FAA Gets Hands Slapped

Half Fast said:
pilots could equip their aircraft with similar transmitters, thereby crashing any drone that gets within a couple of miles of them.
Click to expand...
So, you want to crash all the aircraft flying legitimately at RC fields just because you happen to be flying over them?
 
Really? 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz are two of the most common frequencies when you are dealing with small drones.

If you are familiar with frequencies, then you may already know that 2.4 GHz is the same frequency that wireless computer networks work in.

So I guess your jammer will make airport wireless (and the neighbor's) free Wi-Fi useless.
 
Not a jammer. A command signal. No need to interfere with wifi at all, any more than the drones are already interfering..

And I said the idea only had a couple of minutes of thought and was likely full of holes. You guys come up with something better.
 
How about a wireless signal that takes control of it returns it to the owner who has the transmitter and then it explodes.
 
jbarrass said:
Really? 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz are two of the most common frequencies when you are dealing with small drones.

If you are familiar with frequencies, then you may already know that 2.4 GHz is the same frequency that wireless computer networks work in.

So I guess your jammer will make airport wireless (and the neighbor's) free Wi-Fi useless.
Click to expand...

Military and PD are already doing demos of jamming units. Whether or not FCC will be pleased, probably depends on who's buddies pay off whom in DC or who's kid is involved in making and selling them.
 
Radar Contact said:
I'm all for government not over-regulating... However, can someone explain what they think should be done with drones? They are continuing to get bigger, faster, fly higher, fly farther, etc. They are being flown by all different types of people (kids, aviation ignorant, general morons and respectful knowledgeable people). A guy just spotted a couple in a twin cessna at 4500 near an airport, we get reports semi-regularly of drones over Chicago on the finals at glide slope altitudes. Wait for a couple to shred airline engines? Wait for a GA pilot or two to be decapitated in the cockpit as one comes through the window?
Click to expand...
That happens, and FAA will just put out another AD requiring all windshields to be replaced with 2" thick Lexan. o_O
 
orange said:
If I do, it'll be raining drone bits.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, one a$$ with a drone could bring down a real airplane with real people in it. Drone manufacturers should be equipped with some type of altitude-limiting device to keep them under 400'.
 
SbestCFII said:
Drone manufacturers should be equipped with some type of altitude-limiting device to keep them under 400'.
Click to expand...

That would have to be 400' AGL, requiring a radar or laser altimeter (GPS altitude accuracy sucks). Impractical.
 
Half Fast said:
Not a jammer. A command signal. No need to interfere with wifi at all, any more than the drones are already interfering..

And I said the idea only had a couple of minutes of thought and was likely full of holes. You guys come up with something better.
Click to expand...
what freq?....and what command and format are we sending?
 
Don't mean to crap in y'all cornflakes, but this hysteria just needs to stop, and y'all need to just worry about yourself and your flying.

Spoiler alert, YOU are the mostly likley (and by a huuuge margin) factor to get YOU killed while flying.

If these "drones" we're such a threat you'd already have seen a crashed plane, facts are out, the world isn't ending.
 
James331 said:
If these "drones" we're such a threat you'd already have seen a crashed plane, facts are out, the world isn't ending.
Click to expand...

Don't think the discussion is about the world ending or anything dramatic. Just about the possible danger of drones and airplanes getting together. Instead of discussing all the near misses, close calls and actual collisions that haven't killed people, I guess we should just wait until it does kill people and then discuss the possible dangers.
 
Half Fast said:
Give me a contract and I'll be glad to design it for you. Lockheed pays me quite well to do engineering work; I don't do it for free, especially for the USG.
Click to expand...
so....you want me to design the system for you? :lol:
 
SbestCFII said:
Unfortunately, one a$$ with a drone could bring down a real airplane with real people in it. Drone manufacturers should be equipped with some type of altitude-limiting device to keep them under 400'.
Click to expand...
Building drones in factories above 400 feet isnt inherently unsafe. /smartass
 
Radar Contact said:

Don't think the discussion is about the world ending or anything dramatic. Just about the possible danger of drones and airplanes getting together. Instead of discussing all the near misses, close calls and actual collisions that haven't killed people, I guess we should just wait until it does kill people and then discuss the possible dangers.
Click to expand...
If you go to the YouTube page that clip appears on, you will find that its source is Bruce Branit, a visual effects artist for film and TV.

http://branitfx.com/
 
Last edited:
Radar Contact said:

Don't think the discussion is about the world ending or anything dramatic. Just about the possible danger of drones and airplanes getting together. Instead of discussing all the near misses, close calls and actual collisions that haven't killed people, I guess we should just wait until it does kill people and then discuss the possible dangers.
Click to expand...

