Vince Ambrosia is a NASA Earth Scientist who is also affiliated with the California State University Monterey Bay. He has been with NASA since 1980 and has been involved with remote sensing of ecosystem processes. More recently, he has been involved with natural disaster systems and improving understanding of them.
Questions & Answers
Q: How do you use UAVs in your work?
A: We have done, in particular with wildfire analysis or disaster analysis is look at both small UAVs and large UAVs for tactical versus strategic observation of natural disasters to help those on the ground make more informed decisions about how to mitigate that wildfire event or how to respond to that wildfire event. So in essence, it is taking sensory data and massaging it such that we can make real time decisions about where that fire is and where it is going. We also use UAVs for natural resource inventories in areas that are hard to get to or difficult to get to. You can think about this in the 3-D model, or Dull Dark and Dangerous missions, where a UAV is really important to be put to use most effective. For example, you would want to employ a UAV in an urban area that has just has a toxic plume blowing through it, and you don’t want to but anybody at risk. So you fly a UAV to collect all the data you need to start informing decision on how to deal with the disaster.
Q: So, what are some of the limitations you have seen in the conventional UAVs you have worked with?
A: There aren’t many limitations of UAVs themselves, but more so limitations based on regulations of operations of the crafts. What we really want to see, though, is improved miniaturization of the sensory technology on UAVs so that they can be used more ubiquitously. So taking a small UAV, for example a hand-launched UAV or one that only needs a very small take-off area, and flying it around for 15 to 20 minutes to observe the features you want to observe. Those features exist, but the really important sensor technology that gets that data that you as a scientist want? That sensor technology doesn’t exist in small enough packaging to be used on a small UAS.
Q: So is that somewhere that synthetic biology can be important?
A: Absolutely, given that microorganisms can act as sensor technology.
Q: What is your opinion of synthetic biology at large?
A: I think that synthetic biology is the next wave of innovation in the science of creating things. It could prove particularly useful in UAVs such that you could have a small UAS with great sensor technology, flown in conditions harmful to humans, and ultimately have it land and be completely biodegradable and not impact the earth system at all. A perfect situation for that technology is a Fukishima-like meltdown, and you want to be able to measure radiation output. But, you don’t want to subject anyone to the radiation poisoning necessary to get the UAV out of that system. If you could have a UAV collect that information, and then biodegrade or destroy itself naturally, it might be a great application for UAVs and you still get your measurement capability!
Q: Do you think biosynthetic UAVs will be as efficient?
A: It’s hard to say. I could see roles where synbio UAVs could be more useful, and easier to create, and thus cheaper. If you could have a disposable platform, it could be tremendous cost savings. In that sense, they could even be more efficient.
Q: As I’m sure you are aware, there is a huge stigma surrounding the use of UAVs, much like the stigma surrounding synthetic biology. What can we do, as a community of scientists, to counteract that stigma?
A: Right now, we see a lot of concern around the use of UAVs in civilian society. I think a lot of that worry comes from the fact that people only see UAVs in the context of their military usage and think that all UAVs are used for spying or for launching missiles. They are concerned about the integration of UAVs into the daily regimen of normal society. We, as a scientific community, need to be more transparent about the really beneficial scientific use of UAVs- for example, mitigating natural disasters. They really need to know about how UAVs can be used to societal benefit. The same can be said of synthetic biology.
Q: When do you think UAVs will become a part of our everday lives?
A: Really the only thing stopping the domestic use of UAVs is public perception and the law. I think if we try to flush out this concept of spy-planes, rules and regulations could be loosened, and UAVs could be everywhere in about 5 years.
Read the Other Interviews
Read one or more of the other UAV-related interviews that we conducted. All of our interviews are catalogued here:
"
