Drones threatening commercial a/c?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is difficult to see how a registration scheme will ever work. These big toy UAS are bought by MTV watchers who take breaks to play call-of-duty and grand-theft-auto. They will not be aware or care about an FAA regulation nor will they hear about large fines imposed as MTV won't carry that and if they did call-of-duty would be played in preference to watching a talking head.
The toothpaste is out of the tube and the ANSPs have been far too slow to act. It was apparent 10 years ago that this could become a problem just with normal full size commercial UAS and model aircraft with payloads. But the bureaucracies preferred to just not take notice and wait out the commercial pressure that would 'go away'. Except it didn't and several enablers became available concurrently, small GPS, powerful small electric engines, and, control electronics for stability of multiple rotor UAS. Suddenly as the draft regulations for sub-55# UAS were being published the world wass flooded with grown up toy UAS being sold everywhere from traditional model aircraft shops to literally anywhere - I saw some in Bed Bath and Beyond.
Even if there was a bad crash due to a UAS/airliner collision, the use of UAS would not be affected there are just too many of them. Standards, regulations and laws could have been in place years ago, but it was easier to just say no. The toy UAS was not considered as ANSPs thought all UAS would be Predator like and need a large commercial organization. Not something that can be bought anywhere and flown by an unsupervised teenager.
The ball was dropped 10 years ago.
The toothpaste is out of the tube and the ANSPs have been far too slow to act. It was apparent 10 years ago that this could become a problem just with normal full size commercial UAS and model aircraft with payloads. But the bureaucracies preferred to just not take notice and wait out the commercial pressure that would 'go away'. Except it didn't and several enablers became available concurrently, small GPS, powerful small electric engines, and, control electronics for stability of multiple rotor UAS. Suddenly as the draft regulations for sub-55# UAS were being published the world wass flooded with grown up toy UAS being sold everywhere from traditional model aircraft shops to literally anywhere - I saw some in Bed Bath and Beyond.
Even if there was a bad crash due to a UAS/airliner collision, the use of UAS would not be affected there are just too many of them. Standards, regulations and laws could have been in place years ago, but it was easier to just say no. The toy UAS was not considered as ANSPs thought all UAS would be Predator like and need a large commercial organization. Not something that can be bought anywhere and flown by an unsupervised teenager.
The ball was dropped 10 years ago.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tourist: I'm not concentrating on 'regulated' drones & 'regulated' operators: I'm concentrating on being able to identify who owned the drone that causes damage or worse.I'm talking about registration. That does not mean their use is restricted in any unreasonable manner; it just means you know which muppets are using them after they've crashed & burned somewhere they shouldn't.
Despite the fact that no drone has yet caused any of the predicted deaths despite millions being operated by morons all over the planet, you are planning ahead for the scenario of not being able to work out who caused the problem despite the fact that finding the culprit has not yet been a problem with any of the drones that have strayed so far?
I bet your pre take-off briefs last for aaaaages......
"Sensible considerations about possibilities"
That is the bit where you are supposed to do a risk assessment based upon actual empirical data rather than preconceptions and fear of change.
Drones are ubiquitous and have caused zero accidents.
In the same period airliners have crashed for a dizzying range of reasons which many on here should be stressed about, but you worry about drones?!
One of the first signs of people operating beyond their capabilities in a cockpit is inappropriate focus on minutia rather than correct prioritisation.......
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is difficult to imagine how a registration scheme could be enforced for any small electronic devices in this day and age.
An invention known as the internet has made it possible, no commonplace, for individuals to import goods directly from the far east one unit at a time. The vast majority of companies satisfying this demand are more than happy to lie on their customs declaration and claim any contents are a gift of less than $5 value, or to falsely claim there are no lithium batteries included in the shipping documents, so relying on the seller notifying an authority of sales is a non-starter.
That means any registration scheme would have to rely on the purchaser notifying the authority of their purchase after the fact. If you were a wreckless drone operator, would you register?
An invention known as the internet has made it possible, no commonplace, for individuals to import goods directly from the far east one unit at a time. The vast majority of companies satisfying this demand are more than happy to lie on their customs declaration and claim any contents are a gift of less than $5 value, or to falsely claim there are no lithium batteries included in the shipping documents, so relying on the seller notifying an authority of sales is a non-starter.
