The idiot whose Phantom Drone crashed on White House Grounds in early 2015 is one of the biggest reasons for the 30 mile radius ban on flying R/C near Washington D.C.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/01/26/drone-crash-secret-service-faa/22352857/
Many other issues too, but THAT ONE really was a massive public relations blow to R/C in general and the "rallying point" for politicians and a big incentive for FAA to come up with ways to try to address this.
Which just happened to occur one week after a conference was held in DC about the terrorist threat of remote controlled, real time video guided weapons, also known as low cost hobbyist FPV drones and one whole one year BEFORE the sudden 30 mile restriction was made related to no "special event" or events as excused elsewhere and occurring IMMEDIATELY after RC pilot registration was enacted. There's even a still image on-line from that threat conference showing a DJI Phantom with explosives attached.
Any WH drone incidents since registration was passed... passed in the same year that incident occurred?
The guy who owned the drone worked here. He turned himself in most likely because he knew his on-file prints were on the drone:
National Geospatial Intelligence Agency
https://www.nga.mil/Pages/Default.aspx
Also, here are news items from the months just prior to the "sudden emergency" of Christmas drones (the vast majority being little toys) which "required" drone pilot registration:
Military exercise Black Dart to tackle nightmare drone scenario
July 25, 2015 (FAA task force on RC pilot registration began in October, 2015 with a less than one month deadline)
https://nypost.com/2015/07/25/military-operation-black-dart-to-tackle-nightmare-drone-scenario/
Excerpt:
Sweat the small stuff.
That’s the unofficial motto for this year’s edition of the military exercise Black Dart, a two-week test of tactics and technologies to combat hostile drones that begins Monday on the Point Mugu range at Naval Base Ventura County in California.
The military categorizes Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) by size and capability, from Group 5 drones that weigh more than 1,320 pounds and can fly above 18,000 feet like the Reaper, down to Group 1, mini- and micro-drones less than 20 pounds that fly lower than 1,200 feet. Previous Black Darts have covered threats to troops overseas and targets at home posed by drones of all sizes.
But small drones are this year’s focus, said the director of this 14th edition of Black Dart, Air Force Maj. Scott Gregg, because of worrisome incidents since the last exercise.
Gregg cited the quadcopter that a drunk crashed onto the White House lawn in the wee hours of Jan. 26 and sightings of unidentified small drones flying over nuclear reactors in France. In the wake of those events, he said, “Even though we’ve been looking at [the small drone threat], it’s taken on a new sense of urgency.”
Homeland Security warns drones could be used in attacks
Aug 1, 2015 (FAA task force on RC pilot registration began in October, 2015)
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/homeland-security-warns-drones-could-be-used-in-attacks/
Excerpt:
WASHINGTON -- CBS News has learned that the Department of Homeland Security has sent an intelligence assessment to police agencies across the country about drones being used as weapons in an attack.
The bulletin went out Friday and warned that unmanned aircraft systems or drones could be used in the U.S. to advance terrorist and criminal activities. Law enforcement sources say, "emerging adversary use of Unmanned Aircraft Systems present detection and disruption challenges."
According to federal officials, "The rising trend in UAS incidents within the National Airspace System will continue, as UAS gain wider appeal with recreational users and commercial applications."
If you search for it, there's all kinds of related stuff on-line from 2015 just prior to the sudden "need" for RC pilot registration, the Registration Task Force beginning in October, believed by the public to be because of threat to manned aircraft (the statistically provable non-threat) which the FAA could not have NOT realized and the threat of drones spying on them through their window as they "did the nasty."
One member of the drone regulation working group even brought the bird strike statistics up... and was ignored. And what most don't know is that the mass limit for registration was due to the head hitting hazard from drones only using the WORST case population density for the US - Washington DC (yet again). They didn't even address any potential hazard to aircraft because they claimed they didn't have enough data. Of course they did. It was meticulously compiled by the FAA over 25 years - bird strike data. If the statistical odds of an accidental drone/manned aircraft collision are NIL, it doesn't matter whatsoever that you don't have collision damage data. The next question should be, after the very, VERY long history of hobby RC, why DON'T you have any RC vs manned aircraft impact data? The answer is obvious.
ISIS is now using low cots off-the-shelf consumer drones for bad things. The recent explosion of a massive outdoor ammo dump in the Ukraine was suspected to have been caused by a drone because of a previous failed attempt which was discovered. Cheap drones have been targeting high value targets like the phased array radars for SAM sites. Any high value target is vulnerable at very low cost - comm tents/vans, command tents/vans, individuals, etc. You'll find various news items about US military units receiving rifle-like drone jammers.
