Dronesfor Traffic Regulation (Cons)
Dronesfor Traffic Regulation (Cons)
Inthe modern world, the massive technology development and advancementhave led to the invention of numerous useful devices in human life.With the application of remote control, there has been invented ofremotely controlled devices or self-programmed devices which havebeen in use for one purpose or the other. Today, civil security hasbecome an important aspect in terms of protecting the public fromthreats such as terrorist attacks as well as identifying crimesbefore they happen, and in turn appropriate air support has become adecisive advantage. This has led to the invention and use of ‘drones’for surveillance. In a simple definition, drones are regarded as‘unmanned aerial vehicle’ shortened as ‘UAV’, however thecommon name they are known by being the drone (Preble, 2015).According to Elsey & Trosclair (2016), this an aircraft thatoperates without a human pilot, but rather is operated throughautonomous on-board computers or else controlled by an operator onthe ground remotely. This paper discusses the development and use ofdrones in the traffic, manning sector focusing on the demerits oftheir use in the traffic sector.
Despitethe massive adoption of the drone technology in almost all aspects ofhuman life, such as weather, surveillance and even in war, the use ofdrones in traffic comes with both merits and demerits. One of thedisadvantages associated with the use of drones is the invasion ofprivacy. With the use of drones in the air to keep watch over thetraffic, there is also the tendency for the drones to interfere withpeople’s privacy. In the developed countries, the adoption ofdrones has become rampant increasing the surveillance and securityaspects to its citizens. However, the drone use in the domesticaspects such as monitoring traffic in major towns is raising privacyconcerns as well as a potential violation of the Americas forthamendments (Elsey & Trosclair, 2016). In the case of the UnitedStates, the enactment of the fourth amendment guarantees the right tothe people to be secure in their houses, unreasonable searches. Theuse of drones has in a way violated the 4th amendment. With theincreasing concern about people’s privacy, there has been anincreased conflict between the advocates of people’s privacy andthe continued adoption of unmanned drones in the skies as part oftraffic monitoring. Drones are known to contain high power zoomlenses, night vision, and when they are see flying over drones, theyin fear of being every now and then under surveillance, which hasdecreased people’s confidence in drones. This can, in turn, lead tolaw cases between the council and the civilians as they perceivetheir rights to have been violated (De Bruin & Booysen, 2015).
Increasedcost to the city council budget. Despite the increased adoption ofthe technology advancement in the modern era, the adoption of dronesfor traffic control and supervision is a cost intensive investment.This is whereby large sums of money are needed by the council inimplementing and supporting the drone projects. Not only drones areneeded, but also integrated information system on how the informationrelayed by the drones is recorded and used by the traffic police onthe ground (Belfiore, 2015). Not only has the financial strainexperienced in selecting the drones in the air, but also it’s afinancially draining investment as the council needs also toeffectively train its people on how to use the technologyeffectively. This, in turn, has added an extra cost to the effectiveimplementation and support of drones in the traffic surveillance andcontrol.
Thirdly,the use of drones has brought along the concern about people`s safetyin the cities where they are used or areas where there are dronesflying. With the airspace having traditionally been dominated withmanned flights, the introduction of unmanned drones has increased thepossibility of collisions. In many countries, there are well-definedprocedures, regulations as well as infrastructure, aircraft andpeople who are entailed in the country air transport system. Theadoption of drones by city councils has, in turn, increased safetyconcerns/issues, i.e. collisions, both in the air and on the groundas well as system reliability. The control of the drones differs fromthat of the traditional aircraft, hence the difference in collisionavoidance strategies. When the aircraft develops any problem while onthe flight, the pilot can communicate with the control people on theground and minimize the impact of any possible collision (De Bruin &Booysen, 2015). Contrary to the case of drones, whenever there arecases of mechanical breakdown, the device (drones) can crash anytimeand anywhere, hence causing devastating property damage such asbuildings, and even loss of life. The reliability level of theunmanned crafts isn’t that promising. One of the major concerns isthe battery life of the drones, and in case the drone fail’s whilein the air, the damage can be devastating.
Useof drones causes unemployment. With the increased adoption oftechnology, there has been an increased number of people beingrendered unemployed. This is due to the fact that, when a drone isused to monitor the traffic, one drone can cover a large area whichin turn renders people unemployed in the city council. More so, theuse of drones doesn’t help in an assist in instant apprehending oftraffic law breakers, but instead can help in identifying theoffenders. The use of drones will hence lead to the city deployingpeople to make the follow-up in order to make the necessary arrests(De Bruin & Booysen, 2015). This means an extra cost in supportof the system as the drones aren’t self-sufficient cannot move fromdoor to door in addition inability to make arrests and captures.
Next,the uses of drones possess the threat of being hacked and wrong useby a terrorist. One of the downsides related to the technology behinddrones is the vulnerability to hacking. This can, in turn, led to theuse of the drones by the wrong people or for the wrong reasons. Forexample, the drones deployed by the city council can be hijacked andused by ill thinking people such as terrorists to monitor and planterrorist attacks. This sis due to the idea that the drones wouldgive them an access to understanding a city’s plan and geographicalaspects not to mention the densely populated regions such as mallshence aiding their attacks. Finally, drones are weather dependent andin turn, the city council should consider cases whereby theirservices won’t be available due to bad weather. For example, whenthere is snow, heavy rain hailstone among others. This, in turn,explains the case that, drones are not 100% dependable. On the otherhand, the city council should be aware that, currently, there is nodrone that is suitable for traffic surveillance, hence no guaranteethe drones will function perfectly (Belfiore, 2015).
Inconclusion, the massive technology advancement in the modern hasbrought along breakthrough in the traffic monitoring and surveillancewith the continued adoption of the unmanned drones. However, this hasbrought along increased negatives with the adoption and in turn,every city council planning to invest on drones for their trafficcontrol system ought to consider points such as people’s privacy,accidents and people`s safety, vulnerability to hacking and accidentssuch as collisions, rendering people unemployment as well as thedrones being used as an aid to terrorism. All of these are consrelated to the adoption of drones within a city for traffic controland monitoring.
Preble,B. C. (2015). A case for drones. Technology& Engineering Teacher, 74(7),24-29.
DeBruin, A., & Booysen, T. (2015). Drone-based traffic flowestimation and tracking using computer vision. CivilEngineering (10212000), 23(8),48-50.
Elsey,R. M., & Trosclair, P. L. (2016). The Use of an Unmanned AerialVehicle to Locate Alligator Nests. SoutheasternNaturalist, 15(1),76-82.
Belfiore,M. (2015). Drone Makers Seek Traffic Control. BusinessWeek,(4422), 31-33.