Drone over RCL

[UNV-IT!!!]

Ya I'm looking at the phantom 2. I think that's a good starting point for myself. I don't need the vision version as I already have a GP. But would want to attach the device for live feed.

[Russ_MT]

Ya I'm looking at the phantom 2. I think that's a good starting point for myself. I don't need the vision version as I already have a GP. But would want to attach the device for live feed.

 

Fatshark makes a FPV system that will attach to the GoPro. Nothing about this hobby is cheap.

 

http://www.amazon.com/FATSHARK-Predator-Headset-System-Goggle/dp/B00I08F7UM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1399390902&sr=8-1&keywords=fatshark+fpv

[rhuntington3]

Cool video, thanks for sharing.

[metphan714]

It's scary, especially in today's terrorist environment.

I thought the video was very cool. But I agree that there is potential for problems,not just with ships but planes or any large contained gatherings.

[UniPac]

I thought the video was very cool. But I agree that there is potential for problems,not just with ships but planes or any large contained gatherings.

 

You shouldn't bring ideas to someones mind ;-)

 

However, I don't think the drones can get fast enough to get close to a plane that is flying, even during takeoff (and I think flight control would recognize a drone in their area).

 

They are also not able to carry much weight.

[Russ_MT]

You shouldn't bring ideas to someones mind ;-)

 

However, I don't think the drones can get fast enough to get close to a plane that is flying, even during takeoff (and I think flight control would recognize a drone in their area).

 

They are also not able to carry much weight.

 

You are correct, these multi-rotor copters have a maximum speed of 25mph. A control tower would spot it fairly quickly.

 

These "drones" weigh as much as a seagull. A jet plane would ingest it the same way and spit the pieces out. Small private planes have more to be concerned about. The FAA does regulate them and they are prohibited near airports.

 

They can carry a maximum payload of 200 grams. That's barely enough to get GoPro and accessories off the ground. Therefore I seriously doubt any bad guys could carry much of a danger with one. The biggest danger is the spinning blades that can cause a serious cut.

 

However, thanks to our government overusing military drones (which can carry hellfire missiles), the thought of flying objects now frightens people as does the name "drone".

These are flying toys with GoPro cameras. There are some privacy issues and most of these hobbiest frown on those that abuse other's privacy. They enjoy the hobby and don't want legislation enacted because of a few idiots scare people.

 

Don't be afraid of a quadcopter taking video of a cruise ship. Be afraid of the NSA recording all your cell phone calls and tracking all your online usage. What was your last Google search?

[mbjboyle]

You are correct, these multi-rotor copters have a maximum speed of 25mph. A control tower would spot it fairly quickly.

 

These "drones" weigh as much as a seagull. A jet plane would ingest it the same way and spit the pieces out. Small private planes have more to be concerned about. The FAA does regulate them and they are prohibited near airports.

 

They can carry a maximum payload of 200 grams. That's barely enough to get GoPro and accessories off the ground. Therefore I seriously doubt any bad guys could carry much of a danger with one. The biggest danger is the spinning blades that can cause a serious cut.

 

However, thanks to our government overusing military drones (which can carry hellfire missiles), the thought of flying objects now frightens people as does the name "drone".

These are flying toys with GoPro cameras. There are some privacy issues and most of these hobbiest frown on those that abuse other's privacy. They enjoy the hobby and don't want legislation enacted because of a few idiots scare people.

 

Don't be afraid of a quadcopter taking video of a cruise ship. Be afraid of the NSA recording all your cell phone calls and tracking all your online usage. What was your last Google search?

 

 

Well said, Russ. People generally fear what they don't understand....

[mbjboyle]

Just wanted to show everyone a quick video of what a DJI Phantom looks like, start at 2:11, or watch the entire video. Just remember that every time one crashes the owner is loosing some serious $$$$.

[YOUTUBE]iWV1HtyC28I[/YOUTUBE]

[shipshape sam]

Just wait till FAA weighs in on this. We use them in real estate for some great shots of homes

[shipshape sam]

Not sure about weight restriction as I saw on Stossel a company using drone to carry at least a 6 pack of beer to someone on a lake and was told to stop.

Edited May 7, 2014 by shipshape sam

[UNV-IT!!!]

Not sure about weight restriction as I saw on Stossel a company using drone to carry at least a 6 pack of beer to someone on a lake and was told to stop.

