We have a standing policy here at DIY Drones of no discussion of weaponizing drones, but the White House incident was so important and this Wired article so illuminating that I'm going to make an exception this time. From Wired:
If you want to understand why the government freaked out when a $400 remote-controlled quadcopter landed on the White House grounds last week, you need to look four miles away, to a small briefing room in Arlington, Virginia. There, just 10 days earlier, officials from the US military, the Department of Homeland Security, and the FAA gathered for a DHS “summit” on a danger that had been consuming them privately for years: the potential use of hobbyist drones as weapons of terror or assassination.
The conference was open to civilians, but explicitly closed to the press. One attendee described it as an eye-opener. The officials played videos of low-cost drones firing semi-automatic weapons, revealed that Syrian rebels are importing consumer-grade drones to launch attacks, and flashed photos from an exercise that pitted $5,000 worth of drones against a convoy of armored vehicles. (The drones won.) But the most striking visual aid was on an exhibit table outside the auditorium, where a buffet of low-cost drones had been converted into simulated flying bombs. One quadcopter, strapped to 3 pounds of inert explosive, was a DJI Phantom 2, a newer version of the very drone that would land at the White House the next week.
Attendee Daniel Herbert snapped a photo and posted it to his website along with detailed notes from the conference. The day after the White House incident, he says, DHS phoned him and politely asked him to remove the entire post. He complied. “I’m not going to be the one to challenge Homeland Security and cause more contention,” says Herbert, who runs a small drone shop in Delaware called Skygear Solutions.
Read the rest here
Comments
NO! The only solution is to put your bootheel down and oppress people even more than you currently are! Then spend VAST sums of money on completely ineffective countermeasures against things like underwear bombings.
It's not enough that people are dying for a lack of medical care that we spend on luggage, you must also actively take the x-rays from hospitals!
I think internationally, traditionally guarded entities or organisations should be very concerned about the possibilities that open source and cheaply available UAV technologies has given anybody who wants to harm them. A single example why this is so dangerous is that in essence a complete intelligent guidance system exists right here under $200 - way point control, altitude control and and and. With the foam air frames sold by the hobby community, the endurance of these are becoming better and better. You can fly in an 2kg payload from 20km without breaking a sweat under $500. What drills home with intents like this is not the damage caused by a small payload, but the psychology and emotional spin-offs....oh and the movie after that. Every little activity in this regard sends $mil++ of defense and intelligence equipment into gear = money wasted for a $500 incursion, not to mention the media frenzy.
I see the following technologies and defenses getting vast funding and fast track development:
1. High sensitivity radar systems that can track <1kg objects. I know they are out there, but I suspect that they will be fast tracked in turbo mode to be more efficient and accurate.
2. Focused EMP generators to knock the UAV down with the related targeting tech.
3. Pencil beam chemical lasers for UAV AA application.
4. In general, the anti-UAV for units smaller than 5kg will start to flourish.
Interesting times ahead, indeed.
@Jimmy: Nice!
RC Aircraft have been around for decades. Any of them could carry a bomb.
In my view, that is the very first thing that should be said in any discussion of this topic. Once you've established that, then you can move on to things like no-fly zones, etc.
Now prepare your antenna. This is a length of wire cut to 1/4 wavelength of the desired target frequency. If you do not know the target frequency you can just make some guesses. You can also connect multiple antennas together to cover various frequencies. Remember you will have RF emitted on all frequencies it will just be more powerful on the frequencies that the antenna is resonant for. Mobile phones are about 0.5 inch antennas and older police radios are 2.86 inches. For a good spectrum coverage if you make antennas of 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 inches most of the usable spectrum will be covered.
Connect the antenna(s) that you made to one of the stationary side rods. To the other end you will need to connect a ground. This can be to a metal water pipe in your house or to a rod driven into the ground. If you do not have a ground the radio will still transmit although it will be at a slightly lower power.
Now connect the output of the ignition coil to the stationary rods on either side of the motor. Connect the negative terminal to the ground side and the positive terminal to the side with the antenna(s). The idea here is that when the motor spins current will pass from one rod to the other and out the antenna. The motor will switch the output of the coil on and off in rapid succession.
The last and final step is to connect the battery to the motor and the coil. You may optionally install a switch to turn the device on or off or you may just disconnect the battery.
Remember building this is not illegal (in most places) but using it is. You will be causing harmful interference and probably upsetting people.
OMG. I did this video a couple of years ago. Forget the phantom or the turbine jet, this can do it. And the music is already programmed in to it.
http://vimeo.com/13674637
To sell to the White House
Easier to Build
Rotary Spark Gap Designs
http://www.tb3.com/tesla/sparkgaps/index.html
Probably need the new heavy lift Phantom 3 for that one Jimmy.
@rob
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next