Preventative measures needed before "neighborhood nutjob mounts a weapon onto his personal drone" . . . Attack of the Personal Drones
You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!
Preventative measures needed before "neighborhood nutjob mounts a weapon onto his personal drone" . . . Attack of the Personal Drones
You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!
Comments
As for the uproar from us, well, probably it's because we have invested alot of time money and knowledge in our hobby, and can't let some inexperienced person try and take it all away.
punto.
Oh boo hoo. Your government pushes you around because you are willing to take it.
I love how all the attention is pointed towards "we mustn't upset the master otherwise he'll take our planes away" instead of saying "f*** off, don't touch my plane because someone did something stupid. PUNISH THEM NOT ME."
Everyone here with their over the top safety hyperbole scares people enough.
Folks, total lack of imagination on your part.
Seems like the sUAS website gets it with their recent blog question "Weaponized model aircraft?"
Ok so the weapons are only fireworks and the targets are toy balloons but it shows the potential of simple systems. . . . High profile stunts, rapidly shared on social media websites are becoming the stock in trade of these fliers. How long can it be before their antics impact traditional aeromodelling? Its a subject that we have steered away from at sUAS News as it quickly becomes heated and emotional. FPV flying when properly planned and carried out with care and attention is a compelling low cost way to look at mother earth. But ill conceived flights that show poor judgement cannot be commended. The Unmanned Aircraft Systems community is going to have to think long and hard as to its attitude towards FPV. The general public will not easily make the distinction between sUAS, FPV or traditional modelling should their be a major FPV based security scare.
"To those suggesting that I was just looking for an argument, well yes, that's the aim of the site."
"May I suggest that your next encounter with people who aren't as knowledgeable "
So wait, you are admitting you post articles on subjects you know very little to nothing about in the hopes to get someone to argue with you? Wow, I have to admit I've never met such a self aware and honest Troll. Hope that works out for you, I see no value in such a site.
So when is the piece on the teeth whitening scandal? Or the hidden dangers of Crocs shoes? Perhaps and expose on how the e-toll passes are recording driver's conversations for the government?
/sarcasm
The AMA did not condone the event. The AMA has also banned everything closely resembling autonomous or semi-autonomous activities and banned all but "buddy boxed" line-of-sight FPV. Even the AR Parrot is banned by the AMA unless somoe can buddy box an iphone(?). Do not look to the AMA for any help. AMA rules are not laws and only dictate what their insurance will cover. The AMA actually requested that the insurance cmpany drop coverage for any "autonomous" flying.
However, the AMA is working with the FAA to make the AMA the sole governing body of recreational sUAVs. In essense that would make AMA rules de facto laws!
Be Afraid!!!
The AMA will hurt us more than FAA!!! The FAA is not planning to ban autonomous nor FPV but the AMA already has!!!
"The AMA, which publishes safety guidelines for R/C fliers, condemned the flight in a statement, saying “Although AMA recognizes the ingenuity and creativity of this activity, it does not condone the manner in which this flight was conducted and the threat it posed to the public.”
Is that a typo or did AMA not condone the event ( which in this case is surprising )
Kuncen,
Keep in mind that the USA people here (at least) have been abandoned by the AMA, under scrutinty by the FAA (at least) and demonized by the mainstream press. All without substantiation or reason.
What you wrote is nothing new, it is the same unsubstantiated alarmist comments that we have been reading, hearing and seeing for more than five years. Truthfully, we are tired of all the nonsense. We are not singling you out, we are upset that you seem to be just feeding the paranoid masses more food for lack of thought.
@Mike: Thank you for at least entertaining the possibility that this issue might be a growing concern of non-UAVers, and worth discussing.
@Duane: I absolutely did not delete any comment of yours. My only thought is that we have an automated spam-detection setup which requires you to enter a CAPTCHA if the server thinks your comment might be spam. Perhaps you missed it, or perhaps the spam-detection is over sensitive.
I will admit that I deleted the last comment posted ("you're a dick" and nothing else) and I've closed the thread to further comments as it's been nothing but nastiness, which is a shame. I'm still open to posting a counter-article, to provide balance as Mike suggested.
To those suggesting that I was just looking for an argument, well yes, that's the aim of the site. If you read the "About" pages, you'll see that that's what the site tries to do: generate discussion and debate about topics in the news. To this point, I've never had one community respond so violently and with such defensiveness. May I suggest that your next encounter with people who aren't as knowledgeable on these subjects be to educate rather than castigate them.
The NYC stunt was long after the FAA statred working on safety rules for UAVs and had nothng to do with privacy or terrorism.
Fireworks are few centuries old and hardly a weapon of choice for either terrorist or psychos.
Some posts here are as far fetched as the original author.
The kid down the block had firecrackers... Call Homeland Security before he kills us all!!!
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 6 Next