Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 31 to 44 of 44
  1. #31
    Join Date
    31st July 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    288
    Quote Originally Posted by Zauskycop View Post
    Sorry, but Im on the other side of the fence (somewhat) on this. Drones CAN be a threat to aircraft, people, and property. Flown correctly, no they are not. Flown irresponsibly, yes they are. Having them registered was a small deterrent towards operators who flew irresponsibly and now even THAT is gone. Now I have to deal with pilots and their drone reports without the possibility of the irresponsible operator being caught.
    While I agree with your first sentence, completely. FAA registration was nothing more than a money grab and a feel good exercise for the FAA... I know at least two individuals who used fake names, addresses, and paid with a prepaid credit card.. How did registration work in those cases? I'm a long time RC flyer, started in the 1960's. My AMA membership #, along with my address and phone # are on each Model, same with my quads. Name one incident where a FAA registration lead to the ID of the flyer... From what I can tell, there are none, not one. I have no problem with commercial UAS/drone registration, but leave the recreational flyer alone. There are already FAA rules restricting model aircraft/drone flights/operations within airspace used by manned aircraft, has been for years... Just enforce what is on the books.

    Fred Wallace
    TRA 5763, TAP
    MDRA Lifer
    I need a Kevlar wrap for my truck..

  2. #32
    Join Date
    31st July 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    288
    [QUOTE=georgegassaway;1698200]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/...-faa/22352857/QUOTE]

    That has been relaxed to the 15FRZ, same as manned aircraft. Sometimes the FRZ is extended out to the 30 mile limit or modified as needed for special events and DV movement.

    Fred Wallace
    TRA 5763, TAP
    MDRA Lifer
    I need a Kevlar wrap for my truck..

  3. #33
    Join Date
    31st January 2009
    Posts
    4,110

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by georgegassaway View Post
    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/...-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)

    http://nypost.com/2015/07/25/militar...rone-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)

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/homeland...ed-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

    http://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/2017/5/23/1...ts-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/...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:



    It's usefulness:

    "I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." - Will Rogers

    "If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're misinformed." - Mark Twain

  4. #34
    Join Date
    31st January 2009
    Posts
    4,110
    MUCH stink from people toward the AMA now that an individual, an insurance attorney who should know a great deal about statistical odds, did what they didn't even try to do and succeeded in just over a year, mostly self-funded. The AMA has a three year old lawsuit on another FAA issue which seems to have gone nowhere.:

    FAA Sued In Federal Court Over Drone Registration Rules
    JAN 4, 2016

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngog.../#6fc995c762e8

    The lawsuit challenging the FAA registry was filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on December 24 by a model aircraft enthusiast concerned that the registration rules were illegal. That individual is John A. Taylor, a multi-rotor builder and flyer living in Silver Spring, Maryland. An insurance attorney, Mr. Taylor is representing himself. He started flying model aircraft approximately one year ago and has become passionate about the hobby. He expected other hobby groups or drone manufacturers to file suit against the registration rules but when they didn't, he decided to step up himself. Although he plainly admits that he has no aviation or administrative law experience, as a long-time litigator, he says he's up to the challenge.

    Mr. Taylor is requesting that the court "issue an order declaring that the [FAA's registration rule] is void" and prohibited by Section 336 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. He alleges that that section specifically prohibits the FAA from promulgating any new rules or regulations regarding model aircraft if they're flown for hobby or recreational purposes.

    Somewhat surprisingly, the legal challenge does not come - as many hobbyists expected - from the Academy of Model Aeronautics. The AMA - which represents over 180,000 model aircraft enthusiasts - has asked its members to hold off on registering their drones until the legal deadline of February 19 for drones owned before December 21, 2015. Those bought on or after that date must be registered before operation. The registration requirement applies to drones weighing .5 to 55 pounds. The AMA has stated that it believes the FAA's new registration rule violates Section 336.

