Dangerous Drone Flying

[dam]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[DroningOn]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Uhhhhhhhh....... this is relevant to our conversation how???

 

[Grey Wolf]

Reaper Two Seven is one of them.
Check his post.
I understand he used poor judgment, which, hopefully he will learn from, but more importantly, I am disgusted at the negative feedback I received.
We are in this together and if we don't curtail stupidity, then the industry will be highly regulated more than it is now.
As it stands now, Reaper's Mavic is still unaccounted for and we don't even know if it fell and potentially hit someone. Did the guy have insurance? I highly doubt it.
All we need is to have a drone fatality due to negligence and that will be the end of Drones.

 

[F6Rider]

I saw this on the news last night, only thing this guy did wrong was to fly over an area congested with a LOT of traffic (2 freeways converge at that point) and there were a LOT of people enjoying the sights, and it was night (no night flying). He did check the venue's web site for drone restrictions, and 'B4 you fly' was clear as there are no airports close. But he should have realized flying at night over a heavily populated area was not smart, given that he was probably reported a dozen times.
Man Confused After Cal Expo Police Confiscate His Drone, Says He Hasn’t Been Charged

AND, they took his MAVIC!!

 

[Mike_in_Letcombe]

Reaper Two Seven is one of them.
Check his post.
I understand he used poor judgment, which, hopefully he will learn from, but more importantly, I am disgusted at the negative feedback I received.
We are in this together and if we don't curtail stupidity, then the industry will be highly regulated more than it is now.
As it stands now, Reaper's Mavic is still unaccounted for and we don't even know if it fell and potentially hit someone. Did the guy have insurance? I highly doubt it.
All we need is to have a drone fatality due to negligence and that will be the end of Drones.

Absolutely ludicrous! Sends it (purposely) TOWARDS a city centre, way beyond LOS (7200 feet!), 'forgets' to set RTH altitude above nearby buildings, turns OFF obstacle avoidance, loses signal and tries to ascend then...crashes. But he doesn't know where, onto what (or whom), seems totally ignorant of ANY of the rules governing us all yet has a mass of experience. Then, to add to the farce, he gets a friend to send a P3 up (with some type of coat hanger 'hook' attached), who also flies behind a tall building, loses signal and, because HE also forgot to set RTH to a safe altitude, manages to crash as well! I fear for our 'hobby' whilst this sort of idiotic (and dangerous) behaviour carries on.


Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots

 

[F6Rider]

Absolutely ludicrous! Sends it (purposely) TOWARDS a city centre, way beyond LOS (7200 feet!), 'forgets' to set RTH altitude above nearby buildings, turns OFF obstacle avoidance, loses signal and tries to ascend then...crashes. But he doesn't know where, onto what (or whom), seems totally ignorant of ANY of the rules governing us all yet has a mass of experience. Then, to add to the farce, he gets a friend to send a P3 up (with some type of coat hanger 'hook' attached), who also flies behind a tall building, loses signal and, because HE also forgot to set RTH to a safe altitude, manages to crash as well! I fear for our 'hobby' whilst this sort of idiotic (and dangerous) behaviour carries on.


Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots

There are simply no words, I shudder at the stupidly displayed, absolutely amazing that this person lived to his current age.

 

[UAV Man]

Okay so I posted a stark warning and then had my posts deleted by admin, surely this is now condoning the actions of a dangerous pilot and in turn telling all members that in fact 'DronePilots' condones these actions too. I understand this is a commercial site sponsored by adverts but its appalling that the moderators/administrators would condone such actions.

The thread by reaper is NOT titled 'I'm an idiot, please forgive me for endangering life and our future as drone enthusiasts!'.

 

[DroningOn]

I saw this on the news last night, only thing this guy did wrong was to fly over an area congested with a LOT of traffic (2 freeways converge at that point) and there were a LOT of people enjoying the sights, and it was night (no night flying). He did check the venue's web site for drone restrictions, and 'B4 you fly' was clear as there are no airports close. But he should have realized flying at night over a heavily populated area was not smart, given that he was probably reported a dozen times.
Man Confused After Cal Expo Police Confiscate His Drone, Says He Hasn’t Been Charged

AND, they took his MAVIC!!

My comments are directed at this incident only.... and I only know what is included in this news report:

THIS is the kind of apparent local law enforcement abuse that disturbs me. From what I can see, IMO this guy did nothing illegal. He wasn't charged with a "Crime" because he didn't break any laws. A couple of local cops had no probable cause to confiscate his PERSONAL property let alone detain him. There is no such thing as "CalExpo airspace". It doesnt exist no matter how much they want to believe it. State and local governments all around the United States are instituting laws to regulate "Drone" use and claim jurisdiction of "Airspace" but they are all invalid thus nobody is being charged with such crimes. It is long established legal precedent that regulation of airspace is the sole domain of the Federal Government. Wishing (or passing laws) by local municipalities that this isn't the case doesn't make it so. An arrest, indictment and conviction test case is needed or specific Department of Transportation (FAA) regulation(s) (not "Guidelines") need to be established ASAP to put this nonsense to rest once and for all. That's the way it works in this country.

 

[Grey Wolf]

Okay so I posted a stark warning and then had my posts deleted by admin, surely this is now condoning the actions of a dangerous pilot and in turn telling all members that in fact 'DronePilots' condones these actions too. I understand this is a commercial site sponsored by adverts but its appalling that the moderators/administrators would condone such actions.

The thread by reaper is NOT titled 'I'm an idiot, please forgive me for endangering life and our future as drone enthusiasts!'.

Thank you for your post. My posts referring to him were also deleted but I did get a nice note privately from the admin person understanding my situation. However, the admin did put up an announcement for all to follow FAA or Ministry of Transport rules governing safety. So I assume the message got to Reaper and he will think twice about flying in cities next time, especially if he has no insurance. He would be held accountable for life if his drone killed somebody.

 

[Grey Wolf]

There are simply no words, I shudder at the stupidly displayed, absolutely amazing that this person lived to his current age.

I agree wholeheartedly!

 

[UAV Man]

Thank you for your post. My posts referring to him were also deleted but I did get a nice note privately from the admin person understanding my situation. However, the admin did put up an announcement for all to follow FAA or Ministry of Transport rules governing safety. So I assume the message got to Reaper and he will think twice about flying in cities next time, especially if he has no insurance. He would be held accountable for life if his drone killed somebody.

We know he won't, he's one of these obsessed with filming a certain thing... Like the morons trying to film the 'statue of liberty' or those over intersections...

On a positive note if people did get to see our and other posts saying what a moron they may, just may think twice.

 

[F6Rider]

My comments are directed at this incident only.... and I only know what is included in this news report:

THIS is the kind of apparent local law enforcement abuse that disturbs me. From what I can see, IMO this guy did nothing illegal. He wasn't charged with a "Crime" because he didn't break any laws. A couple of local cops had no probable cause to confiscate his PERSONAL property let alone detain him. There is no such thing as "CalExpo airspace". It doesnt exist no matter how much they want to believe it. State and local governments all around the United States are instituting laws to regulate "Drone" use and claim jurisdiction of "Airspace" but they are all invalid thus nobody is being charged with such crimes. It is long established legal precedent that regulation of airspace is the sole domain of the Federal Government. Wishing (or passing laws) by local municipalities that this isn't the case doesn't make it so. An arrest, indictment and conviction test case is needed or specific Department of Transportation (FAA) regulation(s) (not "Guidelines") need to be established ASAP to put this nonsense to rest once and for all. That's the way it works in this country.

They were not even 'Police', more like rent a cop's as they only have jurisdiction on CalExpo property, and I also pointed out the 'CalExpo Airspace' assumption to my wife, no such thing. I would have made him/her quote me the relevant law I was breaking. These guy's are not 'cops', they are basically security guards.

 

[dam]

This is the best part .. FAA isnt concerned over trivial issues... they have much bigger fish to fry !!!

Love how the drone police get their hopes up high... you all think your above the law (FAA) and they are idiots !!! No they are not.. they are a rational bunch of professionals who would like to get on with their jobs without being harassed by some busy nobodys.... Sheesh... again more rubbish.. I think the admin should close this topic.

 

[DroningOn]

They were not even 'Police', more like rent a cop's as they only have jurisdiction on CalExpo property, and I also pointed out the 'CalExpo Airspace' assumption to my wife, no such thing. I would have made him/her quote me the relevant law I was breaking. These guy's are not 'cops', they are basically security guards.

Sadly they probably are sworn "police". Another example of the post 9/11 proliferation of redundant police agencies in the name of "homeland security". Even the local school district police run around town all decked out like badass tactical swat teams. Thankfully they've started to disband/shrink some of these redundant departments here in Vegas.

 

[m0j0]

I keep hearing this argument that birdstrikes are somehow more dangerous, or that harm from a bit of plastic toy is somehow impossible.

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Be responsible.

