rgburrill

We should beat the crap out of anyoone we see flying his UAV illegally~

cloudancer03

My Feedback: (22)

congratulations north dakotahat state now is the first state that can equip their grones with pepper gas and tasers.wonderful and any other non lethal weapons. so now add drones to the paranoid country fascinated with guns and violence.I eventually will move to a caribbean island void of guns and drones.how insane have we become/meanwhile a reporter buys a gun and kills his former colleagues. no I wont preach just think we have a very violent nation and getting worse by the year.so how many states will follow north dakota and eventually they will allow guns to be attached to drones .it will never stop

Duncman

Only people kill people, not guns and drones. Isn't that the name of a rock band, Gun's and Drones????

Sport_Pilot

I recall a few bird strikes that did not leave blood spots, so it could have been a bird strike as well.

rgburrill

Maybe so but don't they also leave dents from the body hitting the plane? The "experts" that looked over his plane could find no other damage than the two gouges. A quadrotor would like do just that, two rotors gouge the plane but keep the body of the quad away from it. Anyway, that's what they thought but have no proof. Heck, even the pilot of the plane didn't see anything.

Duncman

Not if the bird had his beak open going "aw s@$t!!!

804

My Feedback: (1)

Earlier you said that two blades of the
prop were damaged.
Now how the heck could the quad damage the
prop and still get thru to damage
the nose (I assume behind the prop?) with
still spinning rotors?

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Does it really matter?. The Aircraft was damaged by something, they have not found out what it was, Quad, Bird, or whatever?

804

My Feedback: (1)

Well, if you don't give a rat's arse about the credibility of
a reported, possible drone strike on a full scale
aircraft,
I guess not.

DocYates

My Feedback: (102)

Well if nothing else this drone issue has certainly stimulated new weapon development. But I notice the story also refers to "planes"....
http://www.wired.com/2015/08/welcome...mbid=social_fb

rgburrill

It is certainly possible that a Quad could hit the nose after getting over half way through the prop disc, then get stopped or slowed by hitting the fuse and having the prop blades hit the back end of the Quad. The prop damage was minor compared to the fuse.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

I think you may have not interpreted my post. The report could not make it clear if it was a Drone, or a Bird. Bad reporting IMO.
Hell yes it matters, why do you think this thread was started in the first place?.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Well, the idiots are still at it. http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/lo...323232591.html

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

So now what is local LE going to do about this? Great to see a story where the finally catch someone doing this, now what? Fines, arrests, confiscation of drones etc...some examples need to be made.

flycatch

My Feedback: (26)

I just posted a comment to another trend on this topic. I received a reply stating that when model helicopters were introduced to our hobby they were treated the same as "drones". Was the poster correct?

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Don't know the context of that comment, but would not be shocked to hear of that. Some people are just not agents of change, don't want to see change, don't want to hear about it, deal with it etc. Helis were probably treated the same way, just as people made fun of and scored for their use of ARF's and foamies as they started to be become more popular.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Oh Yeah! To all the above. This just can not continue and there is NO excuse for it period. Fine them very heavy like 10K, confiscate the drone and dispose of it by destroying, and give them a 60 day jail sentence, so they can have time to think how stupid they were. No Bail.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

[QUOTE=FLAPHappy;12091731]Well, the idiots are still at it. http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/lo...323232591.html[
/QUOTE]
Did U catch the last statement by the reporter that the FAA Drone laws were supposed to take effect this Sept. 30th but have now been again pushed back to some time in 2017. What gives? OH! that's right we are dealing with an inefficient government agency.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Pretty much so. A lot of people that don't fly helos still hate them, so they designate special areas for them and small foamies too. That's all well and good, but the way I figure it is they paid their club dues just like everyone else and they have just as much right to their 8 to 10 Minutes of fun. If U can't giv'em that I'd say, Well it starts with GET,and it ain't Get Out. JMHO

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

[QUOTE=HoundDog;12091812]Yeah HD: I saw they pushed the new rules back until 2017, I have no idea why, so there must be a good reason why they decided that???
I do respect the FAA and their rules, the Federal Government rules outside the FAA rules are very questionable. The FAA could make immediate changes in these rules if and when a fatality or multiple fatalities occurs because of this problem. I would hope they would make those changes now. My question why wait for deaths to occur?, when they know the problem exists right NOW???

Chris Nicastro

My Feedback: (3)

Talk about taking advantage of a trend... That'll work

Duncman

Just some prudently applied vigilantism goes a long way to right the universe.

Lifer

My Feedback: (1)

Interesting:

http://www.nbcnews.com/video/boeings...e-515266115812

porcia83

My Feedback: (8)

Marketing 101.....brilliant!

smeckert

DESTROY it, are you kidding, the LE will use it or sell it in the police auction and "pocket" the money.