Narrative:

While working local control; I was already working a moderate amount of traffic with high complexity when a large uas was observed and commented on by the ground controller. What appeared to be a larger quad-copter of large enough size to deliver packages operating a guesstimated 1 to 1.5 NM southeast palo alto up to an estimated 1;500 feet. I tried to brief aircraft and adjacent facilities of the uas while others called the police department. I had been forced to work a lot of traffic on the south side because moffett denied extensions on the north side. With the observed uas activity on the south side the controller in charge tried to get north extensions to be away from the uas activity and moffett denied the request without citing an operational need for the airspace. This resulted in more aircraft remaining in the south pattern and increased workload in my part to issue additional advisories regarding uas activity due to the traffic being forced to fly in closer proximity to it; in addition to the complex airspace arrangement. This is another example of why the airspace between palo alto and moffett field needs to be redesigned. Having to make aircraft fly closer to uncoordinated uas activity did not contribute to safely and efficiently moving aircraft through the NAS. I have previously filed a report about palo alto needing more airspace while still being sensitive to moffett operations. This is just one more example of why such a change is necessary.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ATC Controller reported an example why this particular airspace needs possible redesign and a UAS that was violating the airspace.

Narrative: While working Local Control; I was already working a moderate amount of traffic with high complexity when a large UAS was observed and commented on by the Ground Controller. What appeared to be a larger quad-copter of large enough size to deliver packages operating a guesstimated 1 to 1.5 NM SE Palo Alto up to an estimated 1;500 feet. I tried to brief aircraft and adjacent facilities of the UAS while others called the police department. I had been forced to work a lot of traffic on the south side because Moffett denied extensions on the North side. With the observed UAS activity on the south side the CIC tried to get North extensions to be away from the UAS activity and Moffett denied the request without citing an operational need for the airspace. This resulted in more aircraft remaining in the South pattern and increased workload in my part to issue additional advisories regarding UAS activity due to the traffic being forced to fly in closer proximity to it; in addition to the complex airspace arrangement. This is another example of why the airspace between Palo Alto and Moffett Field needs to be redesigned. Having to make aircraft fly closer to uncoordinated UAS activity did not contribute to safely and efficiently moving aircraft through the NAS. I have previously filed a report about Palo Alto needing more airspace while still being sensitive to Moffett operations. This is just one more example of why such a change is necessary.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.