    The drone registration requirement was precipitated by the FAA's concern that a surge in drone buying at Christmas would increase the number of pilot reports of drones
    [totally unverified as actually being "drones" - W] flying too close to manned aircraft. The FAA determined that registration was necessary to “increase accountability and education” of drone operators. [And because of the great effectiveness of that US registration, there hasn't been a single confirmed collision between a manned aircraft and hobby drone anywhere in the world in the 18 months since registration was required - CLEARLY this act was extremely effective, even preventing collisions in foreign countries without registration requirements! - W] The data used by the FAA has been debunked by a number of people, including most recently the Academy of Model Aeronautics.
    "I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." - Will Rogers

    "If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're misinformed." - Mark Twain

  5. #35
    Join Date
    31st January 2009
    Posts
    4,110
    ANOTHER pilot weighs in on the issue:

    SEPTEMBER 8, 2015
    Stop The Drone Panic – Pilots Should Take Their Own Advice
    by John Zimmerman

    http://airfactsjournal.com/2015/09/s...s-take-advice/

    For an industry that’s usually obsessed with “risk management,” aviation sure isn’t using much of it when it comes to drones. The constant drumbeat of stories about close encounters between airplanes and unmanned aerial systems (UAS) can be described as nothing short of a panic, with pilots and non-pilots alike convinced that a drone disaster is looming. Flying Magazine has chronicled the drones disrupting wildfire aircraft operations in California and AOPA has written about about “chillingly dangerous” encounters with unmanned aircraft. That’s not to mention the non-aviation media, which is positively hyperventilating.

    And yet, I am unable to find a single verified story of a drone colliding with an aircraft in the US. There is one event that happened in Afghanistan in 2011 [that was a military drone that collided with a C130 - W], and there was a story about a Piper that might have hit a quadcopter over Illinois recently – but it turned out to be a bird.

    This is the latest example of the “safety fad” problem in aviation, a type of industry-wide ADHD. For a few years in the mid-2000s, runway incursions were going to kill us all. Reports of these events skyrocketed almost overnight, and serious FAA presentations warned of huge fatalities if something didn’t change. Millions were spent on technology and training.

    But then runway incursions seemed to fade, and bird strikes were the next big problem. As the FAA reports, “The overall number of reported strikes for all aircraft and airport types has increased 6.2 fold, from 1,851 in 1990 to a record 11,399 in 2013.” Does anyone really think the number of birds increased 600% in 20 years?

    The problem is clear: when we look for something we usually find it, even when it isn’t there. A number of supposedly close encounters with drones sound awfully vague, and could easily be balloons or birds. Even some situations that did involve drones probably weren’t as “near miss” as the pilots think. But when all you have is a hammer, the whole world looks like a nail. Just ask UFO enthusiasts.

    It’s not a bold prediction to say that a midair between a manned and an unmanned aircraft will happen (eventually). What’s harder to predict is the frequency of these collisions and the severity of them. If you’re flying a Cessna for a $100 hamburger, what are the odds you really will hit a drone? If you do, will it cause serious damage or be fatal? How about for a Boeing that weighs 950,000 pounds?

    The bird strike example is a relevant one here – while there were over 11,000 bird strikes in 2013, only 605 caused aircraft damage, and none of them were fatal. Is there any reason to believe a two pound quadcopter would be much different? The large unmanned airplanes are tightly controlled and on flight plans, so these under-five pound hobby machines are the only legitimate threat.


