30-Minute Drone Deliveries Closer to Reality

As more and more consumers turn to e-commerce because of COVID-19, speedy fulfillment is no longer just a luxury. It is now the expectation and even a necessity for many customers. They are increasingly on the lookout for same- and next-day deliveries, and shipping companies like UPS and FedEx are struggling to keep up due to the “last mile” problem. 

Last-mile refers to the final leg of the delivery journey where the product reaches the customer. Anyone who has ever tracked their package and seen “Out for Delivery” for what seems like ages has already experienced the inefficiency of the final step of the delivery process.

Not only is the last mile the most time-consuming and expensive part of delivery—it makes up 41 percent of the total cost—it is the key to consumer satisfaction. To overcome this challenge, retailers are researching various new technologies, including drones, to deliver packages more efficiently. UPS and Wing (a subsidiary of Google) are already in the process of testing drones to expedite deliveries. Amazon even promises 30-minute delivery will be possible with its fleet of drones.

Despite this potential, drones are not yet widely adopted for delivery in the United States. This is because of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the laws it has passed to ensure safe operations. The stringent nature of these laws has hamstrung the commercial implementation of drones. However, the FAA issued new safeguards in December 2020 for flights over populated areas and at night, which removed some hurdles for drone applications. 

So how close are drones to going mainstream? Let’s take a more aerial view (pun intended) of the FAA regulations to see how they have affected the industry and what is in store for the future.

The FAA was formed in 1958 by Congress “to regulate aviation safety, the efficiency of the navigable airspace and air traffic control, among other things” for aircraft. For many years, hobbyists were able to fly radio-controlled airplanes with very few restrictions, and the FAA only published a voluntary standard in 1981.

However, all this changed in the aftermath of 9/11 and the advent of cheap remote-controlled drones in the 2000s, which resulted in the FAA legislating all drones as falling within its regulatory purview. From 2013 to 2015, licenses for operation of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) were only granted on a case-by-case basis. This was challenged in 2014 by a group of major media companies, who asserted that the limitations were against the organizations’ First Amendment rights to gather news, but the case fell through.

In 2015, the FAA created the “Part 48 Regulations,” which required all drone operators to register any drones weighing 0.25 to 25 kg along with their names and addresses. However, at the urging of companies like Google and Amazon, the FAA did form a committee in February 2016 to develop guidelines for safe UAV operation over populated areas and released Rule Part 107 during the summer of 2016. Basically, Part 107 states that any drone that weighs less than 55 pounds should maintain line of sight with the pilot, and the pilot should have mandatory certifications. Commercial drones were also prohibited from flying at night, above 400 feet, faster than 100 miles per hour or over crowds of people. However, Part 107 did allow commercial drones to carry a package, provided secure fastening of the package and a total weight of less than 55 pounds.

In May 2017, the 2015 UAV registration rule was overturned, but was reinstated in December by President Donald Trump. 

On Dec. 28, 2020, the FAA introduced new rules that required drones to have remote identification. Additionally, new safety measures were defined for flights over populated areas and at night, potentially opening the door for the commercial use of drones. Drones must weigh less than 0.55 lbs to fly over people and not have any exposed rotating parts that could lacerate human skin. To safely operate at night, the drone must be equipped with anti-collision lights with visibility up to three statute miles. Pilots will also no longer be required to undergo an in-person training test every two years but can complete the test online. These changes are a significant easing of previous constraints.

According to a Grand View Research (GVR) report published in 2019, revenue forecasts for drones by 2025 will be over $129 billion at a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 56.5 percent. In anticipation of being early movers in a market poised to grow exponentially, Amazon, UPS and Wing all obtained FAA approval to operate a drone airline but were unable to bring them into large-scale operation. 

Consequently, a lack of regulatory flexibility forced jobs and innovation to migrate outside the U.S. In Australia, Project Wing successfully delivered burritos and medication to customers with drones. Google conducted extensive testing to overcome hurdles by extending drone battery life for long-distance deliveries, learning how to package perishable products and improving delivery coordinates for precise deliveries. 

Amazon turned to Canada to try out its fleet. It was able to experiment with hybrid drones that took off and landed vertically and horizontally, and successfully delivered packages over long distances. Amazon also built an R&D center in the United Kingdom and received approval from the U.K. Civil Aviation Authority to conduct testing of drones beyond line-of-sight. In fact, Amazon Prime Air’s first delivery took place in the U.K.

