More drone crap

[Robert Zambelli]

Yep, still going on.

The future of model aviation.

 https://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/drones/a25653640/gatwick-drones-disable-deterrence/

[Dave Hull]

Bob,

No, that appears to be one of the commentaries on the prolonged incident from late last year. (Dec. 2018) Old news.

But the problem has not gone away. I don't recall them ever tracking down a verified offender.

Dave

[Gordon Van Tighem]

First conviction in Canada. (Way up north, where I live)
G

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/drone-flyer-convicted-yellowknife-1.4879016

[Dan McEntee]

First conviction in Canada. (Way up north, where I live)
G

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/drone-flyer-convicted-yellowknife-1.4879016

    DAMN!! That guy should be considered a career criminal! He's got away with bloody murder. I would have stood him up against a wall and shot him!  If that sentence doesn't make people "loose faith in the justice system"  I don't know what would!
   
  Type at you later,
  Dan McEntee

[Larry Renger]

Flying a drone in the path of an aircraft should be charged as attempted murder, or terrorism, or something more serious than what he was.

A friend of mine was on a jury where the charge was "concealed weapon". The guy was a professional mechanic with a screwdriver in his pocket!  It goes both ways, unfortunately. (My buddy did convince the jury to not convict, but there was this one gal who said that you just HAD to believe the cops.

Life is a mess, and there is only one way out of it. 

[Sean McEntee]

An RF spectrum-monitoring device that could isolate and jam the frequency that the drone is operating on would be the most logical choice.

[Fredvon4]

OTOH

 if you know a little about the FCC, spectrum managment, and ALL the various schemes of isolation and frequency hopping...there is NO system to detect and scramble, interfere with ONLY Drone command and control ---withOUT also interfering with all aircraft air and ground operations at any airfield

I worked a LOT of years on US Army Radio Jamming  and anti jamming systems...some with super high wattage and very broad spectrum.....

Most drones are within the FCC legal 2.4Ghz spread spectrum scheme...and commercially some up in the 5.2 Ghz spread spectrum scheme.... many of the First person View transmissions require a FCC Technician License to operate...even the wally world ones...

Interference immunization was EXACTLY why these R/C systems exist today....

Good luck jamming one deliberately withOUT going Heavy NUKE---- IE---VERY Broad Band very high wattage, and wiping out ANY and ALL 2.4Ghz or 5.2Ghz  bandwidth within the 5 miles of airport acreage

We had spec ops fixed wing and Huey's in my day, that could shut down every radio emission within 20 miles .....very bad mojo when your electric grid is controlled by radio links...very bad mojo.....thunk on that a sec

[Dave Hull]

Sean,
The implication of the reported comments at Gatwick suggests that that is exactly what they were setting up to do. Since this is a new threat, this capability is not deployed, so it is thought that there was a delay as the equipment was brought in.

My personal opinion is that the FCC should not have allowed frequency-hopping (jam resistant) technology to be used on consumer items. I know it has been a boon to the R/C hobby, but we are now reaping what we have sown. Of course, it is further assumed that up to date jamming equipment would have little problem....

For those who are noting the "first drone conviction" in the Great White North, it is my understanding that the FAA convicted over 23 individuals of multiple counts in the USA back in 2016. And presumably at least that many since then, based on the urgency of the government to get the problem under control. And while the fine, upstanding gentlemen residing in Yellowknife is clearly a knucklehead, the USA has more than our fair share.

Dave

[Doug Burright]

And the Academy of Model Aeronautics wants to include these type of drone pilots into their body of modelers, and cover them with insurance that we pay for?

This is why the FAA sees model airplanes as a threat, and have decided to regulate and control their usage. Since the AMA was the body that presented itself to the FAA as the governing body over drones, and was shown that they actually had little control over that segment of aviation, the FAA decided to create a way to make pilots accountable for their actions. A blanket regulation to register pilots who fly certain types of models- because of the few that screwed it up for everyone! GREAT! Thanks AMA! (said sarcastically)

It seems that the AMA is the threat to model aviation; and it has shown the government that it doesn't have control over a category of flyers that it has included in it's insurance coverage. If we can count on the AMA to keep encouraging the government to regulate and restrict our pilots, models and flying, soon there will be no reason for us to need the AMA.

[Dave Hull]

Doug,

I’d say that there is little chance of an individual such as has been mentioned joining anything like an organized group with rules. His every citation (in the article) was for a rebellious act—a total non-conformist. I’d say this is generally true here in the US of A as well regarding joining the AMA, especially with $75 dues. Not a member? No coverage. So you are wasting your valuable angst if you have picked this to worry about….

In the future, let’s hope that rulemaking occurs such that GPS-coupled autopilots are only allowed for use by Part 107 operators. With that license, there is enough training that ignorant errors should no longer occur, and they will have enough skin in the game to avoid blatant, open violations.

Dave