 

If your talking about the drones taking beers to ice fisherman in their lake houses I believe they had a drone that could carry a 24 pack. I remember seeing videos and they looked like 12 packs. Cool none the less

[Russ_MT]

Not sure about weight restriction as I saw on Stossel a company using drone to carry at least a 6 pack of beer to someone on a lake and was told to stop.

 

This video

[YOUTUBE]qmHwXf8JUOw[/YOUTUBE]

These machines can't do this.

 

This was a publicity stunt. I don't believe that copter has enough lift to get 12 bottles off the ground. My guess is they lifted an empty box. That's a lot of weight and the technology isn't there to get this much lift.

What this did was generate a lot of attention, specifically from the FAA that prohibits commercial use. The story claims the FAA came down on them. Even better publicity as more news outlets carried the FAA story. I bet more people know of Lakemaid beer now.

 

Amazon was actually testing using them to deliver DVDs. A lot less weight and again, publicity stunt. People have trees. These machines don't play well with trees. It can be very costly when they do.

[Ken at the beach]

This video

[YOUTUBE]qmHwXf8JUOw[/YOUTUBE]

These machines can't do this.

 

This was a publicity stunt. I don't believe that copter has enough lift to get 12 bottles off the ground. My guess is they lifted an empty box. That's a lot of weight and the technology isn't there to get this much lift.

What this did was generate a lot of attention, specifically from the FAA that prohibits commercial use. The story claims the FAA came down on them. Even better publicity as more news outlets carried the FAA story. I bet more people know of Lakemaid beer now.

 

Amazon was actually testing using them to deliver DVDs. A lot less weight and again, publicity stunt. People have trees. These machines don't play well with trees. It can be very costly when they do.

 

There are ones that can. This one has a lifting capacity of 8kg or about 18lbs.

 

It also comes with a price tag of $14,999

 

 

http://www.steadidrone.com/index.php/2014-steadidrone-qu4d-x.html

[NorbertsNiece]

Came across this article today

[loubetti]

Came across this article today

 

Yup! As a a pilot for 39 years, these things can be dangerous if not operated properly and within FAA guidelines. I don't know how high these smaller ones can go (they are certainly not the big military models!), but even 1000' is enough to cause issues with real aircraft. As to the beer delivery one, the FAA squashed that real fast!

 

You see that drone with the beer box above? Okay, substitute that weight for a small camera for guidance, a detonating device and a pound of plastic explosive, then crash it into the crowded deck of, say, Oasis as she departs FLL. No you won't sink the ship, but you WILL kill a bunch of people.

 

Frankly, I think they need to be licensed and regulated. Sadly, while I am sure the majority of drone operators are responsible, all it takes is a minority of idiots or those with bad intentions to wreak havoc.

 

We still have idiots pointing laser pointers at planes!

 

A drone such as the one flying over the ship would be enough to take out my "small" Cessna 210 if it hit head on. Right through the windshield, just as real birds have done.

 

Food for thought, folks.

[Esmerelda]

Great post Loubetti. I attempted to point that out before.

 

Just simply google; drone pilot arrested. There are stories out of Ohio, New York, North Dakota, France, etc. (I just Googled and these instantly popped up) These are NOT toys that you just simply take out anywhere and launch. As a matter of fact, my son was going to Chicago a few weeks ago to fly the drone he flies to film a car commercial. At the last minute, it was cancelled because they couldn't get FAA clearance. He works for a legit company so they do everything by the book/rules. Once they get it cleared with the FAA, they will plan the trip up again. I'm thinking if you got caught on any cruise ship with a drone, you would probably not be sailing any longer. The charges for the most part are felonies.

 

I hope everyone on here commenting understands the possibly outcome of owning a drone. Its not anything to take lightly. Just sayin...:rolleyes:

[joepeka]

Yup! As a a pilot for 39 years, these things can be dangerous if not operated properly and within FAA guidelines. I don't know how high these smaller ones can go (they are certainly not the big military models!), but even 1000' is enough to cause issues with real aircraft. As to the beer delivery one, the FAA squashed that real fast!

 

You see that drone with the beer box above? Okay, substitute that weight for a small camera for guidance, a detonating device and a pound of plastic explosive, then crash it into the crowded deck of, say, Oasis as she departs FLL. No you won't sink the ship, but you WILL kill a bunch of people.