Even in a comparatively less-developed country like Rwanda, drones have been used to deliver blood and medical supplies. In Rwanda, many mothers die from blood loss during childbirth, but drones are able to mitigate the risk substantially. Doctors can place orders via text message, and the drones travel at 80 mph to deliver their cargo posthaste.

There can be many risks to the use of drones. At a 2016 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) panel in Las Vegas, Jim Williams, a former FAA official, presented the other side of the story.

"The objective is to find the spot that the community you’re operating in is comfortable with and that the FAA is comfortable with, and then you go forward and adjust if something does happen. Because that is really the history of aviation," Williams told the crowd. 

"Since the very first flights, there have been crashes... You try and learn from it and prevent that from happening again. It’s a wonderful thing that we have a transportation system that’s the best in the world, but it’s based on a lot of people who had to die to make it that good. You don’t learn by arguing about how to do it. You learn by doing it." 

Essentially, the FAA was erring on the side of caution, and these concerns are not unfounded.

Public safety is a major source of unease, with drones sharing airspace with other aircraft, such as helicopters. In 2013, a UAV flying over Manhattan collided with several buildings and crashed onto the pavement, almost hitting a pedestrian. The operator was fined $2,200. In 2015, a White House employee lost control of a drone he was operating during his free time. It flew onto the White House property and caused a security lockdown. In 2017, a small charter plane collided with a drone in Canada. Thankfully, it sustained only minor damage. Though all of these incidents were accidental, they suggest the worrying possibility of intentional attacks. 

Privacy concerns have also come to the foreground with drones equipped with cameras increasing the possibility of unwarranted surveillance. Another illicit use could be for smuggling drugs and other contraband.

There are other challenges to widespread drone use that must be studied and resolved, according to the GVR Report. For example, a scarcity of trained pilots and issues of UAV traffic management may hamper the growth of the commercial drone market.

The FAA’s line-of-sight regulation turned out to be obsolete. The intent was to increase public safety and reduce collisions by requiring operators to see their drones directly—thus putting them in a better position to avoid imminent hazards. Yet modern operators can use first-person camera technology instead, which is safer than limited visibility from the ground. More recently, drones now come equipped with autonomous object detection and avoidance systems, which render the FAA’s concerns moot.

Another case of positive intentions causing negative consequences is the requirement for pilots to provide their names and addresses when registering their drones. This information is currently a matter of public record, which breaches the privacy of drone owners. Consequently, anyone buying a drone with mischievous intent would be unlikely to register their drone, which defeats the whole purpose. The remote identification proposed by the FAA is an excellent resolution, as it will allow the FAA to track the drones. Even though operator registration is still required, the FAA now promises that the registration database will be limited to its own use, plus authorized law enforcement and national security personnel upon request  The only caveat is that small drone operators have their remote pilot certificate and identification in their physical presence when operating, ready to present to authorities if needed.

Until now, FAA regulation has discouraged companies from investing in drone technology in the U.S., forcing them to turn elsewhere. The new regulations promise to open the door to innovation while keeping safety a key consideration.

The total death count from drone-caused aerial accidents in the US is zero. It should, however, be noted that as drone traffic increases, the probability of a fatal crash increases. There have already been plenty of close calls in recent years, but these can be mitigated with onboard avoidance software, as well as access to artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning. Additionally, after the White House incident, drone manufacturer DJI began installing geofencing software in all its products. This programming prohibits the drone from flying near any sensitive locations, such as the White House, Pentagon or any airport. While bad actors could potentially hack into the drones to overcome this programming, that is no less a possibility for any other technology.

The best comparison is with the airline industry, which is statistically the safest way to travel but is still subject to accidents. Again, after the 9/11 incident, the airline industry was not shut down but made safer. Driving is even more dangerous. More people have been killed by car accidents since 2000 than in both World Wars. Again, driving is not banned but is regulated to ensure maximum safety while encouraging technological advancements. In fairness to the FAA, it was trying to be proactive and not reactive, but with more drones in the air, the more errors will decrease and innovation will increase. Hence, the new rules by the FAA are a step in the right direction and provide a much better balance of safety and freedom.