    All this hysteria has a cost. While we’ve been panicking about drones, dozens of pilots have died in low level stalls or VFR-into-IMC accidents. We’ve even had a real airplane midair, between a jet and a Cessna in San Diego. None of these make the nightly news or the front page of the New York Times, but all of them present a much more serious threat to general aviation safety.
    "I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." - Will Rogers

    "If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're misinformed." - Mark Twain

  6. #36
    Join Date
    11th May 2009
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    427
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	18742487_10212574253211010_1909297201_o.jpg 
Views:	1817 
Size:	87.9 KB 
ID:	320870

    Airline pilots are certainly caught up in the "Drone Hysteria". This illustration is funny because it's true. Departing yesterday I heard a frantic pilot tell tower that he had a near miss with a drone at 3500' on final. It works out to about 2000' agl. I thought about how small even the largest quadcopter would be from 2000', so I couldn't see anyone actually flying theirs in this manner and wrote the hysteria off to a plastic bag caught in a thermal. But even still, all aircraft on approach and arrival for probably an hour afterward were warned about "unauthorized UAS activity" and ATIS was changed to include the warning. The result? Many pilots were needlessly distracted during critical phases of flight because of a plastic bag or a balloon.
    Last edited by watheyak; 27th May 2017 at 10:59 PM.
    Scott Wathey
    TRAPHX VP and Waiver Getter
    TRA 7726
    KF7EIV

  7. #37
    Join Date
    31st January 2009
    Posts
    4,110
    Quote Originally Posted by watheyak View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	18742487_10212574253211010_1909297201_o.jpg 
Views:	1817 
Size:	87.9 KB 
ID:	320870

    Airline pilots are certainly caught up in the "Drone Hysteria". This illustration is funny because it's true. Departing yesterday I heard a frantic pilot tell tower that he had a near miss with a drone at 3500' on final. It works out to about 2000' agl. I thought about how small even the largest quadcopter would be from 2000', so I couldn't see anyone actually flying theirs in this manner and wrote the hysteria off to a plastic bag caught in a thermal. But even still, all aircraft on approach and arrival for probably an hour afterward were warned about "unauthorized UAS activity" and ATIS was changed to include the warning. The result? Many pilots were needlessly distracted during critical phases of flight because of a plastic bag or a balloon.
    When this whole hysteria began and it didn't smell right, I did my own analysis of a university(!) analysis of so-called "near miss" reports and sightings and ripped them a new orifice with little effort. I emailed them with my detailed deconstruction of their "work" and they changed the report in a later release. Made me wonder if this was one of those "tell them what they want to hear so we get more 'research' funding" cases since their work was so incredibly sloppy but, of course, everyone was buying into it 100%.

    Here's an excellent, very recent documentary about the small hobby drone threat and how it is being addressed/countered. Only one (past) showing on TV that I can find, but it can be viewed on-line if you subscribe to some cable or satellite service that carries the National Geographic Channel:

    Game of Drones (2017)

    http://channel.nationalgeographic.co...ame-of-drones/
    "I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." - Will Rogers

    "If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're misinformed." - Mark Twain

  8. #38
    Join Date
    14th April 2015
    Location
    Enumclaw, WA
    Posts
    1,484
    Quote Originally Posted by watheyak View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	18742487_10212574253211010_1909297201_o.jpg 
Views:	1817 
Size:	87.9 KB 
ID:	320870

    Airline pilots are certainly caught up in the "Drone Hysteria". This illustration is funny because it's true. Departing yesterday I heard a frantic pilot tell tower that he had a near miss with a drone at 3500' on final. It works out to about 2000' agl. I thought about how small even the largest quadcopter would be from 2000', so I couldn't see anyone actually flying theirs in this manner and wrote the hysteria off to a plastic bag caught in a thermal. But even still, all aircraft on approach and arrival for probably an hour afterward were warned about "unauthorized UAS activity" and ATIS was changed to include the warning. The result? Many pilots were needlessly distracted during critical phases of flight because of a plastic bag or a balloon.
    A drone can easily be flown beyond visual range when using an FPV setup.
    Ryan Winslow
    Level 1 5/28/16 3" kitbash Patriot H128W
    Level 2 5/13/17 Polecat 4" BBIII J270W

  9. #39
    Join Date
    18th January 2009
    Location
    Homewood, AL
    Posts
    3,480
    Quote Originally Posted by Flyfalcons View Post
    A drone can easily be flown beyond visual range when using an FPV setup.
    So can a $10 model rocket, without FPV.