 

Frankly, I think they need to be licensed and regulated. Sadly, while I am sure the majority of drone operators are responsible, all it takes is a minority of idiots or those with bad intentions to wreak havoc.

 

We still have idiots pointing laser pointers at planes!

 

A drone such as the one flying over the ship would be enough to take out my "small" Cessna 210 if it hit head on. Right through the windshield, just as real birds have done.

 

Food for thought, folks.

Very good post Lou. As cool as that video is, my first thought when this thread started last weekend was potential for something unfortunate to happen, not that the pilot of that drone had any ill intentions. But stuff happens sometimes when people don't consider the potential impact of their actions.

[Russ_MT]

Came across this article today

 

First of all, don't get your news from the Daily Mail, a UK tabloid.

 

Second, there ARE regulations over these as there are for pointing laser pointers at pilots and laws against speeding and driving while intoxicated. Regulations only go so far.

 

The FAA prohibits flying remote controlled aircraft (of all kinds) within 3 miles of an airport.

http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=76240

 

Airline flight had close call with drone in March

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/09/travel/unmanned-drone-danger/

 

The "drone" in this story was not a copter.

"Such close calls are rare, the FAA notes.

The pilot reported that the small unmanned aircraft involved looked similar to an F-4 Phantom jet, and not like a helicopter that might hold a camera that many associate more closely with drones. Such planes have gas turbine engines and can fly higher than an average drone, according to the FAA."

 

Could a quadcopter be used for nefarious purposes? Sure. But the "drone" in the above photo would work much better. Seems as thought the pilot of the "drone" was operating illegally. More laws wouldn't change that.

You know what would work even better, a small Cessna filled with C4 and flown into the deck of a ship. THAT would do some damage and just about anyone can do that with a few pilot lessons. A bad guy with a laser pointer could also. There are some who believe flight 800 was brought down by a land based missile. Regulations exist, yet can't protect from everything.

 

Yes, flying things are scary, but quadcopters really don't make good weapons. A modern jet might ingest one and possibly lose an engine and could still easily fly to its destination. Happens all the time with birds. Could a small Cessna or DA20 be severely damaged? Sure, but a flock of birds could also, that's why pilots are trained to look for these things. That's why UAV are illegal within 3 miles of an airport and above 400 feet.

 

I hope that UAV hobbiest police themselves and never cause a real accident. I also hope the public doesn't react to initial fears and demand regulation that will only change honest pilots and do nothing for real bad guys who seem to ignore laws.

[Russ_MT]

Just simply google; drone pilot arrested. There are stories out of Ohio, New York, North Dakota, France, etc. (I just Googled and these instantly popped up)

I visit several quadcopter forums and the population there is very self policing. They have followed these stories with great interest. They also are quick to scold some yahoo pilot who posts a video showing some stupid thing he did with it (like fly over populated areas).

 

Google drone pilot arrested.

Ohio: Still under investigation. Guy was filming an accident crash scene. The drone pilot claims nobody asked him to land it or he would have. They claim they did. I don't know, if a cop with a gun told me to land my copter, I would have. Don't know all the facts yet.

 

New York: Idiot flew it over people, it crashed into a building, people below gathered the pieces and handed them over to the police. The guy was stupid. Gee, I never saw stupid in NYC before this. I would be more afraid to go to a parade on 5th avenue with those balloons overhead.

 

France: Is highly regulated. Who would have thought? The operator didn't have the required docs and was flying over urban areas without written permission. So he broke the law, nobody was hurt. A true bad guy wouldn't care. This guy got busted.

 

North Dakota: That's a case where the government used a Predator Drone (yeah, those that can carry Hellfire missiles) to arrest a rancher. And folks are worried about some guy with a GoPro filming a ship? What about our government using them?

 

These are NOT toys that you just simply take out anywhere and launch. As a matter of fact, my son was going to Chicago a few weeks ago to fly the drone he flies to film a car commercial. At the last minute, it was cancelled because they couldn't get FAA clearance. He works for a legit company so they do everything by the book/rules. Once they get it cleared with the FAA, they will plan the trip up again.

Exactly! Because contrary to common belief, the FAA does in fact, regulate commercial use. Commercial grade ($10k+) copters are often used in film production.

 

We all know the possibilities. There exist the possibility that a drunk driver can kill someone, so why are there parking lots at bars? Ships can sink (Concordia) yet we don't fear cruising.