That means any registration scheme would have to rely on the purchaser notifying the authority of their purchase after the fact. If you were a wreckless drone operator, would you register?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US/EU
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Economics of Drone Delivery
A serious look at the economics of drone delivery by Flexport, a shipping industry blog.
https://www.flexport.com/blog/drone-delivery-economics/
Despite drones’ current inability to match the efficiency of a delivery truck’s milk run, the economics of delivering air freight by drone seem compelling. That’s why Amazon and Google are investing in the R&D. That’s why Matternet is testing drone deliveries with Swiss Post and Swiss World Cargo. And that’s why the drone community expects deliveries to happen—even if not as quickly as executives like Bezos promise.
Resident insomniac
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 79
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
The concept of 'Amazon' delivering parcels by drone seemed something of a pipe dream when it was first made public, but, however, having seen a video produced by a local, the definition is outstanding, and, by adding two-way sound it would seem possible to 'deliver' the parcel to a recipient with them responding to questions of identity and showing ID in return for release of the load - so not so far-fetched?
There are other more practical obstacles. Current battery technology would limit drone delivery devices to rather short ranges (perhaps 3-5 miles) with any significant payload (much more than a couple of kilos). They could extend this by fitting onboard generators powered by (say) internal combustion engines, but this would not only be noisy - I think the public acceptability of petrol-containing drones flying around would be even less likely than for the electric flavour.
I also struggle with the implied assumption that delivery drones would be exempt from the vessel-vehicle-structure-person separation rules which currently even apply to a 1 kilo radio-controlled model aeroplane.
PDR
PS - High Colin [it's Pete R]
I also struggle with the implied assumption that delivery drones would be exempt from the vessel-vehicle-structure-person separation rules which currently even apply to a 1 kilo radio-controlled model aeroplane.
PDR
PS - High Colin [it's Pete R]
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are other more practical obstacles. Current battery technology would limit drone delivery devices to rather short ranges (perhaps 3-5 miles) with any significant payload (much more than a couple of kilos).
The drone is a hybrid design -- it is an octocopter with vertical takeoff / landing, but also has wings and a pusher prop to fly like a conventional rc aircraft to/from the destination.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-worth-noting/
via G-CPTN:
The concept of 'Amazon' delivering parcels by drone seemed something of a pipe dream when it was first made public, but, however, having seen a video produced by a local, the definition is outstanding, and, by adding two-way sound it would seem possible to 'deliver' the parcel to a recipient with them responding to questions of identity and showing ID in return for release of the load - so not so far-fetched?
The concept of 'Amazon' delivering parcels by drone seemed something of a pipe dream when it was first made public, but, however, having seen a video produced by a local, the definition is outstanding, and, by adding two-way sound it would seem possible to 'deliver' the parcel to a recipient with them responding to questions of identity and showing ID in return for release of the load - so not so far-fetched?
.......... villainous opportunity is boundless..
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Somewhere between here an there
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Drones. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Pandora’s Box has been opened, and even the most ardent drone users and those who support them will eventually realize how wrong they are.
Remember the recent (Dec. 22, 2015) incident in which the world’s best downhill skier almost got hit by a 22-pound camera drone operated by a newsman that fell out of the sk ust behind the skier? (It apparently fell because of radio interference.) It is terrifying to think what could easily have happened to that skier had that drone either fallen right in front of him or actually hit him. It missed him by inches! Remember -- he was going more than 90 mph at the time the drone fell near him, and that drone was being operated by a supposedly responsible person.
There is absolutely no justification for using these things anywhere -- except in rare circumstances -- and even then they are dangerous. Getting news out is not, and will never be, one of those rare circumstances. And Jeff Bezos and Google’s top execs and everyone else who uses or wants to use these very dangerous things should be ashamed of themselves for putting making lots of money or having fun ahead of caring intensely about everyone’s safety.
Pandora’s Box has been opened, and even the most ardent drone users and those who support them will eventually realize how wrong they are.
