6 ms·

For now drones cost more than helicopters. On NPR the other day they mentioned the drones used for border security are 18 million each. Maybe that will change

For now drones cost more than helicopters. On NPR the other day they mentioned the drones used for border security are 18 million each. Maybe that will change with time, and maybe it won't. The only reason to use a drone vs a helicopter over American soil at the moment is the stealth factor of a much smaller bird in the air.

discostrings 13y ago
Thanks for pointing that out. The current cost of high-end surveillance drones is higher than helicopters, yes. I do wonder if that $18 million is only for the drone, or for its associated infrastructure on the ground as well, though. My point was more theoretical than based on current costs. To me, it seems prices will almost certainly drop fairly quickly. There are many fewer constraints in building a vehicle that doesn't have to hold a human. As the technology is produced in greater numbers, and as the technology is refined, I imagine the cost will plummet. And as the process becomes more automated, it will require less personnel as well. I imagine there will also be "light drones" that cost much less, if there aren't already. If there's a counterargument for the price dropping, I'd love to engage with it, but I'm having trouble coming up with it myself. I'd love to see some real numbers. My suspicion is that the amount of surveillance per dollar spent already heavily favors the drone and will only get better, but I could be wrong. In a situation in support of an ongoing event, I imagine the helicopter is currently a lot more useful.
- stonemetal 13y ago
  Good quality optics aren't getting any smaller as far as I can tell. So a good surveillance drone is always going to have to be a certain size to carry that payload. I can see them getting cheaper than helicopters but not cheap.
  - psb217 13y ago
    Smaller drones with worse optics should be cheaply producible. With large numbers of such drones, lower altitude surveillance with greater redundancy of coverage would become affordable. The computational costs associated with patching together the key-hole views provided by a swarm of fungible drones could be offloaded to ground-based computational resources. In my opinion, the result will be a net shift towards favoring many small cheap drones coupled with fancy off-board image processing. Though, one or two large expensive drones capturing monolithic images with great onboard optics should remain the better option for some situations.
- asynchronous13 13y ago
  I think unmanned aircraft will always be more expensive than their manned counterparts of similar size. The base flying platform will be a similar cost, with or without the ability to carry a person. And there must be additional computer, radio, and sensor equipment in addition to the base airframe. It's a different story for smaller systems, of course. Anything under 100 lbs will certainly (eventually) cost less than a manned aircraft.
  - m4x 13y ago
    Why do the "smaller systems" only get a brief mention at the end of your comment? There are relatively few uses for an unmanned but full size aircraft. The advantage to using a drone is that it can often do the same task previously done by a large, manned aircraft but at a fraction of the cost and complexity due to its reduced size Imagine being able to send out ten drones to scour a mountain for lost climbers, and on the same day that they got lost (rather than waiting until tomorrow to make sure they really are lost and it really is worth spending thousands launching a single helicopter)
    - asynchronous13 13y ago
      Mostly because I'm more familiar with the larger versions. Physics really hurts the capabilities of the small platforms. There's just not enough energy in current batteries to carry useful sensors and fly long enough. Not trying to say they aren't useful, just that their applications are limited due to limited flight times.
- Estragon 13y ago
  I think you're absolutely right that the price is going to keep dropping, and that's the scariest part to me. Wait till criminals start using weaponized drones. Then life's going to get really interesting.
duck 13y ago
I don't know the numbers, so this is just a guess, but I imagine the total cost of ownership gives a single drone a huge advantage and a fleet of them even a bigger one. For each helicopter you have two expensive pilots, maintenance costs, and crazy insurance, plus a lot of high octane fuel.
- omilu 13y ago
  For each drone you have one expensive pilot, and maintenance costs also. Plus you have to factor in that the range is extremely limited, the speed is 1/15th of a chopper. Taking those factors into account the chopper is cheap, considering what you can do with it compared to a drone. The cheap toy drones that can stay up for 20min max, are like 90K. Pretty limited use cases, although they do open up new capabilities . Comparing them to a heli and saying they will save cost is not the right argument. It's like saying the city should replace their garbage trucks with bikes and trailers, cause you'll save so much money on maintenance.
  - ohazi 13y ago
    WTF? These are the drones they're talking about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-1_Predator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-1_Predator Not these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadcopter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadcopter
    - omilu 13y ago
      I assure you know one is talking about predators.
commandar 13y ago
>On NPR the other day they mentioned the drones used for border security are 18 million each. The thing is, drone doesn't necessarily mean a full size unmanned aircraft with extended loiter times. A surveilance drone could be something massively cheaper and more targeted. The RQ-11B Raven has a unit cost of around $35k, and honestly, even it's over-specced for a lot of what LEAs would want drones for. http://www.army-technology.com/projects/rq11-raven/ http://www.army-technology.com/projects/rq11-raven/ You can build something fairly similar with obviously reduced capability for under $1K. The most expensive component that law enforcement would be after would be thermal imaging, even adding that capability would be far cheaper than running a helicopter.
- stonemetal 13y ago
  If all we care about is cameras on the border then cameras on large poles would seem to be the most cost effective route. Why bother with something that moves, has fuel and operator costs?

