I would like to add that i do think we've seen probably one of the last field campaigns for something of this magnitude. Working on a UAV (unmanned arial vehicle) program, the advancement of the remotely powered sysems is ridiculous you could have a field campaign of a 1/4 the size of vortex in 10 years that remotely operates field and air powered vehicles that can receive data without the prospect of human injury. We'll see how the FAA adapts to this advancement as it is a daily operation over seas they just don't have a way to regulate something that has no line of site vision from a cock pit they seem pretty confused with it.
Disclaimer: My views that I express in this post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of the University of Nebraska, the University of Colorado, VORTEX2, or anyone else.
You are correct that the use of a UAS (unmanned aerial system) for this purpose is uncharted territory for the FAA. It isn't reasonable to expect that FAA administrators will understand the science and the need to perhaps relax some of the restrictions for UAS operation. In many potential uses of a UAS, it may be perfectly acceptable to pin down operation within a region of a few counties with a 24 hour lead time. Good luck pinpointing supercell formation and severity on that scale with a 24 hour lead time. It's not at all an easy forecasting problem. The FAA is tasked with keeping the skies safe and they're going to play it safe. I can't say that I blame them for being cautious. But playing it safe isn't necessarily conducive to taking advantage of the best opportunities for data collection.
The FAA requires that a UAS operator maintain visual contact with the aircraft at all times. In order to make that work, it means that someone on the ground has to follow along in order to keep the aircraft in sight. That means another vehicle on the roads, and one that needs the roads to be reasonably clear in order to operate optimally.
A friend of mine and a fellow member of the UAS-VORTEX2 team commented to me that he would have liked to deploy in Oklahoma during the May 10 outbreak. It could not have happened because it was well outside of the domain that the UAS is authorized to operate within. My response to him was that it probably was for the best that we weren't operating on May 10 or during some of the other outbreaks in Oklahoma this year. As crowded as the roads were, it would have been quite a challenge to collect data and maintain compliance with FAA regulations.
While I fully understand that nobody owns the road, I would like to think that many skilled chasers understand and appreciate the science they use when forecasting and nowcasting. The goal of VORTEX2 is to further the science. While the obvious benefits of VORTEX2 are hopefully more accurate warnings and better lead times, it's very reasonable to think that chasers who understand the science might realize some benefits in their own chasing.
I would hope that chasers would consider yielding the right of way to VORTEX2, within reason. That shouldn't be a controversial statement to the chasers on here because most of the people who take the time to create an account on this site and participate in forecast discussions are people who understand and appreciate the science. They're also people who understand the benefits of reporting severe weather to help emergency managers and meteorologists know when to take action and warn the public. Through this process, they also assist in creating a good database of severe weather reports, especially tornadoes, that is beneficial to scientists.
I'm not sure that the use of UAS could replace a lot of the current observation methods in the near future. Hopefully UAS-VORTEX2 can demonstrate the usefulness of a UAS as an observation system. Even if everyone who posts on this site and was chasing on May 10 or during some of the other outbreaks this year in Oklahoma had pulled off the road for VORTEX2, I'm not sure it would have made data collection much easier. I don't think the type of people that post here are impeding the collection of data for science.
Just my opinion...