Remember the recent (Dec. 22, 2015) incident in which the world’s best downhill skier almost got hit by a 22-pound camera drone operated by a newsman that fell out of the sk ust behind the skier? (It apparently fell because of radio interference.) It is terrifying to think what could easily have happened to that skier had that drone either fallen right in front of him or actually hit him. It missed him by inches! Remember -- he was going more than 90 mph at the time the drone fell near him, and that drone was being operated by a supposedly responsible person.
There is absolutely no justification for using these things anywhere -- except in rare circumstances -- and even then they are dangerous. Getting news out is not, and will never be, one of those rare circumstances. And Jeff Bezos and Google’s top execs and everyone else who uses or wants to use these very dangerous things should be ashamed of themselves for putting making lots of money or having fun ahead of caring intensely about everyone’s safety.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cars. Are. Dangerous. Always
Guns. Are Dangerous. Always.
Lasers. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Tigers. Are. Dangerous. Always
Spiders. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Stars. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Trousers. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Children. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Nerf guns. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Vajazzles. Are. Dangerous. Always.
This is a great game!!
It would be even better if these risks were ranked in order of deaths/serious injuries caused in the last decade. That way we could have relative risk shown which would provide us with a way of showing the stupidity of knee jerk reactions.
Or, we could just ban everything which has any risk associated with it.
That would, of course require the destruction of every gram of matter in the universe including ourselves, but that is a small price to pay in the search for safety......
Guns. Are Dangerous. Always.
Lasers. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Tigers. Are. Dangerous. Always
Spiders. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Stars. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Trousers. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Children. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Nerf guns. Are. Dangerous. Always.
Vajazzles. Are. Dangerous. Always.
This is a great game!!
It would be even better if these risks were ranked in order of deaths/serious injuries caused in the last decade. That way we could have relative risk shown which would provide us with a way of showing the stupidity of knee jerk reactions.
Or, we could just ban everything which has any risk associated with it.
That would, of course require the destruction of every gram of matter in the universe including ourselves, but that is a small price to pay in the search for safety......
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remember the recent (Dec. 22, 2015) incident in which the world’s best downhill skier almost got hit by a 22-pound camera drone operated by a newsman that fell out of the sk ust behind the skier? (It apparently fell because of radio interference.)
I haven't bothered to investigate what model of drone was involved in the above incident but don't many that size claim to have some sort of fail safe, hover on the spot or return to base function in the event of loss of valid signal? Why didn't that work?
If Amazon end up making 20,000 flights an hour (see above) then they will need to be exceptionally reliable to avoid having a lot of crashes. One crash per million flights equates to about one crash a week. Would most be over cities? Would that be acceptable?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US/EU
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: US
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Humm. I've been a model flyer on and off for 40 years. It's very common to claim interference caused a crash.... Oh look I have no control therefore it must be interference and can't possibly be my fault... when in reality there could be any number of causes. Low receiver battery, faulty wiring, faulty mechanics, unseen previous crash damage etc
I haven't bothered to investigate what model of drone was involved in the above incident but don't many that size claim to have some sort of fail safe, hover on the spot or return to base function in the event of loss of valid signal? Why didn't that work?
I haven't bothered to investigate what model of drone was involved in the above incident but don't many that size claim to have some sort of fail safe, hover on the spot or return to base function in the event of loss of valid signal? Why didn't that work?
The flight software can be programmed to do any number of safer things given a loss of signal: hover, land in place, return to base, maintain course and altitude. I can hardly believe a professional drone filming company would set their drones to "plummet to the ground" on signal loss (and yes this is an option).
I would guess it was caused by some sort of mechanical failure. Like any other machine, parts can fail, solders can crack, propellers can shatter, etc.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are going to be days or even weeks when the UAS delivery system will at best not work at worse will deliver dead UASs and packages to unwilling recipients. One person killed by an Amazon UAS and all the investment will be wasted. I cannot see this delivery UAS idea passing even a cursory safety assessment. That is before we get to the security acceptance of anonymous autonomous UAS flying 5lb packages around major cities like DC, New York or London.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is before we get to the security acceptance of anonymous autonomous UAS flying 5lb packages around major cities like DC, New York or London.
There is also the social disturbance/invasion of privacy topic you read about. Camera toting drones over-flying private areas, taking photos/spying, and then posting them on some titivating 'no-one gives a toss' social website. If you could trace the owner you could take some action, especially if it dumps itself on your property. One sure way to capture said pesky intruder is to engage the use of a trusty shotgun. It will happen, especially in some of the more outlying properties where people like to 'look after themselves' and not trouble local services with trivial complaints.
There is also the social disturbance/invasion of privacy topic you read about. Camera toting drones over-flying private areas, taking photos/spying, and then posting them on some titivating 'no-one gives a toss' social website. If you could trace the owner you could take some action, especially if it dumps itself on your property. One sure way to capture said pesky intruder is to engage the use of a trusty shotgun. It will happen, especially in some of the more outlying properties where people like to 'look after themselves' and not trouble local services with trivial complaints.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is before we get to the security acceptance of anonymous autonomous UAS flying 5lb packages around major cities like DC, New York or London.
There is also the social disturbance/invasion of privacy topic you read about. Camera toting drones over-flying private areas, taking photos/spying, and then posting them on some titivating 'no-one gives a toss' social website. If you could trace the owner you could take some action, especially if it dumps itself on your property. One sure way to capture said pesky intruder is to engage the use of a trusty shotgun. It will happen, especially in some of the more outlying properties where people like to 'look after themselves' and not trouble local services with trivial complaints.
There is also the social disturbance/invasion of privacy topic you read about. Camera toting drones over-flying private areas, taking photos/spying, and then posting them on some titivating 'no-one gives a toss' social website. If you could trace the owner you could take some action, especially if it dumps itself on your property. One sure way to capture said pesky intruder is to engage the use of a trusty shotgun. It will happen, especially in some of the more outlying properties where people like to 'look after themselves' and not trouble local services with trivial complaints.
"Kentucky man arrested after shooting down $1,800 drone with shotgun"
"Taking place in a town called Hillview just south of Louisville, Kentucky, 47-year-old William H. Merideth used his shotgun to fire on a drone that was hovering over his property during late Sunday afternoon. According to an account of the incident, the shotgun blast hit the drone and the hardware crashed in a field in the vicinity of Merideth’s home. When police arrived to investigate the weapon fire, Merideth admitted that he shot down the drone because it was flying over his home."
Man arrested after shooting down $1,800 drone with shotgun | Digital Trends
Addition:
And never ones to miss a marketing opportunity:
Man vs. machine: New shotgun shell being marketed for shooting down drone
"Hobby drone usage is on the rise, with its privacy implications causing some discomfort. However, an ammunition company has apparently devised a solution: a shotgun shell marketed specifically to shoot down nosy camera drones right out of the sky. The shells are given the name “Dronemunition” by their seller, Snake River Shooting Products. The packaging encourages buyers to “prepare for the drone apocalypse” with a subheading clarifying that they are referring to “the invasion of privacy” apocalypse that camera drones will bring.
The shells are 3-inches long and are full of #2 steel shot -- about .15 inches in diameter. The ammunition is relatively large, so firing it at a drone will smash it into a pile of useless metal and plastic. "
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One person killed by an Amazon UAS and all the investment will be wasted. I cannot see this delivery UAS idea passing even a cursory safety assessment. That is before we get to the security acceptance of anonymous autonomous UAS flying 5lb packages around major cities like DC, New York or London.
Currently, vast numbers of packages are delivered by road vehicles. Those vehicles kill people on a daily basis.
Note, not might kill.
Not have potential to kill.
They do kill.
1 million people die in road accidents every year.
Delivery vehicles are involved in those statistics.
A quick perusal online finds this document from the UK Office of National Statistics.
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...36/ras20001.xl
Some Amazon drones will undoubtedly fall out of the sky.
Of those that do, a vanishingly small amount of them (the surface of the earth covers many millions of square feet, and relatively few of those feet have a person standing on them) will actually hit a person.
Of that tiny number, some will be hurt.
Of that number, some will die.
That "some will die" would be a big deal if they were extra deaths, but they are not. They are potential drone of Damocles deaths compensated for by the reduction in actual road delivery deaths.
A look at the table linked suggests that Amazon drones can kill at least 2000 people per year before we should consider them a more dangerous option than light delivery vehicles.......
p.s. Your point about security doesn't even bear the briefest consideration.
Does it make a difference to you if a drone rather than a delivery man delivers your bomb or sarin?