Drone collides with full scale plane video
07-28-2015, 03:57 PM
#1
Drone collides with full scale plane video
Anyone seen this one. Looks legit. Can't make out the airline logo on the winglet, maybe foreign.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ac3_1435080329
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ac3_1435080329
07-28-2015, 04:23 PM
#2
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone seen this one. Looks legit. Can't make out the airline logo on the winglet, maybe foreign.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ac3_1435080329
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ac3_1435080329
07-29-2015, 07:05 AM
#5
It may have been fake in this instance but, unfortunately, the results would be the same if an RC hit that section a 737 wing as depicted in the video. That section is just fiberglass so what was shown would be a very plausible and it wouldn't matter if the R/C hitting the wing was a balsa airplane or a quad
07-29-2015, 11:58 AM
#7
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: palm harbor,
FL
Posts: 2,232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
no comment until its confirmed real but i suspect it is fake.but unfortnuately the drone over a forest fire was not fake and forced a temporary abandon of dropping water or chemical suppresion to kill the fire.that person should be arrested for hindering a critical operation .he had not business to operate the drone in a fire being fought by planes.thank god most people using this technology are sane and have commonsense.sadly its incidents like that will get the greatest amount of tv giving us all a black eye.
07-29-2015, 02:15 PM
#9
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree...no comment either. FWIW shooting a RPV spying directly over my property with a shot gun shouldn't get me arrested IMO. But since it likely will, is I guess I need to develop a device to throw a net. Hopefully with my invention I can retrieve the contraption virtually undamaged and very likely the owner will come looking for it real soon. Once he gets on my property I guess he will realize his mistake...after he takes a swing at me, I guess I'd be fully within my rights to defend myself with appropriate force... Once he regains speech, his arms heal, learns to walk again and leaves the hospital he can come over to my house and ask for it again. It's a shame he will probably take another swing at me... Some people just don't learn. But what the hey...there is a lesson in there somewhere for those perceptive enough to figure it out.
07-29-2015, 05:55 PM
#11
A jammer on the 2.4Ghz range typical of the hobby will knock them down. No need to fire weapons illegally inside city or county limits which can cause you a lot of problems.
I advocate full scale AC have a device just like this with at least a half mile radius range to knock out drones in emergency response areas.
if not on the AC then on a ground station with a tall retractable antenna.
I advocate full scale AC have a device just like this with at least a half mile radius range to knock out drones in emergency response areas.
if not on the AC then on a ground station with a tall retractable antenna.
07-29-2015, 06:36 PM
#12
My Feedback: (209)
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: right here
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A jammer on the 2.4Ghz range typical of the hobby will knock them down. No need to fire weapons illegally inside city or county limits which can cause you a lot of problems.
I advocate full scale AC have a device just like this with at least a half mile radius range to knock out drones in emergency response areas.
if not on the AC then on a ground station with a tall retractable antenna.
I advocate full scale AC have a device just like this with at least a half mile radius range to knock out drones in emergency response areas.
if not on the AC then on a ground station with a tall retractable antenna.
07-29-2015, 08:16 PM
#13
My Feedback: (3)
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Jose,
CA
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In another thread it states that the feds are trying to decide who is at fault if the disabled craft kills someone on the ground when it falls from the sky.
Says its all ready to go, just needs the green light.
Says its all ready to go, just needs the green light.
07-30-2015, 01:08 AM
#14
pretty much all of the drone controllers have RTH, return to home, function, that would just send the drone back to where it took off from. well that direction until it gets good control signal again.
probably would not have a lot of them falling out of the sky from jamming devices, now, guns, nets, and other physical devices are another story...
probably would not have a lot of them falling out of the sky from jamming devices, now, guns, nets, and other physical devices are another story...
07-30-2015, 06:32 AM
#17
Yea, a jammer would have to be a broadband, fairly high power jammer to swamp the receiver. That would also take out garage door remote controls, your bluetooth headset, your car remote, etc, etc, etc.
At one time, and maybe it is still so, the frequency requirements for the onboard camera had to opeate in the HAM band and you had to have a ham license to use it. If that is still true then why can't the FCC confiscate every drone system at every hobby store that operates in 2.4GHxz or 5.8GHZ as most of them do? These are the people making the money. These are the people who are letting the problem get worse. I used to like my LHS until profit become a driving factor over flying.
At one time, and maybe it is still so, the frequency requirements for the onboard camera had to opeate in the HAM band and you had to have a ham license to use it. If that is still true then why can't the FCC confiscate every drone system at every hobby store that operates in 2.4GHxz or 5.8GHZ as most of them do? These are the people making the money. These are the people who are letting the problem get worse. I used to like my LHS until profit become a driving factor over flying.
07-30-2015, 08:32 AM
#19
My Feedback: (36)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ontario, CA
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It may have been fake in this instance but, unfortunately, the results would be the same if an RC hit that section a 737 wing as depicted in the video. That section is just fiberglass so what was shown would be a very plausible and it wouldn't matter if the R/C hitting the wing was a balsa airplane or a quad
Also, San Bernardino county is offering a $75,000 reward for the operators of the "Drones" interfering with the fire fighting aircraft.
"San Bernardino County supervisors on Tuesday approved $75,000 to be used as reward money for information leading to the arrest and conviction of illegal drone operators who forced the grounding of aerial firefighters during recent wildfires in the San Bernardino Mountains and High Desert.
The county’s $75,000 allocation will be divided into thirds, with $25,000 being offered for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the drone operators responsible for grounding aircraft at the three most destructive wildfires: the North, Mill 2 and Lake fires."
Last edited by ramboamt; 07-30-2015 at 08:38 AM.
07-30-2015, 11:19 AM
#20
Then they changed the structure from the ones I used to deal with. They had a thin aluminum leading edge, single spar running to the tip and a fiberglass/paper honeycomb skin. Regardless, they still are not designed to take a direct hit by anything bigger than a small bird.
07-30-2015, 11:34 AM
#21
My Feedback: (16)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lake Havasu City,
AZ
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want to 'take out' any 2.4GHz RC system, it can be done easily, inexpensively, and also legally. What you need is four 250mW (or greater) 2.4GHz video transmitters. These transmitters are analog in nature. There are 4 different "channels", each occupying exactly 1/4 of the 2.4GHz bandwidth. if you turn on all 4 at the same time, each on a different channel, then no RC control system (be it XPS, Spektrum, Futaba, Hitec, FrSky, HoTT, Airtronics, JR DMSS, etc. etc) will even connect with a receiver. Effectively, the entire 2.4GHz band will be wiped out. This is why modeling clubs should NEVER allow 2.4GHz video transmitters at their field. 433MHz, 900MHz, 1.2GHz, and 5.8GHz are all fine.
07-30-2015, 12:16 PM
#22
My Feedback: (58)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: here
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want to 'take out' any 2.4GHz RC system, it can be done easily, inexpensively, and also legally. What you need is four 250mW (or greater) 2.4GHz video transmitters. These transmitters are analog in nature. There are 4 different "channels", each occupying exactly 1/4 of the 2.4GHz bandwidth. if you turn on all 4 at the same time, each on a different channel, then no RC control system (be it XPS, Spektrum, Futaba, Hitec, FrSky, HoTT, Airtronics, JR DMSS, etc. etc) will even connect with a receiver. Effectively, the entire 2.4GHz band will be wiped out. This is why modeling clubs should NEVER allow 2.4GHz video transmitters at their field. 433MHz, 900MHz, 1.2GHz, and 5.8GHz are all fine.