 

To date, the folks who partake in this hobby have been fairly responsible (compared to say, drunk driving). And yes there is the possibility for misuse, but there is also the possibility that we can enjoy some fantastic video from those who are not idiots. Life is not perfect. Let's not live a life of "what if's" and enjoy what is out there.

[loubetti]

that's why pilots are trained to look for these things.

 

Are you kidding me? Seriously?!! Do you think we go into a simulator to train to watch for birds, UAVs (drones) or other aircraft coming at us?

 

Our training is simply the words "see and avoid" when it comes to this stuff.

 

Granted, larger planes have TCAS, and some smaller ones have TIS via their GPS, but none of this will warn of a bird or UAV, unless the latter has a transponder on it.

 

Do you have any idea how hard it can be to spot another aircraft, never mind a bird or small UAV? Take haze, the Sun, etc. into account and you'd be surprised how hard it can be to even spot a 767 at five miles at 2:00 position!

 

ATC cannot warn us about a small UAV or birds via their radar either. Only other aircraft.

 

My good man, you SERIOUSLY need to spend some SERIOUS time in a cockpit under a variety of conditions to understand what I am talking about.

 

License and regulate them. This has nothing to do with ships sinking or drunk driving. I don't need one flying through my windshield at 160 knots. Birds are bad enough, and I don't need these!

[tanzer22pilot]

Are you kidding me? Seriously?!! Do you think we go into a simulator to train to watch for birds, UAVs (drones) or other aircraft coming at us?

 

Our training is simply the words "see and avoid" when it comes to this stuff.

 

Granted, larger planes have TCAS, and some smaller ones have TIS via their GPS, but none of this will warn of a bird or UAV, unless the latter has a transponder on it.

 

Do you have any idea how hard it can be to spot another aircraft, never mind a bird or small UAV? Take haze, the Sun, etc. into account and you'd be surprised how hard it can be to even spot a 767 at five miles at 2:00 position!

 

ATC cannot warn us about a small UAV or birds via their radar either. Only other aircraft.

 

My good man, you SERIOUSLY need to spend some SERIOUS time in a cockpit under a variety of conditions to understand what I am talking about.

 

License and regulate them. This has nothing to do with ships sinking or drunk driving. I don't need one flying through my windshield at 160 knots. Birds are bad enough, and I don't need these!

 

 

License and regulate? AMA (model flying organization) has rules in place for model flying including FPV aircraft. Your chances of hitting a model with your 210 is about the same as hitting Santa's sled on July 4th weekend.

 

And before you call me out on flight time, you better be able to lay over 20k and five type ratings on the table.

[Russ_MT]

Are you kidding me? Seriously?!! Do you think we go into a simulator to train to watch for birds, UAVs (drones) or other aircraft coming at us?

 

Our training is simply the words "see and avoid" when it comes to this stuff.

I've only taken an intro flight school test flight. I'm deciding if I want to drop the $12k to become a pilot. Got the syllabus right here.

Ground lesson 4 - 2.0 hours

(1) Safety of Flight

Collision Avoidance/Visual Scanning and situation awareness

No simulator, but I do recall during the intro flight, the instruction mentioned looking around for birds. A bird strike on that Diamond DA20 would have been bad.

 

My good man, you SERIOUSLY need to spend some SERIOUS time in a cockpit under a variety of conditions to understand what I am talking about.

True. I have spoken with a good friend who just retired from American Airlines flying 767s. Seems they are trained for bird strikes.

Difference between commercial and private pilots is the ongoing training. As a private pilot, you have medical certs, but no ongoing education or training like these guys.

If I choose to continue flight school, I won't be worried about quadcopters. I would be more concerned with uncontrolled airspace and other aircraft in my path.

 

License and regulate them. This has nothing to do with ships sinking or drunk driving. I don't need one flying through my windshield at 160 knots. Birds are bad enough, and I don't need these!

You miss my point completely.

There is a cry for regulation. Regulate! Regulate!

I don't want a drunk driving through my windshield at 75mph either. I don't need people drinking in bars. Laws exist and people break them anyway.

 

Besides, UAV already ARE regulated. Per current law, UAVs are not permitted within 3 miles of an airport and not above 400 feet.

Are there law breakers? Of course. My point was despite laws, people ignore them and drive drunk and run red lights. More regulation is not the answer to everything. We as a people like to generate laws to protect us from scary things regardless of the actual danger or current laws on the books. Regulate, ban them. Should we ban bars because some idiots leave in their cars drunk? At least those who would say yes have deaths to prove their answer. Quadcopters have not proven to be a serious threat.

