnst 5y ago

> Every 6 decibels sound aptitude doubles so 70-80db is a big difference. It’s every 3db the sound intensity doubles. At 6db, the sound pressure level doubles. Loudness (aka the perceived volume to a human) however only doubles every 10db, so the difference in this context is 80db is 2x louder than 70db. Not the best link, but skimming it it seems to do an ok job explaining the difference: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-levelchange.htm http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-levelchange.htm

jstummbillig 5y ago
It correctly explains that loudness is an arguable concept, that depends as much on the subject as it does on other qualities of the sound (for example the frequency makeup)
mrinterweb 5y ago
Thanks for the link and the explanation.
- jsjohnst 5y ago
  Yup! Happy to help. To further break it down: sound intensity increase of 10db: 10x increase sound pressure level increase of 10db: ~3.5x increase loudness increase of 10db: ~2x increase It sucks that there’s so many variations that all use decibels as their unit of measurement with different rates of change. I had to research it years ago because I’d always been told 3db = 2x, yet found it odd that 3db didn’t seem 2x louder. Now I understand.

jfrunyon 5y ago

The major expense for deliveries is the man-hours needed, NOT the truck (or drone). You also get time savings from traveling in a straight line between point A and point B.

taneq 5y ago

A drone's only in earshot for 10-15 seconds if it's doing a drop off, and will usually be flying high enough to be inaudible. At 200m you can barely even see them.

C19is20 5y ago
200m high object you can't hear or see loses power....
JohnFen 5y ago
> At 200m you can barely even see them. But you can certainly still hear them.
- taneq 5y ago
  Do you actually know how high 200m is? Hint: If you've seen a consumer drone it's probably not at 200m because in most regions their ceiling is 120m.
  - JohnFen 5y ago
    Yes, I do know how high 200m is.

stevekemp 5y ago

It's only today I read a story suggesting that delivery bikes (electric) would be better for the environment and throughput than delivery vans: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/05/cargo-bikes-deliver-faster-and-cleaner-than-vans-study-finds https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/05/cargo-bikes-de...

Emma_Goldman 5y ago
This only holds, if it holds at all, for the delivery of low-weight packages in the city centre of major metropolises like London. And everyone in London already knows it's often faster to cycle than drive short distances.