murphey
Touchdown! Greaser!
Please re-read the details of the TFR. It explicitly lists aviation activities that are prohibited. TFRs only relate to aviation/FAA rules.
Two arrested for flying drone near NYPD helicopter
- Thread starter MassPilot
- Start date
Please re-read the details of the TFR. It explicitly lists aviation activities that are prohibited. TFRs only relate to aviation/FAA rules.
timwinters
Ejection Handle Pulled
Aeric
Line Up and Wait
That statement is laughable, at best.
A quick search of Youtube came up with many videos of tri and quadcopters taking video at FAR above 400' AGL. One even had 8000' in the title.
If anyone believes for a minute that operators of these things will keep them below 400', regardless of whether or not there's a rule against higher, they're completely nuts.
And if the only way they can be sold is to have some sort of altitude limiting design, it'll be hacked within minutes of being unboxed.
Silvaire
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2012
- Messages
- 4,612
- Display Name
Display name:
Silvaire
As I said, that's true but first there has to be the regulatory basis to force the Chinese manufacturers of these devices to comply with those limiting parameters. After that there has to be severe consequences for violating the limits. A good example of how it may eventually play out is - try pointing a typical consumer bought Laser at an aircraft in flight and see what might happen to you if you get caught.
These things are new and there is a potential for an explosive increase in their numbers but as the numbers and usage increase so does their exposure. In the end this will most likely be the death of them because people are simply not going to put up with noisy little quadcopter drones buzzing around in the air above them. I see a future where these devices will most likely be highly regulated.
I'm not a big fan of regulation but a jerk with a can of spray paint can screw things up for the rest of us. I guess it's always been that way.
StinkBug
Cleared for Takeoff
No, I'm pretty sure you're the one with the wrong information.
Where are you getting this info, because what you posted doesn't describe a Predator at all. One of my friends is an engineer who works on the things every day, and they do indeed use a Rotax engine. He recently took a business trip to Germany to meet with Rotax in person. They are also most definitely prop driven, not turbofan. Those specs look to be for an entirely different aircraft.
This is looking a lot more accurate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-1_Predator
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,249
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
Global Hawk and a Predator are two different things. Niether one is going to be orbiting in an area that would affect a helicopter as in the OP either.
Is this the one the Iranians hijacked the control signal and stole from the USA? Or the one where the Taliban were watching the video feed with the Russian software because they forgot to encrypt the video?
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,249
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
Negative and negative.
murphey
Touchdown! Greaser!
I never mentioned the Predator drone, that was yetti's assumption. Go back and read my post referring to a UAV the size of a 737. And my info comes from the USAF documents.
StinkBug
Cleared for Takeoff
Umm, the post YOU quoted specifically mentions a Predator, with a rotax engine. You then post specs for something entirely different. How are we supposed to know what you're talking about?
RBeaubien
Pre-Flight
There's a lot of mis-information about that "drone" (poor choice of words). Its highly unlikely that model could reach 800ft nevermind 2000ft and still be controlled. They weren't using FPV and the range of the control is line of site. You would not be able to see it at 2000ft and barely see it at 800ft given its size. Flight time as he stated in the video would be a max of 15 min and that would be extreme. Running the batteries that deep would be very bad for the life of the batteries which is the EXPENSIVE part of that model. Something the owner is unlikely to do. 8-10 min is probably the reality of the situation.
I'd be interested to see the video from the model. It would likely show a different story than that of the officers.
I'd be interested to see the video from the model. It would likely show a different story than that of the officers.
Lindberg
Final Approach
I listened to it. I'm not sure what was supposed to change my mind. I didn't hear anyone report that they were in danger or taking any evasive manuevers. So in that sense, the the recording does not corroborate the police report. OTOH, I did hear them report a 2,000 ft in 2 sec climb. Which I seriously doubt is possible. I suspect much more likely is that the observers fell victim to an optical illusion based on believing that the lighted object they were observing that larger (and therefore farther away) than it actually was.
In the middle of the recording, the cops are saying they don't even know if or what crime was committed. The closest the pilot reports getting to the drone is within three city blocks.
So, yeah, I stand by my prior statements.
RBeaubien
Pre-Flight
Lindberg
Final Approach
I wonder if the author reads this board.
FloridaPilot
Pattern Altitude
And they give those guys guns??
yhuubert
Pre-Flight
An strong engined quadcopter with carbon fiber props can cut both thin metal sheets as well as plastic (besides human flesh). It can also break your windshield. A heavier one, with an SLR camera or bigger video camera can also weigh enough so that in a 100 knot collision it can break a lot of things.
Oh yes it is, loads of fun!
Where and how do you get a $50 ADS-B?!
yhuubert
Pre-Flight
One of the most popular software platforms is Arducopter, which is open source software which everyone compiles from zero using whatever parameters they choose to. No manufacturer controls that. Most other platforms are also fully configurable. The Chinese and Mexicans just make the hardware to chich you load any software you choose.
DJI from recent versions does have the no fly zones built into their software: http://www.dji.com/fly-safe/category-mc although the database is buggy as hell.
yhuubert
Pre-Flight
You can see your quad quite OK at 800 ft, although it would be small. Above that, first you have telemetry, so you can see the location and all other parameters on your mobile or computer. Second many fly the quads in programmed mode according to waypoints and flight plans, without any line of sight.
15 min is pretty doable even with 2200-2400 mAh batteries. Many use 5400 mAh or so and 20-30 minutes is quite doable. But that's for a quad. On an Arduplane you can do times more than that thanks to wing lift.