 

If you fly your 210 below 400 feet (over houses) 3 miles away from an airport, you better be looking out for kites and all kinds of stuff. Most prudent pilots I know don't do this. Most UAV operators I know are extremely aware of the sound of a plane and do their best to avoid interfering with them. These hobbiest are very concerned about the FAA banning these and most operate them prudently.

 

Again, a quad copter is a horrible terrorist device. Get a real copter if you want to do damage or better yet, a Cessna and fill it with fertilizer. These copters are extremely fragile. The pilot in the original video had stones. A passenger with a powerful WiFi device could have splashed his $1500 toy. Many owners who forgot to disable the WiFi on the GoPro have seen such a fate.

I would be far more concerned about the security at your local airfield. I was astonished at how little it took for me to gain access to the stick of that DA20. No background check, no checks at all. Just an interest in learning to fly. How easy is it to rent a small plane at your airport?

 

I'm more concerned about these powerful green lasers that idiots are pointing at pilots. BTW, they are also regulated and it's illegal to do that.

[tanzer22pilot]

I've only taken an intro flight school test flight. I'm deciding if I want to drop the $12k to become a pilot. Got the syllabus right here.

Ground lesson 4 - 2.0 hours

(1) Safety of Flight

Collision Avoidance/Visual Scanning and situation awareness

No simulator, but I do recall during the intro flight, the instruction mentioned looking around for birds. A bird strike on that Diamond DA20 would have been bad.

 

 

True. I have spoken with a good friend who just retired from American Airlines flying 767s. Seems they are trained for bird strikes.

Difference between commercial and private pilots is the ongoing training. As a private pilot, you have medical certs, but no ongoing education or training like these guys.

If I choose to continue flight school, I won't be worried about quadcopters. I would be more concerned with uncontrolled airspace and other aircraft in my path.

 

 

You miss my point completely.

There is a cry for regulation. Regulate! Regulate!

I don't want a drunk driving through my windshield at 75mph either. I don't need people drinking in bars. Laws exist and people break them anyway.

 

Besides, UAV already ARE regulated. Per current law, UAVs are not permitted within 3 miles of an airport and not above 400 feet.

Are there law breakers? Of course. My point was despite laws, people ignore them and drive drunk and run red lights. More regulation is not the answer to everything. We as a people like to generate laws to protect us from scary things regardless of the actual danger or current laws on the books. Regulate, ban them. Should we ban bars because some idiots leave in their cars drunk? At least those who would say yes have deaths to prove their answer. Quadcopters have not proven to be a serious threat.

 

If you fly your 210 below 400 feet (over houses) 3 miles away from an airport, you better be looking out for kites and all kinds of stuff. Most prudent pilots I know don't do this. Most UAV operators I know are extremely aware of the sound of a plane and do their best to avoid interfering with them. These hobbiest are very concerned about the FAA banning these and most operate them prudently.

 

Again, a quad copter is a horrible terrorist device. Get a real copter if you want to do damage or better yet, a Cessna and fill it with fertilizer. These copters are extremely fragile. The pilot in the original video had stones. A passenger with a powerful WiFi device could have splashed his $1500 toy. Many owners who forgot to disable the WiFi on the GoPro have seen such a fate.

I would be far more concerned about the security at your local airfield. I was astonished at how little it took for me to gain access to the stick of that DA20. No background check, no checks at all. Just an interest in learning to fly. How easy is it to rent a small plane at your airport?

 

I'm more concerned about these powerful green lasers that idiots are pointing at pilots. BTW, they are also regulated and it's illegal to do that.

 

 

Great post.

[loubetti]

License and regulate? AMA (model flying organization) has rules in place for model flying including FPV aircraft. Your chances of hitting a model with your 210 is about the same as hitting Santa's sled on July 4th weekend.

 

And before you call me out on flight time, you better be able to lay over 20k and five type ratings on the table.

 

Huh? What are you talking about? I'm talking about UAVs, not a model of a Cessna 172.

 

Also: Boeing 707-320, Boeing 737-200, Boeing 747-400, ATR 72-500, Falcon 900 EX, Falcon 2000 EX.

 

Oops, that's six! :D

 

Don't let the 210 fool ya', and no 20K on the table either!