UPS successfully tests package delivery with a drone

[Shawn Knight]

Amazon boss Jeff Bezos revealed in late 2013 during a segment on news program 60 Minutes that his company was actively developing an autonomous drone delivery system. A few days later, UPS said it was also looking into the matter.

In the more than three years that have elapsed, both companies (as well as a host of others) have made great strides in the market with Amazon conducting its inaugural Prime Air drone delivery a couple of months back. Now, we can add “Brown” to the list of couriers that have successfully pulled off an aerial drone delivery.

In partnership with Ohio-based battery-electric truck and drone developer Workhorse Group, UPS said it used a Workhorse HorseFly UAV delivery drone to make a delivery while a UPS truck driver continued down the road to make another delivery in person.

The drone in question docks on the roof of the truck and has a cage that hangs below. Through a hatch in the truck, the driver can load a package into the drone’s cargo hold and send it on its way. The drone, which features a 30-minute flight time and a top speed of 45 miles per hour, can carry a package weighing up to 10 pounds and recharges itself while docked atop the UPS truck.

As per current FAA rules, the drone had to maintain line-of-sight with a pilot and it flew a pre-programmed route for the sake of the test.

A bit concerning is the fact that, as TechCrunch highlights, a second, unofficial demonstration of the drone didn’t go very well. Some sort of interference, possibly from the broadcast reporters’ cameras, caused issues with the drone’s compass. The drone aborted its launch, the publication said, and tried to land on top of the UPS truck but fell to the side and was nearly crushed by the still-closing lid of the vehicle. Oops.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/68248-ups-successfully-tests-package-delivery-drone.html

 

[OutlawCecil]

Cool in theory, but UPS and Amazon both are gonna have a ton of issues with actual application. Packages will get shot down by *****s, placed on rooftops or in pools...etc, and drones will malfunction and crash or simply lose packages once in a while. I guess we will see.

 

[mailpup]

For various legitimate reasons someone will need to refuse delivery sometimes. How does a package recipient refuse delivery under this system?

 

[Evernessince]

Cool in theory, but UPS and Amazon both are gonna have a ton of issues with actual application. Packages will get shot down by *****s, placed on rooftops or in pools...etc, and drones will malfunction and crash or simply lose packages once in a while. I guess we will see.

I've seen the whole "the drones will got shot down" excuse a billion times and it's BS. Smaller guns don't pack enough punch, you risk loosing and / or destroying the package anyways, and they likely will come equipped with 360 degree cameras meaning if you can see it then it is recording you. But yeah people are going to be shooting dangerous and loud weapons (a bb isn't going to do it) to get something they likely can't use. Are you going to hangout near people's houses waiting from the drones and then hope that no one notices the loud noise?

"drones will malfunction and crash or simply lose packages once in a while"

And that doesn't happen to current delivery men?

 

[OutlawCecil]

I've seen the whole "the drones will got shot down" excuse a billion times and it's BS. Smaller guns don't pack enough punch, you risk loosing and / or destroying the package anyways, and they likely will come equipped with 360 degree cameras meaning if you can see it then it is recording you. But yeah people are going to be shooting dangerous and loud weapons (a bb isn't going to do it) to get something they likely can't use. Are you going to hangout near people's houses waiting from the drones and then hope that no one notices the loud noise?

"drones will malfunction and crash or simply lose packages once in a while"

And that doesn't happen to current delivery men?

Wow shot down most of my ideas... (no pun intended)

Just saying you know somebody, somewhere will be firing at these thinking somebody ordered something expensive... Even if unsuccessful in stealing the package, people may do this for parts from the drone or simply to damage packages for laughs. Don't know about you but I know people here in New Mexico would do these things if given the chance.

Also a big issue is people following drones, knowing they are unmanned, and stealing packages. This happens with the big brown trucks already after dropoffs. Even people driving by seeing your package... but at least the drivers can *try* to hide packages behind walls and stuff. How's a drone supposed to prevent package line-of-site with roads?

I just see too many issues with the overall idea, and I'm in the tech field...

 

[Evernessince]

Wow shot down most of my ideas... (no pun intended)

Just saying you know somebody, somewhere will be firing at these thinking somebody ordered something expensive... Even if unsuccessful in stealing the package, people may do this for parts from the drone or simply to damage packages for laughs. Don't know about you but I know people here in New Mexico would do these things if given the chance.

Also a big issue is people following drones, knowing they are unmanned, and stealing packages. This happens with the big brown trucks already after dropoffs. Even people driving by seeing your package... but at least the drivers can *try* to hide packages behind walls and stuff. How's a drone supposed to prevent package line-of-site with roads?

