Three Arrested For Two Fire-Related Drone Incidents

Domenick

Domenick

Pattern Altitude
PoA Supporter
Joined
Sep 11, 2019
Messages
2,174
Display Name
Display name:
Domenick
Unless the FBI website is outdated, or they just don't have enough evidence, I'm thinking it's not related:
1000001582.png
 
Baked Potato said:
Unless the FBI website is outdated, or they just don't have enough evidence, I'm thinking it's not related:
Click to expand...
There are multiple people on social media posting images of there drone footage. I assume those are unrelated to the drone, which collided with the aircraft.

They have recovered most of the drone, that collided with the aircraft, including the serial number. Traditionally, DJI is very cooperative, and if you find a missing drone, when you contact them, they will help find the owner. They could possibly have already arrested the person, which si what the article is about, but we are unaware at the moment.



Worse news: DJI has just removed the no-flyZone restrictions from its drones. DJI makes 70% of consumer drones, so that's bad news. DJI had to implement geofencing and flight restrictions, due to drones flying into the Whitehouse area, repeatedly. Now, it's used to prevent people from flying near airports, flying high or more. It used to be possible to bypass, but it required numerous steps, they just got rid of all the flight restrictions and replaced them with only warnings. Expect to see more drone activity near airports in the coming months. This is probably worthy of its own post, but I think its important to add as a reply, because DJI, is not being very cooperative with the US government at the moment(and busy lobbying congress, because SkyDio, an American company, has been lobbying to ban Chinese drones from the United States), so we will see if they actually turn in, whoever flew the drone into the firefighting airplane.
 
Corin said:
Worse news: DJI has just removed the no-flyZone restrictions from its drones. DJI makes 70% of consumer drones, so that's bad news. DJI had to implement geofencing and flight restrictions, due to drones flying into the Whitehouse area, repeatedly. Now, it's used to prevent people from flying near airports, flying high or more. It used to be possible to bypass, but it required numerous steps, they just got rid of all the flight restrictions and replaced them with only warnings. Expect to see more drone activity near airports in the coming months. This is probably worthy of its own post, but I think its important to add as a reply, because DJI, is not being very cooperative with the US government at the moment(and busy lobbying congress, because SkyDio, an American company, has been lobbying to ban Chinese drones from the United States), so we will see if they actually turn in, whoever flew the drone into the firefighting airplane.
Click to expand...

eh? - maybe my drone is too small... but I've never had a flight restriction from the drone, just a warning about being within the class D airspace. I always get the "approval" for my operations (I always stay below 200' agl) ... never had a restriction.
 
I generally believe in freedoms, but sometimes people force steps to be taken. Something needs to be done about the out of control drone pilots.

A good start would be prosecuting these guys to the fullest extent of the law and make sure that everyone in America knows about it.

Additionally, I don’t know technically what should be done, but maybe above a certain size or altitude they need to be traceable. I would say ADS-B, but then we would have ADS-B returns cluttering our screens.

Unfortunately it’s like a stop sign or traffic light. Until someone is killed, they don’t take the step to make it safer for the motorist.
 
Because I am a top level nerd, I have been listening to the Palisades Fire command radio channel. Just the other day, even a sighting of a drone by ground crews led to 5-10 minutes of coordination and radio traffic for safety, mitigation, and location of the operator.

I know in my state a drone sighting in a fire are will completely shut down air ops until it can be addressed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Literally as I posted that, another drone sighting and reporting just came in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I'm not surprised. Video and stills from drones above the devastation have been all over the Internet since Tuesday.
 
MBDiagMan said:
Additionally, I don’t know technically what should be done, but maybe above a certain size or altitude they need to be traceable. I would say ADS-B, but then we would have ADS-B returns cluttering our screens.
Click to expand...
This is already a requirement, but the drone that hit the firefighting aircraft was below the weight limit where remote ID is required.
 
MBDiagMan said:
"A good start would be prosecuting these guys to the fullest extent of the law and make sure that everyone in America knows about it."
Click to expand...
Never going to happen, just like laser strikes we do not hold people accountable for their actions. It's called capital punishment those without the capital get punished.

 
brien23 said:
Never going to happen, just like laser strikes we do not hold people accountable for their actions. It's called capital punishment those without the capital get punished.
Click to expand...
Not sure about that. In most of Washington State virtually no one is held responsible.
 
brien23 said:
Never going to happen, just like laser strikes we do not hold people accountable for their actions. It's called capital punishment those without the capital get punished.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't matter as long as drones and lasers are easily purchased by the average idiot. They either have no knowledge of the laws and punishments, or just don't care, they will do what they want.

I've had one interaction with a drone "violater". I tried to be nice and educational, the young man threw it back "This is a free country, I can do what I want, you can't tell me what to do." The FSDO contacted him and tried the nice approach as well, same result. They eventually had to go the hard way.
 
MBDiagMan said:
maybe above a certain size or altitude they need to be traceable. I would say ADS-B, but then we would have ADS-B returns cluttering our screens.
Click to expand...
The problem of course is the same problem with nearly all laws, you end up with several groups of people.

1. I follow the rules. Not the problem people
2. I don't know the rules. A problem, just because they don't know any better.
3. I don't care about the rules. know the rules probably won't be enforced, or don't understand the consequences if they are
4. I am intentionally avoiding the rules. Makes an active effort not to get caught, pretty easy in the drone environment to build drones specifically for this.

The big problem with drones is just quantity and availability, any 6 year old with money can buy a drone and fly it.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 
Corin said:
Worse news: DJI has just removed the no-flyZone restrictions from its drones. DJI makes 70% of consumer drones, so that's bad news. DJI had to implement geofencing and flight restrictions, due to drones flying into the Whitehouse area, repeatedly. Now, it's used to prevent people from flying near airports, flying high or more. It used to be possible to bypass, but it required numerous steps, they just got rid of all the flight restrictions and replaced them with only warnings. Expect to see more drone activity near airports in the coming months. This is probably worthy of its own post, but I think its important to add as a reply, because DJI, is not being very cooperative with the US government at the moment(and busy lobbying congress, because SkyDio, an American company, has been lobbying to ban Chinese drones from the United States), so we will see if they actually turn in, whoever flew the drone into the firefighting airplane.
Click to expand...
I don't know if this is worse news. I have a DJI drone. I never stopped me from flying into any area. It just had me enter my phone number, then texted me a code. Typing in this code shows that I got a warning from them and that I'm saying I'm authorized in that area. If I didn't comply, it would auto-land. I will still get the warning.
 
brcase said:
The problem of course is the same problem nearly all laws, you end up with several groups of people.

3. I don't care about the rules. know the rules probably won't be enforced, or don't understand the consequences if they are
Click to expand...
I've heard that the media pays good money for up-close drone shots of these fires. I'm assuming some of this is the consequences aren't enough. In this case, they probably might be, but only because they caused a collision.
 
Lowflynjack said:
I've heard that the media pays good money for up-close drone shots of these fires. I'm assuming some of this is the consequences aren't enough. In this case, they probably might be, but only because they caused a collision.
Click to expand...

And if you are making money for the drone photos, you have now crossed the line from recreational to commercial use, subject to Part 107. That was one of the issues that got our drone pilot on the radar, not to mention the photos were clearly taken from high altitude in close proximity to the airport, in controlled airspace.

The average Joe doesn't realize the distinction of commercial operations in aviation. You can make money driving Uber or Doordash without any additional license or certification, why can't you make a quick buck taking a photo with your drone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top