    Glass houses.....

    Meanwhile, last Saturday I went to a meetup with about 20 other multicopter fleirs. First time i'd flown with a multicopter group. Site was a small park where it's OK to fly.

    Various knids of multicopters. Some Racng Drone types, using FPV. Some intermediate models. And some aerial video models such as Phantoms, Mavics, even a 3DR Solo.

    I took my Lunar Module, and my 250 sized Quad. I flew the Lunar Module when the only models up were the slow moving aerial models, and kept it on the ground when the fast flying models were up, especially the racing quads (not a matter of distrust, just simply that models flying that fast could hit the slow moving or stationary LM before the pilot even realized they were on a collision path). When the faster models were up, I switched over to flying my 250 Quad.

    A few pics from one on the other pilots:



    My LM, with a Mavic to the left shooting video of it (Have not seen any video yet)



    LM, two Mavics, and a Phantom 3 or 4



    A good time flying and meeting other fliers. Some were newbies who needed some help. One was a new Phantom 3 owner who got help in learning how to make better use of its features.

    I put my pics on an IMGUR album at this link: http://imgur.com/a/tst8v

    A few from that album:





    The new Phantom owner getting some flying tips:


    Contest flying, Sport flying, it's all good.....
    2016 Bike Mileage total: 1843 miles. 5 Miles a day for the year!

  10. #40
    Join Date
    31st January 2009
    Posts
    4,110
    Well, lookie here at this snazzy report I just found from June 2015 - just four months prior to the sudden need to register all RC pilots in the US because of the statistically provable non-hazard presented by the 2015 Christmas toy drones. I can't believe I didn't find this before. I found it now thanks to that excellent "Game of Drones" documentary I mentioned above. In it, a guy from the "Center for a New American Security" (https://www.cnas.org/) was interviewed, the organization which produced this report.

    A WORLD OF PROLIFERATED DRONES:
    A Technology Primer
    June 2015

    https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.cnas....nes_052115.pdf

    The interesting stuff starts on p10, the section entitled "Hobbyist Drones". Here's an excerpt. I've highlighted a key part:

    Over time, hobbyist drone capabilities will become increasingly accessible to non-state actors and individuals and increasingly sophisticated – ultimately approaching currently available small military-grade capabilities and blurring the line between civilian and military systems. Today, relatively capable COTS drones are widely available for purchase, ranging in price from several hundred to several thousand dollars. While most are used for recreational purposes, they have also been used for public nuisance – generally in the form of unauthorized surveillance or flights over private property or restricted government areas, notably including the White House and nuclear facilities in France, Belgium, and the United Kingdom.15

    Commercially available drones are also known to have been used for warfighting purposes by both state and non-state actors. The Ukrainian military has made extensive use of commercial systems, including modified DJI Phantoms and other reconfigured hobbyist drones, in its conflict with the self-declared Donetsk People’s Republic, a rebel group backed by Russia.16 Reports indicate that ISIS has also used a commercial drone, the DJI Phantom FC40, for surveillance purposes.17 Usage of these systems will almost certainly continue to expand in conjunction with falling prices and improved ease of use.

    With this proliferation will come increased prospects for the disruptive employment of hobbyist systems by both individuals and non-state actors. Most concerning is the potential that such systems could be weaponized. Though most COTS drones have relatively short range and limited payload capacity, they have been successfully used to smuggle drug packages and could be modified to carry explosives, firearms, or other damaging objects instead.18 To date, The Wall Street Journal reports,“authorities in the U.S., Germany, Spain, and Egypt have foiled at least six potential terrorist attacks with drones since 2011,” and more can be expected.19 The difficulty of monitoring and regulating the sale of such systems in the future – a major contributor to their appeal to disruptive actors – is compounded by the fact that they are dual-use, with both military and civilian applications, and unlike firearms do not require *registration*. (Of course, in the US, neither do firearms - W)