I just see too many issues with the overall idea, and I'm in the tech field...

Porch pirates is already an issue. If people are going to follow around the trucks to steal packages they are going to do the same for drones. At least with dones though it's harder to follow them. It's not like you can fly over things.

"but at least the drivers can *try* to hide packages"

Very few drivers do this and even if they did it isn't going to stop someone already watching from getting it.

"Even if unsuccessful in stealing the package, people may do this for parts from the drone or simply to damage packages for laughs. "

Probably not worth it given that these drone will likely be steaming their 360 cam's footage directly to the local delivery van. Drone goes down and the driver is a minute away. Assuming they didn't just record you shooting the drone, the driver would likely catch you in the act, even assuming no one heard your gun go off. Maybe at the start people will be doing this just for the laughs until they realize they are going to have to pony up $1,200 for the drone and possibly more for a damaged package.

 

[Draconian]

That's not the way to go about drone package delivery.

You want a command center where a team of people can manually steer the drones as they get to their destination. Left to their own devices, an autonomous drone could drop a package on a roof or something.

 

[BSim500]

Very few drivers do this and even if they did it isn't going to stop someone already watching from getting it.

Many drivers will attempt to leave a package with a neighbor or attempt redelivery the next day if there's no response (with far lower rates of theft than leaving an expensive packages on someone's doorstop in plain sight). A few bad drivers aside, the big difference is drivers have the option of providing actual signed proof of receipt into the hands of the person (who is either the customer or someone who accepts legal responsibility for the package on their behalf with a paper trail), which is not the same as unsigned "we filmed ourselves throwing it over the fence to an empty house" delivery when it comes to non-delivery disputes (which merely proves the courier left it unattended, not that anyone at the delivery address has actually received it). And as mailpup said, how do you refuse delivery or deal with Special Instructions like "please make sure only the named person signs for it"?

The real issue is, if people know drones are dumping expensive packages in gardens with no proof of actual receipt, then I can see non-delivery fraud claims increasing. "Hi Amazon, according to your tracking page the $1,400 2TB Samsung 960 PRO I ordered was "delivered" yet no-one knocked the door, nor put any 'You were not at home, we will attempt to redeliver' note through or left anything with a neighbor and there was no sign of the items anywhere on our property. No we don't have CCTV nor do our neighbors. It was probably stolen but there were no eyewitnesses. I'd like a full refund please". Amazon may try and dispute that, but if a high value item was despatched without requiring actual signed proof of receipt (because Amazon chose a drone not a driver), then the credit card company / many legal systems are likely to find favor with the customer as the burden of proof is on Amazon proving fraud and receipt of the item, not the customer "proving" their innocence or non-receipt, and unsigned drone deliveries by their nature = they can't actually provide any proof it was delivered it to a person. Eg, here in the UK, the law (Consumer Rights Act 2015) states the retailer is responsible for the condition of the goods "until the goods are received by the consumer, or by someone else they have nominated to receive them on their behalf like a neighbour". An empty garden / yard / driveway is not a person.

Assuming they didn't just record you shooting the drone, the driver would likely catch you in the act, even assuming no one heard your gun go off. Maybe at the start people will be doing this just for the laughs until they realize they are going to have to pony up $1,200 for the drone and possibly more for a damaged package.

Just like all protesters / rioters wearing hoodie's and covering their faces all queue up to individually pay for exactly the amount each individual caused after being caught with 100% accuracy by an understaffed police force? Personally, I agree the risk of drones getting shot at is overstated, but there's also a whole lot of "over-swing" in naively believing the opposite. Unless drones knock on the door and hand it to the resident, 100% of drone deliveries will be left outside vs only 10% or so for manned couriers. Of course generalized rates of opportunistic theft against packages, etc are going to be higher even if the drone isn't being shot out of the sky or being "stalked", let alone increased buyer fraud when they can order $1,500 items yet no longer have to sign for them and aerial video footage of someone's empty yard gets dismissed as "proof" of receipt...

 

[Evernessince]

Many drivers will attempt to leave a package with a neighbor or attempt redelivery the next day if there's no response (with far lower rates of theft than leaving an expensive packages on someone's doorstop in plain sight). A few bad drivers aside, the big difference is drivers have the option of providing actual signed proof of receipt into the hands of the person (who is either the customer or someone who accepts legal responsibility for the package on their behalf with a paper trail), which is not the same as unsigned "we filmed ourselves throwing it over the fence to an empty house" delivery when it comes to non-delivery disputes (which merely proves the courier left it unattended, not that anyone at the delivery address has actually received it). And as mailpup said, how do you refuse delivery or deal with Special Instructions like "please make sure only the named person signs for it"?

