Shenzhen Velocity – Is Your World Provide Chain All Rancid And Clotted? – Drones Information

0

In this article we will talk about Shenzhen Speed ​​and what it means to the rest of you outside the other bay.

As reported by the UAV Expo 2018 of the World Drone Congress –

“According to the Shenzhen UAV Industry Association, there are now more than 1,200 companies involved in the development and production of drones and related components.”

And guess what, they have software that works too!

How many drone manufacturers are there in the US?

Speaking to the organizers of this year’s offer, they asked me to find experts who could talk about the robust hardware ecosystem for drones in the United States. Apparently they don’t know that it is waiting for the much needed life support. In addition, they do not seem to be aware of the difficult situation with DJI and the US federal government. Or how DJI spends Beaucoup dollars on lobbying to ban their company name from the bill and replace it with the more general “Chinese” drones.

I was at Expo 2018 in China and it is impressive. The question is why the Chinese are our supply chain and we are not in theirs. Well, they have some advantages, namely a state-subsidized and well-maintained ecosystem. This supported ecosystem means money for marketing, engineers, facilities and access to the inner circle.

Instead of resting on their laurels, the Chinese are ready to double or triple China’s first program.

China’s $ 1.4 trillion technology spending

For some reason, the upbringing of the Chinese and their many tried and tested initiatives increases people’s anger, but you won’t find conspiracy theories here. There is no longer any reason to regard this knowledge as bigotry or anti-Chinese feelings, or to dispel the dismay by saying that the Chinese only produce cheap, low-quality products. Forget the notion that West is years ahead of the Chinese in software.

In the pictures for this article you can see the so-called Global Hardware Innovation Center. You can go there and have custom components or products and do business directly with representatives of different manufacturers.

What does all this mean for my aerospace manufacturing, research and development, my funnel and my pipeline? The punch line, you can go to China with an idea, a little local help, some packaging graphics, and you can ship products to the US with half the money.

I know it’s not all doom and darkness as the government tops the list with $ 100,000 to $ 500,000 SBIR contracts, and that’s a good thing. Sure, if you had a product made in China, it might be enough, but far from what it takes to open a factory in a western country with high wages, crazy workloads, draconian environmental laws, and punitive tax systems.

Another obstacle to success is the VC investment community, which is housed in its hardware-resistant Patagonia vests. Years ago they threw the hardware breaks, and these skid marks are visible directly through drones and in UAM / AAM and now in ORBS. Some of us wonder if most of these investors are Canadians because they always talk about hockey sticks. Apparently, these venture capital investors (VC for Best Buy flyers) don’t like hardware, esoteric certification systems, or a complicated regulatory process. Golly, should we assume that the 30 years of the FAA on drone integration have led people to get ROI to secure their bets? Nothing brings a pair of New Balance sneakers or Rockport slippers out of the office door like a forecast for profitability in 80 to 120 quarters.

By the way, startups looking for money should be careful and exercise due care, as some of these mutual funds may have Chinese money lurking beneath the surface. This could later limit some future opportunities and be a place where people can poach IP.

Concerns of a de facto public trustee –

During my much acclaimed and celebrated tenure (ask for partying) I saw some boondoggles that started with awards and the best intentions. Some of these recent examples are without limitation; ACCES 5, UAS in NAS, FAA NAS integration test sites, UAS IPP free and the other sorted and different DoD roadmaps and programs as well as UTM, UAM and recently AAM.

NASA UTM was announced as a huge success, but I don’t think the report was open. At the TCL 4 demonstrations, non-cooperative airplanes infiltrated their traffic management system in both Reno and Corpus Christi. We have to assume that both the manned aircraft and their pilots were certified and in most cases would make them safe in the eyes of the FAA. In both of these cases, however, both the legacy system and the proposed system failed.

The error occurred despite local and national reporting, NOTAMs and months of planning. What happens to the slurpee delivery without all the effort? I can see that perhaps an error is not mentioned in the report, but two are a tremendously misrepresentation of the facts.

If we want to be successful, we have to be vigilant –

Many of the earlier examples of public, private partnerships have served in one form or another only to bleed private sector companies with little or nothing to show taxpayers an ROI for their vigorous investments. In the past, this game plan has driven people out of business and accelerated a Chinese drone hardware monopoly.

“He’s such a parade pisser!”