Uhhhh, you know that video is about as fake as a three dollar bill right?



The defense rests their case lol


It's like reefer madness only dumber,
"Thank god little billy only got into marijuana cigarettes, could have been much worse he could have got into......DRONES!" [Inserting fainting woman]
 
There is no 400 ft AGL restriction for "model aircraft" either. The FAA put that restriction in for UAS operators to abide by (Part 107). I can fly my planes as high as I want as long as they are within sight. No 100 mph speed limit either.
 
I just got out of a cross country a few minutes ago....and was speaking with my CFI. He said he's almost hit two drones already.
 
My instructor thought we almost hit a drone. Looked like a Mylar balloon to me. But we "almost" hit it so closely we really couldn't tell.
 
One of the other CFIs said a friend of his is a sheriff, and they had found a drone on someone's property that had crashed and the property owner called in. They read the N number of it but it wasn't registered.
 
Surely soon, drones will surpass laser pointers as the leading cause of plane crashes. </sarcasm> I'm not saying there isn't an issue that needs to be addressed, but let's address that issue and not some dire fantasy that doesn't, and probably won't ever, exist.
 
Lindberg said:
Surely soon, drones will surpass laser pointers as the leading cause of plane crashes. </sarcasm> I'm not saying there isn't an issue that needs to be addressed, but let's address that issue and not some dire fantasy that doesn't, and probably won't ever, exist.
Click to expand...

Yep and registration and licensing was a sensible way to keep things safe while protecting our freedom to use em...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Skyrys62 said:
One of the other CFIs said a friend of his is a sheriff, and they had found a drone on someone's property that had crashed and the property owner called in. They read the N number of it but it wasn't registered.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make any sense. Why would a drone have an N number if it wasn't registered?
 
Timbeck2 said:
That doesn't make any sense. Why would a drone have an N number if it wasn't registered?
Click to expand...
They took money from a bank that wasn't there's? That doesn't make sense.
 
Timbeck2 said:
Um....I guess I need another cup of coffee. That didn't make sense either.
Click to expand...
You seriously don't understand why someone might put a fake N number in their drone so if someone asks they can claim it's registered, but if something bad happens it can't be tied back to them?
 
Salty said:
You seriously don't understand why someone might put a fake N number in their drone so if someone asks they can claim it's registered, but if something bad happens it can't be tied back to them?
Click to expand...

Yeah and anyone from the FAA and law enforcement can ask for ID and query the registration database from just about anywhere, it is 2017 after all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Trying
Salty said:
You seriously don't understand why someone might put a fake N number in their drone so if someone asks they can claim it's registered, but if something bad happens it can't be tied back to them?
Click to expand...

Yeah, it would serve no point. Just don't register it in the first place. The authorities can easily look up the registration anyway.
 
Velocity173 said:
Trying


Yeah, it jwould serve no point. Just don't register it in the first place.
Click to expand...
You guys are obviously not criminals, or if you are, you're really bad at it.

It keeps people from looking further or asking more questions.

If you drive a car with no plates, you're going to get pulled over pretty quickly. Steal a plate and put it on your car, and it'll take a longer for someone to notice.
 
Most laws only keep the honest honest.
 
Salty said:
You guys are obviously not criminals, or if you are, you're really bad at it.

It keeps people from looking further or asking more questions.

If you drive a car with no plates, you're going to get pulled over pretty quickly. Steal a plate and put it on your car, and it'll take a longer for someone to notice.
Click to expand...

The only benefit in using a fake N number is saving a whopping $5 registration fee.

Say your drone hits a manned aircraft. With a registration, they might find the tiny sticker lying in the woods. If you don't register it, they won't find anything. If you make up an N number, who cares? It still can't be traced back to the owner.

So no point in making up an N number, which technically isn't even an N number to begin with. It's a 10 digit code assigned by the FAA.
 
What would really be great would be to get a huge ass drone and register it in my ex's name and fly it around the yard of the whitehouse with six road flares duct taped to it.
 
I would say that laws that are unenforcible only keep the honest honest.

I'm of the mind that there isn't anything we can reasonably do about them. The good news is they don't seem to be as big of a hazard as say bird strikes and we have been able to live with those.

That said the real hysteria is going to come when... and I firmly believe it's only a matter of when... some terrorist figures out they can attach a bomb or a gun to a drone or drones and carry out an attack from a safe distance.
 
Skyrys62 said:
What would really be great would be to get a huge ass drone and register it in my ex's name and fly it around the yard of the whitehouse with six road flares duct taped to it.
Click to expand...
Now you could be a criminal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top