Small drone 'shot with Patriot missile'
15 March 2017
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-39277940
Excerpt:
A Patriot missile - usually priced at about $3m (£2.5m) - was used to shoot down a small quadcopter drone, according to a US general.
The strike was made by a US ally, Gen David Perkins told a military symposium.
"That quadcopter that cost 200 bucks from Amazon.com did not stand a chance against a Patriot," he said.
And if one was smart about their idiocy, there's commercial R/C models that can fly more than 30 miles. Indeed the record was a transatlantic flight over over 1900 miles, 14 years ago (arranged for in advance and legally done by a famous Model Airplane flier, Maynard Hill, and setting an FAI record for distance).
Regardless, as I showed very clearly above, the
accidental collision of an insanely rare craft like that, or for that matter, ANY hobby RC aircraft would be as close to statistically ZERO as you can get. Also, the ocean crossing aircraft you refer to which I have read much about and may have even posted a thread here about was not remotely controlled although it does show another attack method mostly useful for stationary ground targets - autonomous GPS guided aircraft, technology which is now cheap.
This RC regulatory push is ALL because technology has allowed relatively CHEAP hobbyist RC craft to become potential guided weapons.
In the very latest news, we find what is also known as "the back door" route to RC pilot registration. LOL!
DJI will now handicap your drone until you register it with the company
May 23, 2017
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/23/15680206/dji-drone-registration-limits-range-video
Chinese company DJI made a pretty significant change to the process of buying and activating its drones over the weekend. Going forward, DJI drones will be severely limited in functionality until buyers register them with the company.
The decision comes days after a US Appeals Court decided that the Federal Aviation Administration no longer has the authority to make people register their consumer drones with the agency.
Similar headline: "Remington will now allow only very low power rounds to be fired from their firearms until you register with them!" For liability reasons related to
ridiculous efforts to sue gun manufactures for the
intentional misuse of their firearms they might like to do that, but their sales would plummet and the NRA would trounce them anyway. I'd bet DJI's motives are similar. Reactions on-line to DJI's move are not good among people who can do their own drone tech and don't like the DJI move simply on principle. They claim they'll just buy drones direct from China... as the terrorists are already apparently doing. They're much cheaper than DJIs anyway. That works until
that is banned, of course.
Draft bill gives the government power to control your drone
Proposed legislation would give the government sweeping powers in designated areas
May 25, 2017
https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/25/draft-bill-power-control-drone/
The 10-page document with proposed legislation obtained by The New York Times was reportedly circulated through various congressional committees this week. The administration also put together a classified briefing on the topic for congressional staff members, according to an aide. The draft bill is part of the National Defense Authorization Act and contains some sweeping language around what the government could do in these specially designated areas. The bill would allow the government to "detect, identify, monitor or track, without prior consent, an unmanned aircraft," or system. It also includes language allowing officials to "redirect, disable, disrupt control of, exercise control of, seize, or confiscate" the aircraft as well as any cargo attached. The proposed legislation would also give the government the power to "use reasonable force to disable, disrupt, damage or destroy" a drone or it's cargo, as well as to conduct research on any equipment to figure out ways to do all of the above.
Come on, folks, are people here
REALLY too stupid to see the real reason for the intentional incitement of drone hysteria in 2015?
If we began discussing guided high power rockets here and were then required to register ourselves with the federal government, would anyone wonder WHY? Sheesh... give me a break...
When something doesn't pass the smell test, I independently investigate. I thought of the statistical route of drone vs bird strike comparison very shortly after I began to pay attention to drones and long before any scholarly studies of this which confirmed my suspicions.
I could care less about registering with the FAA/fedgov -IF- it didn't result in a potential slippery slope of further regulations in violation of a LOGICAL Congressional policy regarding
hobby RC aircraft and the FAA. The FAA has every right already given to them to regulate the commercial use of drones.
However, if they succeed in altering that hobby RC policy in Congress as it appears they might, oh well. It's sure a LOT of effort for an easily provable statistical
non-threat of causing
accidental catastrophes, no?
Wow! Did that post contain enough NSA keywords or what!? OOPS, there's another one!
The threat as posted to YouTube on Jun 1, 2015 near the height of the media hysteria:
[video=youtube;O1Hhvdpvp5o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1Hhvdpvp5o[/video]
It's usefulness:
[video=youtube;yD9KUB7QqZI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yD9KUB7QqZI[/video]