The Missouri Drone Journalism program received a visit from a group of Korean journalists during class on Monday, April 22. The group was made up of seven reporters that are based in Seoul, South Korea. All are defectors from North Korea. A few of the reporters even left the communist nation within the last two years. Many now work for publications that cover North Korean topics for a South Korean audience.

The journalists were visiting as part of a seminar with the East-West Center. The group studied new media techniques during its stop at the Missouri School of Journalism in Columbia, Mo. for most of the past week, and will also travel to Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles.

During the afternoon, the journalists discussed possible uses of drones in journalism and observed a drone in flight. The class also showed some of its published work involving drone footage to the Korean journalists.

A visiting reporter with the newspaper DailyNK in Seoul, said that she believed drone technology would be useful in documenting the demilitarized zone between North Korea and South Korea.

“I specialize in North Korea coverage, and overhead pictures of both the demilitarized zone and the edge of the North (Korea) would be dynamic,” said the reporter through an assigned translator.

The Drone Journalism program also hosted a group of Pakistani journalists for a similar session in March.

*Names were omitted from the text and faces were omitted from photographs to protect the North Korean families of defected journalists from possible retribution.*

More images from the Korean journalists’ visit:

Video By Zach Garcia

Earlier last month, the Missouri Drone Journalism Program was asked to give a group of visiting Pakistani journalists a demonstration and brief explanation of the program and its goals. The journalists were brought to tour the United States through an exchange set up by the East-West Center, which “promotes better relations and understanding among the people and nations of the United States, Asia, and the Pacific through cooperative study, research, and dialog.”

It works similar to a foreign exchange program: it seeks out a group of journalists from both the United States and Pakistan with backgrounds in different media, and sends them on a two-week tour of the each others’ country.

While the visiting journalists were not originally planning on visiting the Missouri Drone Journalism Program, we jumped at the opportunity. We were unsure how a group of Pakistanis would react to such a controversial technology being used in journalism, and was pleasantly surprised when the Pakistanis expressed.

The visiting group was most interested in the potential implementation of drone in dangerous situations like suicide bombings and natural disasters. After introducing them to the Program, we showed the group a couple of the articles and stories we’ve produced. We then we gave the journalists the opportunity to see the drones in action and even taught a few of them how to fly.

Matthew Dickinson gave them a brief lesson and then put the controls in their own hands. After about 15 minutes of flying, the visiting journalists had their fill of flight for the day. Most were able to get the drone into the air after a couple tries, an impressive feat given the steep learning curve most experience with our models.

The slideshow below shows a couple of the visiting journalists first attempt at drone flight.

Courtesy: Matthew Dickinson/MU IT Drone Lab

As debate over drones in combat reaches a tipping point in the United States, the use of unmanned flying bots on domestic ground is also starting to pick up steam. As many as 28 states are considering legislation that would outlaw unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs. Another contentious issue in the U.S. is what makes a UAV “commercial” or “recreational.” Commercial use is generally recognized as having a profit endgame, but murky Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) laws only fuel the debate. Using UAVs for journalistic purposes seems to further blur the line between commercial and recreational use.

UAVs have also been making waves internationally, where laws (or guidelines) vary from nation to nation. The below is a guide we’ve put together that breaks down these various UAV laws. In most of the countries we’ve taken a look at, the designation between commercial and recreational UAV use is a key starting point in deciding rules and enforcement.

Canada (UAV-Friendly Rating: 2/5)

Perhaps the most complex UAV laws in the entire world exist just north of U.S. borders. Transport Canada is the agency that regulates Canadian air space, and it sets a clear line between “unmanned aerial vehicles” (commercial use) and “model aircraft” (recreational use). The definition of a model aircraft: less than 77.2 pounds, individually owned (no companies allowed) and not profit-seeking. If an aircraft meets these conditions, it is considered a recreational vehicle, making it subject to lower scrutiny. Aircraft that don’t meet this criteria are officially “unmanned aerial vehicles” and require Special Flight Operations certificates. Getting certified sounds like an almost more-trouble-than-it’s-worth process that includes a big list of specifications. For example: a UAV can meet the three model aircraft standards listed above, but if it’s also got a small camera, then the UAV automatically becomes an “unmanned aerial vehicle” under the law.

DIYdrones has more useful information on Canadian UAV law.

Mexico (UAV-Friendly Rating: 5/5)

No Civil Aviation Authority regulations beset UAV users in Mexico. In fact, Mexican attitudes evidently encourage UAV use. The Mexican government rewarded Jordi Muñoz, who is a young scientist and engineer, for exploring the peaceful uses of drones through his own production company, for example. The government also uses UAVs for everything from drug activity to university research.