    Furthermore, given the construction material, small size, and flight altitude of most hobbyist systems, they are rarely visible on radar and are therefore particularly difficult to detect.20 For this reason, defenses against them often require either visual or possibly auditory identification or concerted signal-jamming to disrupt the operator’s communications link with the system and/or the system’s GPS.21 Most such detection methods, however, require either a pre-existing knowledge or expectation of the system’s presence in a given area and thus are markedly less effective against unanticipated use. And as future systems begin to incorporate GPS-independent means of navigation, such as visual-aided or inertial navigation, signal-jamming will cease to be an effective countermeasure. For these reasons, hobbyist systems hold significant disruptive potential.


    -------

    The dog and pony show announcing registration in October 2015. MUCH ado about the threat from toys under the Christmas tree, no?:

    "I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." - Will Rogers

    "If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're misinformed." - Mark Twain

  11. #41
    Join Date
    31st January 2009
    Posts
    4,110
    Quote Originally Posted by Flyfalcons View Post
    A drone can easily be flown beyond visual range when using an FPV setup.
    Yes, there are videos on YouTube where people fly in the clouds, usually using fixed wing FPV aircraft (more power efficient, so they can fly higher for longer than multirotors) and high gain control link antennas that probably violate FCC ERP restrictions for that frequency.

    However, they are even more rare, vastly more rare, in the incredibly vast sky than sub-400' flyers who already have statistically near zero odds of getting close to manned aircraft. The point the OP was making and which several pilots have commented about on-line, including two I've posted here, is that pilots always seem to imagine that they "see" the "new threat" of the day.

    Even if something has a statistically near zero chance of happening, it could happen tomorrow. However, given the odds, if it DOES happen, I would strongly suspect it to have been INTENTIONAL.
    "I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts." - Will Rogers

    "If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're misinformed." - Mark Twain

  12. #42
    Join Date
    1st February 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,219


    The most dangerous drones are the ones that work for the queens.
    http://www.macklinmissileworks.com/

    Making Guillotines Great Again

  13. #43
    Join Date
    19th January 2009
    Posts
    872
    Keep in mind, that there are a number of frequency options that do allow for increased RF powers to be used. Particularly if the owner is a licensed amateur radio operator. So long range links are not, necessarily, illegal. Though I know a number of people do use the radios with a license. The older 72Mhz stuff can have a crazy long range as well, so I still see FPV pilots using them for that and because the harmonics don't interfere with the video feeds nearly as easily.

    As for intentionally hitting a manned craft... I fly with a group that uses foam flying wings and the whole point is to hit each other. We make it easier by flying a known pattern, slowing in front, etc.. It's still quite difficult to do. Add in that most model planes are not nearly as fast as manned planes are, and that the manned craft will attempt to avoid you if they see you, and hitting one intentionally would be very difficult indeed.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    19th January 2009
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    788
    Just a point to make. If this is part of the definition of the FAA definition of a model aircraft "(2) flown within visual range of the operator;" then any FPV vehicle flown outside the "visual range of the operator" would no longer be classified as a model aircraft, right? They would fit more under the designation of Remotely Piloted Vehicle, once it leaves the visual range of the operator.

    Tim Barr

Similar Threads

  1. MH17 Aircraft Crash Report - SAM Brought the Aircraft Down
    By GregGleason in forum The Watering Hole
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 14th October 2015, 02:40 AM
  2. 60 Minutes - Drones, Tabasco, and Tabasco Drones
    By georgegassaway in forum The Watering Hole
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 17th March 2014, 04:19 PM
  3. Russian truck overturns and spills cattle
    By dlazarus6660 in forum The Watering Hole
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 20th December 2012, 05:43 AM
  4. Using a model aircraft kit?
    By Starfire73 in forum Scratch Built
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 3rd July 2006, 01:53 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •