What are your thoughts about "Air Sentinel", a new drone tracking app, and similar apps?

[anotherlab]

That's likely it.

And further proof he wasn't found by Fusion Watch. This isn't a thing yet. It was proposed two years ago by college students. It's not on the market yet. Might not ever, but we'll see.

I think it's likely that he was found by Fusion Watch, it's an actual LE monitoring team in Las Vegas as part of the Las Vegas Metro PD. I think it's part of the Southern Nevada Counter Terrorism Center (SNCTC), but I may be wrong on that part of it.

You can find detailed information about "Fusion Watch" in Las Vegas if you include LVMPD as part of the search criteria. It's not a product nor is it a drone-specific monitoring team. The LVMPD has a study guide online titled "FUSION WATCH SPECIALIST STUDY GUIDE" that details what it does.

Fusion Watch operates as a component of the Technical Operations Section (Tech Ops), which is responsible for combating crime and terrorism using real time surveillance, technical collection methods, and advanced technologies. The purpose of this section revolves around the following four focus areas:
* Electronic real-time monitoring and research of criminal activity using video cameras, open source media, sensor technologies, and various software applications and databases.
* Technical and surveillance support for criminal investigations, major incidents, tactical situations, crime suppression operations, and counter terrorism efforts.
* Virtual crime-fighting operations and situational awareness on potential threats and major incidents

 

[Droning on and on...]

Not to be coy or like I know secret stuff because I don't (I'm just a beginner) but my mission is irrelevant. Nobody cares what we are doing up there as long as we're playing by the rules, well maybe Karen does in which case if she calls LE you might want to have your documents at the ready just like driving a car. Even with the 107, Laanc, or grid waivers if they get a call they have to investigate it.

Well actually they do care what you're doing up there, that's why it's a Zero Grid. The process to get a waiver requires submitting a request to the FAA, and there must be a legitimate purpose to the mission. You will not get a waiver to simply "fly around and have fun".

Further, the chance of getting a waiver to fly up to 400ft in a Zero Grid is close to zero unless there was some extremely important mission that the FAA agreed needed to be performed.

Here's a good article outlining what's involved to fly in a Zero Gid section.

I also took your advice and Google the LVMPD Fusion Watch. Your presentation was very misleading, at least to me, suggesting this was some sort of novel technology.

Nothing of the sort. In fact, it's nothing more than an information integration command center – traffic cams, surveillance cams, etc. – that assist cops on the street while pursuing potential criminals. A job description for an open position in the Fusion Watch center illustrates nicely what they do.

Let's be frank here: You're lying. You made this up, this entire thread is a troll. The logic is simple: If you actually had gone through the application process for a waiver, you would have informed the airport you were near that you had a waiver, and you were engaging operations and when. You also would have notified local PD, both required by the waiver to operate near an airport

Here are the local grid squares in Las Vegas... If you were flying in a Zero Grid square, it would be near one of the two airports.



You would NEVER get a waiver to fly up to 400ft without a very good reason.

 

[anotherlab]

There is a certain set of data required in the packet RID transmits. But there is no legal mandate on what the apps collect. Kenji's system is the one in play at the moment. So app developers will have to license that from him.

So instead of attacking Kenji, who is trying to make RID work for the pilot's safety, you should appreciate what he's doing for this industry.

Unless they reverse-engineer it. INAL, but 17 U.S. Code § 1201 (f) does allow for reverse engineering for non-copyrightable content.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Threats? To whom? To what? That's an interesting accusation considering there wasn't one.

recorded it and then sold it and the geo location of where I was broadcasting from to other people, we would be having further discussion whether you liked it or not.

That's not a threat?

 

[Droning on and on...]

That's likely it.

And further proof he wasn't found by Fusion Watch. This isn't a thing yet. It was proposed two years ago by college students. It's not on the market yet. Might not ever, but we'll see.

Nope.

It's simply an information integration center, something many big cities have. Nothing special about the one in Las Vegas.

Also known as the

Southern Nevada Counter Terrorism Center (SNCTC)

 

[Firejay27]

I tried the app out this past week and the only thing I don't like about it is the fact that it's a public app available from your phone app store. That means anyone can download it and sit outside and watch to see if there is a drone flying around. That also means the Karen's of this world dont even have to hear or see it to complain.

Now with that said there are a number of things to note about an app like this or any others that come out:
- The app can only see your drone if the person using it is within the radio signal zone of the Remote ID signal. I didn't see anything on their web site that stated it sent the data up to them to then be broadcast out to others using the app at the same time. They very well could do that down the road though.
- The app doesn't show pilot location or personal information. I've never done a search on my FAA reg number though to see if it actually comes up with a name.
- The app is only reading the information that the FAA requires be broadcast for Remote ID.

Again though I think this is a bad idea to make an app like this that is so public. It should be 100% restricted to local law enforcement only and require a code per agency to unlock it. They're really the only ones that need this. There isn't a need to have the local Joe be out in the park looking for drones on the app that they can't even see or hear.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

Aeroscope is a different animal all together. And DJI no longer makes that. With the advent of RID, it's not longer needed for the most part.

Aeroscope need hasn’t been made defunct anywhere but the US now though, and they stopped making it quite some time ago.
At least the mobile version.
I think a site type version is still available (for airports etc).

It’s a big World.
So far, RID is introduced in the US only, and likely something is needed for other regions of the World.
But if RID has a successful implementation in the US, it will likely be dragged kicking and screaming into other airspace regions, especially EU and other western type airspace authority regions.
Perhaps into other regions with lessons learned from what happens with US release and some time monitoring.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Aeroscope need hasn’t been made defunct anywhere but the US now though, and they stopped making it quite some time ago.

Are you sure? RID doesn't need regulatory to transmit anywhere does it?

Aeroscope is a DJI-only technology, right?

All DJI drones shipped worldwide going forward will have RID capability, right? Will it be disabled outside the US, or just the requirement, while still transmitting?

RID may provide a way to eliminate Aeroscope even outside the US. Anyone know how the RID feature of DJI drones will behave outside the US?

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

Are you sure? RID doesn't need regulatory to transmit anywhere does it?

Aeroscope is a DJI-only technology, right?

All DJI drones shipped worldwide going forward will have RID capability, right? Will it be disabled outside the US, or just the requirement, while still transmitting?

RID may provide a way to eliminate Aeroscope even outside the US. Anyone know how the RID feature of DJI drones will behave outside the US?

As far as I can see, there are no drone tracking apps available here in Australia.
Not sure about place like the EU, UK, which along with Australia and NZ would probably be the most interested and closely aligned with the US and FAA type administration of airspace.

I guess if RID is transmitting outside the US, authorities at various levels of security may have something available to watch pilots flights.

Nothing like RID has been mentioned by our airspace authority CASA from what I've seen to date, but no doubt they'll be watching the US introduction closely to see if it helps keep the skies safe, and / or make sure general rules like VLOS are adhered to.
Bear in mind the miniscule risk to manned aircraft that drones have demonstrated to date . . . some airspace authorities may feel little point in implementing such a system . . . at least for the foreseeable future.

Aeroscope can detect other drones too, but I recall it doesn't give as in depth info as it does on DJI drones.
It can certainly pick up any consumer drone signals within range, including proper FPV type drones, and probably locate pilots.

 

[Deleted member 170519]

I think it's likely that he was found by Fusion Watch, it's an actual LE monitoring team in Las Vegas as part of the Las Vegas Metro PD. I think it's part of the Southern Nevada Counter Terrorism Center (SNCTC), but I may be wrong on that part of it.

You can find detailed information about "Fusion Watch" in Las Vegas if you include LVMPD as part of the search criteria. It's not a product nor is it a drone-specific monitoring team. The LVMPD has a study guide online titled "FUSION WATCH SPECIALIST STUDY GUIDE" that details what it does.

I would try it out if it were an app for Apple.

 

[Dangerly]

It took me all of about ten minutes to learn how to disable remote ID on DJI aircraft. There are several different ways to do it. AS AN EXPERIMENT ONLY, I tried it on one of my drones, verified that it works to block remote id transmission, and then restored my drone firmware to the original state so it now broadcasts rid again. The whole process took a few hours including testing and restoring.

Any script kiddy could do it. It's clear DJI did not design their software to prevent this kind of hack or even make it hard. I'm wondering whether in the future DJI will make it harder to disable rid. I am not going to post any links about how to do this and please don't ask.

 

[anotherlab]

Are you sure? RID doesn't need regulatory to transmit anywhere does it?

Broadcast RID goes out over existing radio technology used the drones. As long as uses the same channels and signal strength, it shouldn't not need any additional FCC approvals.

 

[anotherlab]

I would try it out if it were an app for Apple.

Fusion Watch isn't an app, it's an organizational group with the LVMPD.

If you are looking for a Remote ID app for iOS, just look for "Remote ID" in the app store. You'll see apps like "Drone Scanner".

 

[Droning on and on...]

Broadcast RID goes out over existing radio technology used the drones. As long as uses the same channels and signal strength, it shouldn't not need any additional FCC approvals.

We're talking about outside the US.

The fact that wifi transmission is already regulated and legal in most places, the question was about whether or not RID could be broadcast without further regulatory changes. Sorry I wasn't clear.

I suspect it isn't necessary, and DJI could just leave RID broadcast on everywhere, regardless of whether or not it is set up by the pilot.

It would lack the FAA registration information, but still contain drone and control location.

There's a good chance the apps that work in the US to detect RID broadcasts work in Europe too, unless specifically designed not to.

So, if my speculative assumptions are true, Karen's may be coming your way too outside the US, and there's nothing stopping LE from using this unofficial tool there too.

 

[anotherlab]

We're talking about outside the US.

The fact that wifi transmission is already regulated and legal in most places, the question was about whether or not RID could be broadcast without further regulatory changes. Sorry I wasn't clear.

You were pretty clear

If your device has been approved by the regulatory authority for your country for the use of the frequencies used by Wi-Fi transmissions, then Broadcast RID is clear. It's not a new means of transmission, it's just a special data packet going out over the existing hardware.

 

[drakkor]

This app/technology is just going to make you an absolute sitting duck for thieves. Why can't the info only be made available to law enforcement?? In places like the SF Bay Area where property crime is currently running rampant (with no consequences -- don't even get me started), there's no way this won't become a huge mess.

I am from the bay area as well, and I agree with you on that one

 

[NightFlightAlright]

Given the fact that in present times, prosecution for "historic" offences is commonplace, that means all your historic data can be used to criminalise you in retrospect.

It might be worth a mention that in the United States, the United States Constitution specifically prohibits prosecution for "historic offenses", that is, you can't be charged for an activity that was legal at the time that you did it, even if an ex post facto law is subsequently created.

I recognize that this is not the case in many nations in Europe and around the world. We also get to have guns. LOL.

 

[NightFlightAlright]

Your teenage daughter or granddaughter is having a pool party with her friends. The pool is in your backyard and is inside a privacy fence. Someone launches a drone and flies it directly over the pool ....

So, do they have those so-called "news helicopters" where you come from? The courts (in the USA) have been very very clear on this. If you can see it from a public place, including from the air such as in a helicopter, there is no expectation of privacy. Period.

 

[Dangerly]

So, do they have those so-called "news helicopters" where you come from? The courts (in the USA) have been very very clear on this. If you can see it from a public place, including from the air such as in a helicopter, there is no expectation of privacy. Period.

While the "no expectation of privacy in public" principle is generally true in the U.S., this principle is not absolute and there are some exceptions. One famous case was Katz v. United States, where the defendant's conversations were recorded from outside a "public" phone booth. In this case, Justice Harlan created the "Reasonable Expectation of Privacy Test" in his concurring opinion where he defined a two-part test:

1. The individual has exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy.
2. The expectation is one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable.

Given this precedent setting case and this two-part test, I think it's arguable that the same test could be applied to drone use.

 

[anotherlab]

It might be worth a mention that in the United States, the United States Constitution specifically prohibits prosecution for "historic offenses", that is, you can't be charged for an activity that was legal at the time that you did it, even if an ex post facto law is subsequently created.

In the context of RID, the rules have been set for a few years. Flying within VLOS and not flying over groups of people is nothing new.

FWIW, the prohibition on enacting ex post facto laws by the US Constitution is been determined by the courts (see Calder v. Bull) to only apply to criminal law, not civil. And there are exceptions to ex post facto criminal laws, mainly with sexual predators.

I recognize that this is not the case in many nations in Europe and around the world..

The EU has a prohibition against ex post facto, that takes precedence over the laws of the member states.