discostrings 13y ago

Thanks for pointing that out. The current cost of high-end surveillance drones is higher than helicopters, yes. I do wonder if that $18 million is only for the drone, or for its associated infrastructure on the ground as well, though. My point was more theoretical than based on current costs. To me, it seems prices will almost certainly drop fairly quickly. There are many fewer constraints in building a vehicle that doesn't have to hold a human. As the technology is produced in greater numbers, and as the technology is refined, I imagine the cost will plummet. And as the process becomes more automated, it will require less personnel as well. I imagine there will also be "light drones" that cost much less, if there aren't already. If there's a counterargument for the price dropping, I'd love to engage with it, but I'm having trouble coming up with it myself. I'd love to see some real numbers. My suspicion is that the amount of surveillance per dollar spent already heavily favors the drone and will only get better, but I could be wrong. In a situation in support of an ongoing event, I imagine the helicopter is currently a lot more useful.

stonemetal 13y ago
Good quality optics aren't getting any smaller as far as I can tell. So a good surveillance drone is always going to have to be a certain size to carry that payload. I can see them getting cheaper than helicopters but not cheap.
- psb217 13y ago
  Smaller drones with worse optics should be cheaply producible. With large numbers of such drones, lower altitude surveillance with greater redundancy of coverage would become affordable. The computational costs associated with patching together the key-hole views provided by a swarm of fungible drones could be offloaded to ground-based computational resources. In my opinion, the result will be a net shift towards favoring many small cheap drones coupled with fancy off-board image processing. Though, one or two large expensive drones capturing monolithic images with great onboard optics should remain the better option for some situations.
asynchronous13 13y ago
I think unmanned aircraft will always be more expensive than their manned counterparts of similar size. The base flying platform will be a similar cost, with or without the ability to carry a person. And there must be additional computer, radio, and sensor equipment in addition to the base airframe. It's a different story for smaller systems, of course. Anything under 100 lbs will certainly (eventually) cost less than a manned aircraft.
- m4x 13y ago
  Why do the "smaller systems" only get a brief mention at the end of your comment? There are relatively few uses for an unmanned but full size aircraft. The advantage to using a drone is that it can often do the same task previously done by a large, manned aircraft but at a fraction of the cost and complexity due to its reduced size Imagine being able to send out ten drones to scour a mountain for lost climbers, and on the same day that they got lost (rather than waiting until tomorrow to make sure they really are lost and it really is worth spending thousands launching a single helicopter)
  - asynchronous13 13y ago
    Mostly because I'm more familiar with the larger versions. Physics really hurts the capabilities of the small platforms. There's just not enough energy in current batteries to carry useful sensors and fly long enough. Not trying to say they aren't useful, just that their applications are limited due to limited flight times.
Estragon 13y ago
I think you're absolutely right that the price is going to keep dropping, and that's the scariest part to me. Wait till criminals start using weaponized drones. Then life's going to get really interesting.

duck 13y ago

I don't know the numbers, so this is just a guess, but I imagine the total cost of ownership gives a single drone a huge advantage and a fleet of them even a bigger one. For each helicopter you have two expensive pilots, maintenance costs, and crazy insurance, plus a lot of high octane fuel.

omilu 13y ago
For each drone you have one expensive pilot, and maintenance costs also. Plus you have to factor in that the range is extremely limited, the speed is 1/15th of a chopper. Taking those factors into account the chopper is cheap, considering what you can do with it compared to a drone. The cheap toy drones that can stay up for 20min max, are like 90K. Pretty limited use cases, although they do open up new capabilities . Comparing them to a heli and saying they will save cost is not the right argument. It's like saying the city should replace their garbage trucks with bikes and trailers, cause you'll save so much money on maintenance.
- ohazi 13y ago
  WTF? These are the drones they're talking about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-1_Predator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-1_Predator Not these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadcopter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadcopter
  - omilu 13y ago
    I assure you know one is talking about predators.

commandar 13y ago

>On NPR the other day they mentioned the drones used for border security are 18 million each. The thing is, drone doesn't necessarily mean a full size unmanned aircraft with extended loiter times. A surveilance drone could be something massively cheaper and more targeted. The RQ-11B Raven has a unit cost of around $35k, and honestly, even it's over-specced for a lot of what LEAs would want drones for. http://www.army-technology.com/projects/rq11-raven/ http://www.army-technology.com/projects/rq11-raven/ You can build something fairly similar with obviously reduced capability for under $1K. The most expensive component that law enforcement would be after would be thermal imaging, even adding that capability would be far cheaper than running a helicopter.

stonemetal 13y ago
If all we care about is cameras on the border then cameras on large poles would seem to be the most cost effective route. Why bother with something that moves, has fuel and operator costs?