Hey man, I’m just one of the lucky people who had to suffer for 20 years when they saw the FAA drone die show evolve. The United States had at least a 20-year lead in unmanned aircraft technology over the rest of the world. After an arbitrary 10-year FAA trade ban, however, we no longer have viable, self-developed solutions or an ecosystem that can support a cell phone app. The Federal Aviation Administration’s forward-looking regulatory thinking and acting has paid off in the face of a real national security risk.

The last paragraph was probably more than just a few readers’ heads. Overall, the current number of drone “experts” wholeheartedly believe that they are early users of drone technology. However, most of these hipsters still wore Batman and / or Scooby-Doo Underoos when the early users of the technology innovated baby steps like transatlantic flights.

I have had my doubts about many of the Moonshot efforts mentioned above, and the tremendous effort to make the flying car concept work requires that we overcome some major technological hurdles. Even in California, wishes and best intentions have not been enough to overcome the harsh and sometimes exciting realities of physics.

My doubts are not about the design and manufacturing practices that exist here in the United States. Unfortunately, many of these people who work on possible solutions have financed and booted themselves. Some of these people are innovative in terms of social security checks and credit cards, or jumping from SBIR to grants plus or minus $ 100,000 and family member investments.

Experts believe that the flying auto industry’s schedules are far too aggressive. We can look at the Honda and Cirrus Jets as examples of how the FAA claims billions of companies trying to meet a 1960s-style certification system. Government employees with time constraints tend to change their attitudes more optimistically after signing an advisory contract. I believe that things are so absurd under the surface that some opportunities to participate border on a game of trust. And that’s not a good old-fashioned scruple talk.

Personally, I flinch every time I hear the mobile app hero braggadocio as a solution to complicated technical problems. Historically, the hubris immediately undermines the credibility of the affiliated program. Hopefully the sideshow will be kept at bay here, as the snap chat fantasy only uses energy and resources that would otherwise solve major technical problems.

There is a clear possibility that we will find ourselves caught in the recurrent pitfalls of this effort, and we must remain vigilant to avoid them at all costs. We can see the marmot’s shadow at software companies that have more VC resources than viable products. These companies rely on regulations to sanction some paying customers, and this business plan friend is a surefire recipe for ecosystem failure.

Flying car Kool-Aid, the obstacles to the success and flashbacks of the drone industry –

But I ask you, do I sound rancid and curdled? You look at me, Jack. Eh? Look what? And I drink a lot of Kool-Aid, you know? I’m something of a Kool Aid man, Jack – that’s me. And I can swear to you, boy, I swear to you that there is nothing wrong with my body fluids. Nothing, Jackie. – Group leader Lionel Mandrake

Many more questions with this effort –

1. How much money will it take to get the UAM / AAM / Agility Prime effort off the pad?

2. How does Chinese capital fit in?

3. Does the Air Force have a problem with a Class A enemy in its supply chain?

4. How many licks do you need to get to the center of Tootsie Pop?

5. Does anyone think the FAA won’t screw this flying car up like drones and GA?

Unfortunately, the deck looks stacked against the American aerospace manufacturer. There is a lack of money, will and the regulatory path for domestic companies to compete globally. Some of them are legacy issues like ITAR and a Federal Aviation Administration that works as if it were in the 1960s or 70s. The reality is that government adoption and realization of technological capabilities is delayed by about a decade, and two or three decades and realistic amounts of inflation-adjusted funds are required to get this project off the ground.

These problems (almost as many as Jeff Lowe’s T-shirts have) are hardly limited to regulators and legislators like the FAA. In the case of NASA, there are multiple layers of bureaucracy and fiefs of middle management. At this point, I would be surprised if NASA were able to do the paperwork to return to the moon by 2024, or possibly even this decade.

For a historical perspective, I offer:

In May 1961, President John F. Kennedy made a speech saying, “But this nation’s vows can only be fulfilled if we are first in this nation, and therefore we intend to be first”, he said. “In short, our leadership in science and industry, our hopes for peace and security, our commitments to ourselves and others require us to make these efforts, solve these puzzles, solve them for the benefit of all. and to become the world’s leading space nation. “

This is very inspiring and a testament to the American state of emergency and what this country can achieve. For this reason, it is difficult to fathom or even vaguely understand that the FAA cannot fulfill the mandate to integrate a drone weighing> 250 grams into the NAS in almost 30 years! Let’s do the math fifty years ago, a man on the moon, after working less than ten years on the solution. FAA has been working on a solution for almost 30 years; They have 51 BVLOS waivers, and most of them (44) are EVLOS where VOs look like BVLOS waivers and a shipload of night waivers are progress. This is not synonymous with success or anything that could scale outside of the UAS IPPs.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.