United Kingdom (UAV-Friendly Rating: 3/5)

The U.K.’s UAV laws are similar to the current policies of the U.S. – meaning they’re really more like guidelines than a comprehensive set of regulations. Currently, CAP 722 claims jurisdiction over UAV use in the U.K. This legislation divides UAV use into two groups that both require permits. The key figure in the U.K. is 20 kg (or 44.09 pounds) – this is the weight limit a UAV cannot surpass to be considered a  “small unmanned aircraft.” This title makes the aircraft more likely to only require a minor “Permit to Fly” classification, which is relatively easy to acquire, but does limit where and how high you can fly (rural lands are more acceptable).

Anything heavier or used for aerial photography requires a “Permit to Carry Out Aerial Work,” which comes with tougher restrictions. Attaining one of these permits requires a big list of prerequisites – from pilot qualification to design and construction certificates. According to The Guardian, there are only 130 groups or companies that have permission to fly UAVs in U.K. airspace.

Europe (UAV-Friendly Rating: 2/5)

Much of mainland Europe operates under the jurisdiction of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), a European Union group. EASA is simple when it comes to UAVs: you’re going to need certification in any situation, whatsoever. Such certification is only granted on a case-by-case basis under the EASA’s rules, which we’d imagine is a  lengthy process. The EASA also has shown that it does not operate under much precedent in these cases, despite UAV technology growing more and more everyday. EASA’s Policy Statement webpage on UAVs says that requests proposing flight in unpopulated areas have the best success rate.

Brazil (UAV-Friendly Rating: 5/5)

In South America, Brazil has become a leading player in UAV use. On the national level, the country is investing deeply in UAVs to patrol its borders. There are also no direct laws that infringe free civilian use. Such openness allows for amazing footage, like this video adventure in Rio de Janeiro:

Asia (UAV-Friendly Rating: an indifferent 1/5)

Both communist China and democratic Japan are using UAVs to square off with each other in a sort of micro-aggressive battle for disputed land. Similarly, South Korea also may be dipping its toes in militaristic UAV use through possible collaboration with the U.S. The only non-military use of UAVs that we’ve been able dig up in the region are limited to corners of agriculture, such as with  rice fields of Japan.

Australia (UAV-Friendly Rating: 4/5)

Oceana is perhaps the most welcoming region for UAVs in the world. An “unmanned aircraft system” is Australian terminology for a UAV used for profit-seeking “air work,” but such commercial use only requires some easily attainable identification. Otherwise, the UAV is a “model aircraft, flown for sport & recreation and education,” according to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. Model aircraft, from what we’ve seen, are completely hands-off in terms of regulation.

New Zealand (UAV-Friendly Rating: 5/5)

New Zealand law is like Australia, but without the identification requirement. It appears as if recreational and commercial motivations for UAV flight are indistinguishable in New Zealand, and free-flying policies lead to visual marvels like this video clip. The Aviation Industry Association of New Zealand has proposed legislation on UAVs, but the proposal is reportedly more of a non-restrictive manual for UAV use than anything.

UAV law ranges quite a bit internationally, which is exemplary of the many opinions on the new aircraft in the U.S.. As of now, the U.S. combines much of both strict but broad laws with fairly open areas of freedom in flight. While much of the direct U.S./FAA regulation zeroes in on commercial purposes for use, recreational or “hobbyist” use has generally been left alone as long as UAVs aren’t breaking trespassing laws. State legislation currently being considered, however, could catapult the U.S. up to among the most highly restricted countries for UAVs out there.

The size of Tucker Prairie has been slightly reduced since the construction of I-70; the area is 145 acres. Photo by Brendan Gibbons/KBIA

Last Tuesday, the Missouri Drone Journalism Program covered a prairie fire at Tucker Prairie near Kingdom City, Mo. to publish their second official piece.  The story we produced focuses on just what makes a prairie a prairie, and why the Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) uses fire to maintain the land.

The MDC explains how a controlled fire is the best way to rid the prairie of harmful invasive species and restore the prairie back to it’s natural habitat.

Read the full story published by the program’s main partner KBIA as well as Harvest Public Media, and be sure to watch the video below, which includes aerial drone footage of the burn.

