-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
text clarification in Section 1.2.2 #10
Comments
@mglt I actually agree there is no need to be very specific about what hobby aircraft may/not be in the picture. i propose to remove the "For all, but the simplest hobby aircraft" |
I agree. |
It should not be assumed that all UAS have a flow of telemetry from the UA to the GCS. Some simple hobby aircraft don't. If the link is not there to support telemetry, it cannot be re-used to support Network RID. |
For all but the simplest hobby aircraft, telemetry (at least position and heading) flows from the UA to the GCS via some path, typically the reverse of the C2 path. Thus, RID information pertaining to both the GCS and the UA can be sent, by whichever has Internet connectivity, to the Net-RID SP, typically the USS managing the UAS operation.
|
i propose to remove the "For all, but the simplest hobby aircraft". If not it should be clearly justified so the reader understands why we are making such distinction. |
implemented as following:
|
1.2.2. Network RID
"""
at either end with the Internet between. For all, but the simplest
hobby aircraft, telemetry (at least position and heading) flows from
the UA to the GCS via some path, typically the reverse of the C2
path. Thus, RID information pertaining to both the GCS and the UA
can be sent, by whichever has Internet connectivity, to the Net-RID
SP, typically the USS managing the UAS operation.
"""
I am reading the text as mentioning that the simplest hobby aircraft are excluded from the discussion. I think the reason is that they do not have telemetry flows. If that is the case, I suggest that one either mention the two categories of aircraft explicitly, or remove the distinction. More specifically - assuming my interpretation is correct - it seems evident that the text precludes the existence of such flow, while the current text - at least my reading of it - let suppose there might be another (simpler) path.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: