Nope, this idiot was kind enough to post his evidence of his 3.4 km (11000 ft) altitude flight just outside the CTR of Rotterdam Airport:

https://www.pprune.org/*****************nUnR

Newly issued drone recognition chart by the CAA :8:8

The report says the pilot informed ATC and police after he landed.

Virtues v hassles of making a call immediately to ATC so as to warn following aircraft?

Might have been preoccupied with all the work involved in landing at a major airport, let alone getting into a non standard R/T exchange with a French controller busy vectoring multiple aircraft.

Drones/rpas/UAV.... whatever!!
 

It used to be foil kiddies balloons whipping past our windscreens at FL160 being called UFO's. Looks like they have been renamed "Drone" :cool:

'Drone' Geo-fencing trials at LHR proving successful. Plans for nationwide rollout will start at Sainsbury's car park Hounslow.

Jetscream you need to add plastic bags to your pictures of 'Drones' see Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

Doh.... back to the drawing board! Surely there would of been impact marks of some description, crikey the times Ive had a bird strike even small birds.... and you definitely know for sure!! However point being even if it wasn't this time.... it won't be long!

iYouu have to add the fire ballloons in Thailand every major festival especially in Loy Kratong. I am sure two loops of welding iron about 40 cm radius will go straight through an engine with no problem.

BA flight unlikely to have been hit by a drone.

http://http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-36159117

Perhaps, just perhaps, some of the drone near misses were in fact not drones as well.....?

Perhaps idiots flying in control zones is not as common as some on here suggest?

It's easy to make a recognition error.

I can hold my hand up for seeing what I thought looked like a microlight plunging into the Clyde Estuary one evening. I reported the event and a search was made by the local lifeboat.
All they could find was a large deflated balloon :O

Would I report such a sighting again? Yes, of course I would; next time I may be correct.

Well, my company has just patented a directional jamming device which jams GPS, video link and control input. You aim it at the drone, select what you want to jam and pull the trigger.
The aim is to make the pilot feel like he has lost control over his device. When you release the trigger, control comes back and what should happen is the pilot will land the drone thinking something is wrong. If not, the action is repeated until he gets the message.
This equipment was successfully used during New Year. A total of 41 drones were made to go away during the course of 30 minutes during the fireworks display at Taipei 101.
The jamming device can disable a drone up to 1.2 km away, and as it is directional and has a beam of around 10 degrees, it does not interfere with other 2.4 or 5.8 equipment unless the equipment is pointed directly at it. Other GPS units are also not effected.

Forget nets.

Patent number?

No way. Not on a public forum.

But here are some pictures FYI


http://i68.tinypic.com/huljro.jpg

http://i68.tinypic.com/2v9dsg4.jpg

http://i67.tinypic.com/10eg6sy.jpg

it would affect purchased drones, but not all diy ones, you would need to add magnetic interference as well. It would not be to hard to make a drone attacking drone to bring any drones down.

The problem with designing any system to combat drones is, its quite easy to design around. Whereas, drone killing drones, is relatively easy and cheap,

for around £ 500, it not hard to knock together a very complex set of sensors and control board that could get a drone from position a to position b and do whatever there, that could not be jammed or confused easily.

but, it would be easy to build sensor arrays to detect any drones around airports and flight paths, and easy to target a drone with a drone and guarantee to bring it down.

The main concern is commercially available drones though, bought by idiots. Anyone who can build a drone is probably intelligent enough not to fly by airports unless their sole purpose is to do just that. If they are determined to get through airport security, they will and they will build a drone specifically designed for that.

My jammer can be used for any airport, prison, border agency, coast guard, police service etc...and as stated in the initial post, is designed against most commercially available drones.

It can also be adapted to block 3g, wifi and 2.4g using omni directional antennas. This is for public order issues. Although I don't agree with the police being able to do this, some agencies in the US - land of freedom - have expressed a interest...

Morals or money? Hmmm...

Its a good bit of kit,

my post was a bit sharp, i was specifically on about airports. I could see plenty of use for them as security devices at events as well as prisions, and usefull for celebrity's . Good idea.

It's OK. I didn't take offence! We're actually working on a drone vs drone solution, so we'll see how that goes.

:-)

Have a good evening!

Why not - patents are a public record. It certainly looks sexy, but I'd be interested to read the patent to see how you "jam GPS" from ground level, how you manage to develop sufficient power to "jam" 5.8GHz signals at 1.2km and how you legally "jam" the 2.4GHz signals without contravening the regulations on duty cycles and power levels. I'm also intrigued to know how these 10-degree beamwidth omnidirectional antennas work.

And then there's the minor issue of contravening the ANO (in the UK, and the equivalent laws which say the same thing in the colonies) by recklessly endangering an air vehicle in flight.

Is it that you have a hankering for prison food or something?



PS - does it also detect IEDs and corporate tax evasion?

Actually, the equipment can be modified to accept an omni-directional aerial.
The small issues about the ANO regarding endangering an aircraft in flight - well, the device which uses a net is also technically in contravention.

