Two men from Inwood arrested after they flew drone near George Washington Bridge, nearly hit NYPD helicopter.

First off these guys were in the wrong and got caught, I am not defending the stupidity of flying close to an aircraft. However, to create a story with a headline "nearly hit" misleading most. Drones can be dangerous if flown next to aircraft. This is theoretically possible and flyers should stay away to avoid being arrested or at fault for a death!!

Original story with photos here:

TWO MANHATTAN men were arrested early Monday after they piloted a drone close to the George Washington Bridge and nearly struck an NYPD helicopter, police sources said.

Wilkins Mendoza, 34, and Remy Castro, 23, were remotely piloting a DGI Phantom 2 drone as it flew near the Hudson River crossing, at about 800 feet in the air, around midnight, the sources said. An NYPD helicopter crew spotted the drone and observed the unmanned aircraft as it circled the Spuyten Duyvil Bridge over the Harlem River about 12:20 a.m., the sources said.

At one point, the NYPD helicopter pilot had to veer off course to avoid being struck by the drone, the sources said.

The helicopter crew followed the drone and watched it touch down at Fairview Ave. and Fort George Hill in Inwood.

Mendoza and Castro, both of Inwood, were arrested at the landing zone at 12:34 a.m., and police also recovered a second drone, the sources said.

Both men were arraigned in Manhattan Criminal Court on a single felony count of Class D reckless endangerment, a charge stemming from the fact the pilot said he felt the drone endangered the NYPD helicopter.

But a prosecutor requested the men be released without bail, and a judge agreed.

A prosecutor told the judge that police reported the drone as having flown 2,000 feet in the air, but a defense attorney said the model used can only fly at heights of 300 feet.

Great post from a guy on another forum about that video:

That's another issue in its own right in this country today. Law enforcement agencies and their staff are above the law. Bring charges that manage to stick against them and if an officer is terminated he's simply rehired by another agency within a very short period of time. It the days of the wild west you'd simply shoot them and be done with it. Today you can only stand there and take what they dish out and pray you survive to heal.

With the helicopter event in your post I would have filed a near miss report with the civil aviation authority. Although police get to do pretty much whatever they want they are still bound by the rules that assure pilots must assure the safety of persons and property on the ground. The size of the shadow well depicted the altitude of the helicopter, and since it wasn't trying to land on the water it was not being operated in a safe manner.

And then there's a good article here talking about both videos:

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/did-an-nypd-helicopter-intentional...

You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones

Comments

Rob_Lefebvre July 8, 2014 at 1:54pm

Yeah, I think that was all done over a $70 charge of "Thou shalt not fly a drone in a national park, just 'cuz".
Quadzimodo July 8, 2014 at 1:49pm

Rob/Gary - Do you have any idea what this Phantom pilot at the Great Falls doing wrong by flying his drone over water? Was he out of VLOS? Or does this have something to do with proposed new rules in US National Parks?

I don't understand what could warrant such a dangerous response by authorities.
Gary McCray July 8, 2014 at 1:46pm

Good luck with the FAA if that's the line the heli pilot hopes to follow.

I am a private pilot and I actually have a lot of respect for the FAA in that capacity, there are a lot of lines it is seriously inadvisable to cross.

Sadly they do not seem to be at all in line with reasonable measures regarding either hobby or various commercial / private "drone" use.

At the moment, you guys in Canada seem way ahead (or Australia or most of Europe for that matter).
Hugh Hemington July 8, 2014 at 1:45pm

Just one more reason to end the national park "service" and turn the land back over to the states, so sensible rules can be established. These people have become feckless thugs.
Rob_Lefebvre July 8, 2014 at 1:33pm

Yeah, fact is, the Phantom pilot in the Grand Falls video wasn't really endangering anybody. I mean, the LZ was a bit sketchy, but perfectly acceptable according to Sparkfun rules. ;) As you say, it was little more than an annoyance to other park users. Heck, with the noise that the water would be making, I doubt you'd hear the Phantom more than 20 feet out.

Then the Park Rangers come along to enforce their $70 fine, and risk themselves and everyone else in the area. Over a $70 offence. It seems crazy. I can only imagine the justification "ZOMG, it's a terrorist plot to blow up Great Falls! We must immediately blow this drone into the water to foil their evil plan!"
Chuck Durham July 8, 2014 at 1:31pm

That 300 feet isn't going to hold up unless it can be proven some height limiter was actually active and prevented the DJI from going higher. I am pretty sure that it can be set with the software and may be by default, but I am pretty sure it can be removed or modified with the software config. Recently there was a posting with someone the FAA contacted with a video of his DJI Phantom 2 going 3,600 feet in the air
Rob_Lefebvre July 8, 2014 at 1:28pm

Great post from a guy on another forum about that video:

That's another issue in its own right in this country today. Law enforcement agencies and their staff are above the law. Bring charges that manage to stick against them and if an officer is terminated he's simply rehired by another agency within a very short period of time. It the days of the wild west you'd simply shoot them and be done with it. Today you can only stand there and take what they dish out and pray you survive to heal.

With the helicopter event in your post I would have filed a near miss report with the civil aviation authority. Although police get to do pretty much whatever they want they are still bound by the rules that assure pilots must assure the safety of persons and property on the ground. The size of the shadow well depicted the altitude of the helicopter, and since it wasn't trying to land on the water it was not being operated in a safe manner.

And then there's a good article here talking about both videos:

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/did-an-nypd-helicopter-intentional...
Gary McCray July 8, 2014 at 1:14pm

That is an amazing video Rob and I don't really think that the FAA can ignore it although I am sure the Park Rangers will claim they are simply investigating it and just happened to fly over it.

On the other hand it does alos appear that the Helicopter was flying below 500 feet in an area fairly crowded with people and that is a serious no no as well, Park Rangers not withstanding.

It may not go public, but I imagine that heli pilot may get a much worse response from the FAA than the guy with the multi.

However you look at it the heli guys were actually creating a dangerous situation out of possibly an annoying situation.

Great candidate for "Bad Idea" of the week.
Rob_Lefebvre July 8, 2014 at 12:09pm

Interestingly... here's an interesting video. A park ranger helicopter "attacks" a drone.

I wonder what would have happened if, during the buffoonery, the Phantom had popped up and hit the tail rotor on the heli and taken it down. Who's fault?
Chris Barlow July 8, 2014 at 11:24am

Funnily enough just posted about something similar:

http://diydrones.com/forum/topics/everyone-seen-this-yet-engadget-d...

of 7

This reply was deleted.