Pilot Brendan Gibbons gives behind-the-scenes details of what it was like to fly the quadcopter drone over flames during a controlled burn at Tucker Prairie in Kingdom City, Mo, on April 2, 2013. As a member of the program, Gibbons is learning to control the drone through a remote control and use the footage captured by the drone to assist in reporting. The story on the burn is the second story completed by the Missouri Drone Program, and was published on Tuesday, April 9 on Harvest Public Media and KBIA.

Scott Pham, director of the Missouri Drone Journalism Program, speaks with Rep. Casey Guernsey at an early hearing for HB 46 on February 5, 2013. Photo by Jaime Cooke.

The Missouri Drone Journalism Program has been aware of HB 46 since it was introduced by Rep. Casey Guernsey early this year.  Today, a version of the bill has gained first round approval from the Missouri House and now the Associated Press is inaccurately  reporting that it prevents journalists from using drones.

The bill explicitly calls out journalists, but the text of the bill actually allows for the use of drones over land where the property owner has given permission:

 3. No person, group of persons, entity, or organization, including, but not limited to, journalists, reporters, or news organizations, shall use a drone or other unmanned aircraft to conduct surveillance of any individual or property owned by an individual or business without the consent of that individual or property owner.

We have been operating under similar restrictions since the Program began and we do not believe this bill will shut us down or prevent us from pursuing more stories.

We are, however, deeply concerned with the bill and its implications for journalism as a whole.

Read the official text of HB 46 here. 

The true stars of the Missouri Drone Journalism Program are the drones themselves, or the J-Bots, as the students pioneering the project have come to call them. Working with these Unmanned Aerial Vehicles is made possible through a partnership with the MU Information Technology Program, in which under the direction of IT Program lead Matthew Dickinson, students have learned to build and control the drones. Following are descriptions of the drones at the helm of the Missouri Drone Journalism Program:

- Quadcopter (DJI F450)

The Quadcopter, or “Quad,” is the most basic of the IT Program’s constructed drones and is the machine type that the Journalism Program’s students have been learning to fly by operating. The Quadcopter makes use of a hand-held radio transmitter, and runs on an external battery (either 3S or 4S) that attaches to the drone’s frame, allowing flight life of approximately 17 minutes. Motorized propellers, which lift the drone to flight, range from eight to ten inches in length. This drone does not have a camera gimbal, and is intended mainly for training use.

- TBS Discovery Quadcopter

This Quadcopter has been built around a TBS Discovery airframe. The TBS Discovery system uses an APM 2.5 controller, along with GPS and telemetry links, to carry First Person View equipment and

Image Courtesy of the MU IT Drone Lab

transmit 1.3 GHz live video. What all this means is that the TBS Discovery Quadcopter has the capacity to stream live video through flight to an adjacent monitor (see corresponding image to the right), for both flight control and recording purposes. This Quadcopter also has an attached base that can securely hold an additional camera, such as a GoPro, for either ground or overhead imaging. This Quadcopter also serves as a platform for the IT Program to develop APM flight controller code.

- Hexacopter (DJI F550)

The Hexacopter, or “Hex,” holds six motors, instead of the four that Quadcopters utilize. This, in theory, leads to better control of the vehicles when in flight, as the motors are spaced closer together and react with quicker and more precise movements from the radio transmitter. The Hexacopter’s larger size also allows it to support a built-in landing gear unit and a camera gimbal. The gimbal gives an external camera (when attached) a steady base.

- XAircraft X650 V8

Image Courtesy of MU IT Drone Lab

The XAircraft X650 V8 drone is currently being tested for the purpose of determining if the vehicle’s eight motors rightly provide additional stability over lower models by the IT Program, and may not see the hands of the Journalism Program until more complex stories are approached. A high payload capacity on this drone also allows for the use of larger batteries and extended airtime.

- “The BumbleBee” Quadcopter

“The BumbleBee” Quad (right) relative to a normal-sized Quadcopter (left)

This tiny Quadcopter, nicknamed “The BumbleBee,” is remarkable in the fact that it was constructed completely through the use of the IT Program’s Full Spectrum Laser 40W Laser Cutter. This non-GPS Quadcopter, which is utilized as more of an indoor flyer due to its small size and will not serve duty in the Journalism Program’s approach to public land stories.

Information in this article was provided from Matthew Dickinson and the MU IT Program Drone Lab.

Additional Imaging:

The overhead camera compartment on a TBS Discovery Quadcopter

The landing unit on a Hexacopter

A larger Quadcopter with an attached landing gear unit

An engine propeller on a large Quadcopter

**All imaging is credited to Robert Partyka unless otherwise noted.