In the wider world (ie Turkey and more lawless and corrupt countries like the US) this is not an issue. If government agencies are interested, I'm sure that the equipment can be modified to fit the current regulations, or that ammendments can be made. There is already a device manufactured in the US which is effective to 300 metres.
Once the units are out of my hands I don't care what happens to them. I live in Taiwan, and the sale is through third parties anyway. No prison food for me. It's not illegal to manufacture or sell them here.


To answer your question about jamming GPS at ground level - if you are directly beneath the drone, then it is not effective. However, from an angle, it works like a dream.

In any case, the whole design is mainly a proof of concept showing that the technology is there and can be utilized if required.
I'm a pilot turned engineer and my company specializes in developing and maintaining aircraft systems, railway asset protection, calibration equipment and signalling systems.
This jamming device is just a side project, the development of which will probably lead to other things, although to date, 68 units have already been sold. :ok:

I think drone control is frequency hopping 2.4ghz so any jammer would also be jamming wifi, cordless phones and other devices also legally able to use 2.4ghz. And if you jam GPS frequencies again plenty of other legitimate users with GPS in their phones and cars would be upset! Even a basic drone if jammed should default to either fly Return to Home or fly autonomously via preset waypoints. Of course if GPS was also jammed it would then fly I would guess on a default heading such as North or could just be random pattern. If you jammed it and it then crashed and hit someone or a plane then who would be responsible? Hope you have good insurance cover!

But it's a really nice sexy gun-shaped thing with a designer matt-black finish and some seriously cool-looking antenna-shaped pods and a smart black backpack - presumably the backpack can also take it's designers schoolbooks and sandwiches, so it's good VFM.

Still no patent number then. Perhaps the backpack has pockets for the puppet to keep his socks in...

The 'i' newspaper in UK has a report headlined ‘Concerning’ increase in near-misses between aircraft and drones, with much of it sourced from Freedom of Information requests.

There's also a list of 16 incidents since 2014 where there was a "serious risk of collision".

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/pilot...rcraft-drones/

So this was last week when the HoftS arrived in Southampton:

The DJI P4 took off from the old wharf south of Ocean Village Marina under FPV which is exactly 3 nm from the runway threshold of runway 02 at EGHI on the extended centreline.

So he flew for over a mile under the hood which is BLOS (beyond line of sight) = illegal as no observer and looks to be well over 400 AGL in some of the frames judging by height of cruise vessel which is 210 ft high

If there is any Flybe jockeys seeing this they will not be very impressed as this is EXACTLY in the final descent profile which starts at 5.6D from the airfield.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqarhago7VY

Well at least the authorities know his name.

Eagles, again
 

The Dutch are exploring the use of trained eagles to snatch drones out of the sky.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/29/wo...es-eagles.html

This would be highly illegal under US Federal Law and FCC regulation and possibly others besides, and it should be everywhere. Jamming of radio signals is not something that should ever be done in peacetime or by civilians, cut and dry.

British drone-freezing ray gets US airports trial - BBC News

A UK-developed system capable of jamming signals to small drones is to be trialled by the US aviation authority.

Seems to me though that it depends what the drone is programmed to do when it loses control signal, could be quite unpredictable. If its 'hover'it doesnt help much. If 'land' possibly. If 'RTB' then bonus, it goes back to the perp.

And to answer chromonkey - The key point is directional. Firing a tight beam up into the sky, would be very unlikely to affect anyone. And exceptions can and are made to FCC and other regulations for specific cases. I suggest that downing a dangerous drone, in the hands of federal authorities (police, security) would get passed.

Uh-huh. And once it has moved a few yards (let alone any distance along the RTB path, which could be many miles long) it's out of the beam of the jammer and safely back under the owner's control.

Of course you'd better hope that this drone doesn't have antenna-diversity, and that the jammer's antennas are made of that special unobtainium alloy that eliminated side-lobes, or that the operator has the courtesy to only operate it in places where the drone death-ray can get a clean shot at it without impinging on any aircraft, offices, hospitals, schools, homes etc who might suffer problems from being subjected to illegal high-powered jamming signals in the 2.4GHz band.

The FAA blurb seems to emphasize detection, and says nothing about jamming.

The fact is has 4 Blighter radars on it will put the price into the "extremely scary" category.

But it wouldn't be civilians using such a device - it'd be 'law enforcement', who seem to be immune from US Federal Law and FCC regulation and possibly others beside. "War On Terra" trumps everything.

@ Jetscream 32

The DJI drones have geo fencing in the software. If won't fly if its in restricted airspace or it may limit the altitude to stay out of the lower tiers if its above you.

DJI have this locked down pretty well so can't see an issue in that video for that reason.

Based on the information on their website, DJI's geofencing covers a minute proportion of the world's restricted airspace.

Cdn Fighters scrambled to intercept drone
 

Now there's a surprise.

A F-18 against a drone ? That will certainly work well. :E
No helicopters avail in that part of Canada ?

First autonomour passenger-carrying drone begins testing
 

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...g-ehang-nevada

"Tom Wilczek, Goed’s aerospace and defence specialist said: “The State of Nevada, through NIAS, will help guide Ehang through the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) regulatory process with the ultimate goal of achieving safe flight.”"

A new beginning?

It will take a new generation to accept this mode of travel, probably purely on the basis of economics.