The real issue is, if people know drones are dumping expensive packages in gardens with no proof of actual receipt, then I can see non-delivery fraud claims increasing. "Hi Amazon, according to your tracking page the $1,400 2TB Samsung 960 PRO I ordered was "delivered" yet no-one knocked the door, nor put any 'You were not at home, we will attempt to redeliver' note through or left anything with a neighbor and there was no sign of the items anywhere on our property. No we don't have CCTV nor do our neighbors. It was probably stolen but there were no eyewitnesses. I'd like a full refund please". Amazon may try and dispute that, but if a high value item was despatched without requiring actual signed proof of receipt (because Amazon chose a drone not a driver), then the credit card company / many legal systems are likely to find favor with the customer as the burden of proof is on Amazon proving fraud and receipt of the item, not the customer "proving" their innocence or non-receipt, and unsigned drone deliveries by their nature = they can't actually provide any proof it was delivered it to a person. Eg, here in the UK, the law (Consumer Rights Act 2015) states the retailer is responsible for the condition of the goods "until the goods are received by the consumer, or by someone else they have nominated to receive them on their behalf like a neighbour". An empty garden / yard / driveway is not a person.


Just like all protesters / rioters wearing hoodie's and covering their faces all queue up to individually pay for exactly the amount each individual caused after being caught with 100% accuracy by an understaffed police force? Personally, I agree the risk of drones getting shot at is overstated, but there's also a whole lot of "over-swing" in naively believing the opposite. Unless drones knock on the door and hand it to the resident, 100% of drone deliveries will be left outside vs only 10% or so for manned couriers. Of course generalized rates of opportunistic theft against packages, etc are going to be higher even if the drone isn't being shot out of the sky or being "stalked", let alone increased buyer fraud when they can order $1,500 items yet no longer have to sign for them and aerial video footage of someone's empty yard gets dismissed as "proof" of receipt...

"The real issue is, if people know drones are dumping expensive packages in gardens with no proof of actual receipt"

For regular packages, all delivery companies scan the package at the place of delivery and record the time and GPS coordinates automatically with the scan guns they carry.

"The real issue is, if people know drones are dumping expensive packages in gardens with no proof of actual receipt"

You mean aside from the above. A signature is only additional proof. But that is beside the point because if UPS is dumping expensive packages in gardens with drones the delivery man would have done the same thing. It's not the drone's fault for sellers like Amazon for not including signature confirmation. This isn't a problem with drones.

"And as mailpup said, how do you refuse delivery or deal with Special Instructions like "please make sure only the named person signs for it"?"

Voice recognition has been around for awhile. A mic on a drone costs a few bucks. For more expensive packages hand delivery will likely still be used.

"100% of drone deliveries will be left outside vs only 10% or so for manned couriers."

Lol, what? 99% of manned couriers deliver the package outside. That 10% figure is absolutely ridiculous. I order things all the time and unless you are at home when they deliver, which is very very rare (work ya know) they always deliver out side. Heck, even when you are home they deliver outside and do not knock. The only time the package goes right inside is when they need a signature, which is very rare.

"let alone increased buyer fraud when they can order $1,500 items yet no longer have to sign for them"

As I mentioned above, this will never happen. Amazon will require signature on receipt. You'd have to be the dumbest online business not to require a signature for a package of that value. I don't know where you got this idea that signature confirmation is going anywhere. Drones are just a cheaper way to deliver low cost packages, which by the way is the large majority of packages.

 

[JamesSWD]

I know it's just a proof concept, but that didn't inspire any confidence:

1) When the roof cover slides back, that'll be a mess for the electronics and inside of the truck if it's raining. Unless they don't deploy the drones during bad weather. But given the lack of rigidity of the truck's cargo box, that sliding door will quickly develop leaks even when it's closed.

2) Watching the driver pull over, load the package, deploy the drone, input whatever she was on the screen...then pull over again to wait for the drone's re-docking, etc., looked like a big, time-wasting hassle, prone to issues.

3) This individual truck/drone deployment scenario just doesn't seem right. A more efficient system might be specially modified truck-drone platform, where a driver can load several drones at once and deploy them from a parked location, such as within a specified delivery zone. Once all the drones re-dock, move on to the next zip code, rinse & repeat. Basically, it takes the video's concept of fire once and turns it into a shotgun blast. This modular approach will allow the drivers to control, monitor, and address any issues with a particular delivery in a zone.

Just my dos centavos.