I will be nice and say. I appreciate the time you spent in your well crafted response. But ... you didn't answer my question. How many verified drone strike has there been. That resulted in a manned aircraft crash or the death of someone on the ground.. In the entire world how many? That's it.. Taking every drone flying into account I think I may have heard of one incident..in the world. I realize exactly what my responsibility is flying mine that's not the point of my post so save the sermon.. I believe in physics.. probabilities and real danger. There was a guy who made some bad choices on this board. He reported his story here and everyone banged on him for flying outside of VLOS. I read the story and made a few comments on how he could find his bird... nobody even picked up on the most dangerous thing he did that day. One that was 100,000 times more likely to really injure or kill someone..

He said he was driving with his TX out the window looking for his bird. Not a peep!! Nothing, nobody said a thing. The folks on here were commenting about him flying 7000 feet down range outside of VLOS. Are you kidding me. He said he was driving down a populated street with his transmitter out of the car window looking up for his bird.. 3000 pound car.. distracted driving.. far more dangerous than plastic Mavic. So I understand the danger.. I understand the problems caused by not obeying the rules but .. let's get a little perspective here and use a little common sense on both sides of the "rules arguement."

 

[m0j0]

Reaper Two Seven is one of them.
Check his post.
I understand he used poor judgment, which, hopefully he will learn from, but more importantly, I am disgusted at the negative feedback I received.
We are in this together and if we don't curtail stupidity, then the industry will be highly regulated more than it is now.
As it stands now, Reaper's Mavic is still unaccounted for and we don't even know if it fell and potentially hit someone. Did the guy have insurance? I highly doubt it.
All we need is to have a drone fatality due to negligence and that will be the end of Drones.

He found it. On the rooftop of a building. No babies killed or injured by the Mavic. Camera was broken though.

 

[m0j0]

Absolutely ludicrous! Sends it (purposely) TOWARDS a city centre, way beyond LOS (7200 feet!), 'forgets' to set RTH altitude above nearby buildings, turns OFF obstacle avoidance, loses signal and tries to ascend then...crashes. But he doesn't know where, onto what (or whom), seems totally ignorant of ANY of the rules governing us all yet has a mass of experience. Then, to add to the farce, he gets a friend to send a P3 up (with some type of coat hanger 'hook' attached), who also flies behind a tall building, loses signal and, because HE also forgot to set RTH to a safe altitude, manages to crash as well! I fear for our 'hobby' whilst this sort of idiotic (and dangerous) behaviour carries on.


Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots

He paid for it with a lost bird, he found it though. I have said before folks actually need to put this in perspective. His flight was ill advised .. but statistically not dangerous. Just isn't statistically dangerous. His distracted driving, holding TX out the window while looking at the tx and searching for the bird in the air.., that was actually more likely to be an issue than the flights. Not saying his driving was reckless I'm saying it is as safe as texting and driving.. which is exponentially more dangerous than flying over a building.

 

[HeavensAbove]

I will be nice and say. I appreciate the time you spent in your well crafted response. But ... you didn't answer my question. How many verified drone strike has there been. That resulted in a manned aircraft crash or the death of someone on the ground.. In the entire world how many? That's it.. Taking every drone flying into account I think I may have heard of one incident..in the world. I realize exactly what my responsibility is flying mine that's not the point of my post so save the sermon.. I believe in physics.. probabilities and real danger. There was a guy who made some bad choices on this board. He reported his story here and everyone banged on him for flying outside of VLOS. I read the story and made a few comments on how he could find his bird... nobody even picked up on the most dangerous thing he did that day. One that was 100,000 times more likely to really injure or kill someone..

He said he was driving with his TX out the window looking for his bird. Not a peep!! Nothing, nobody said a thing. The folks on here were commenting about him flying 7000 feet down range outside of VLOS. Are you kidding me. He said he was driving down a populated street with his transmitter out of the car window looking up for his bird.. 3000 pound car.. distracted driving.. far more dangerous than plastic Mavic. So I understand the danger.. I understand the problems caused by not obeying the rules but .. let's get a little perspective here and use a little common sense on both sides of the "rules arguement."

Just because something hasn't yet happened, doesn't make it impossible. Perspective is realisation that it only needs it to happen once for punitive measures to be taken against drone flying as a hobby. The more idiots who pick up a UAV remote, the higher the risk.

Call a drone a plastic toy if you want, but even if it is hovering still in the sky, a collision with an aircraft travelling at high velocity will result in the massive dissipation of kinetic energy. That may result in it bouncing off, but you are speculating that the airframe of the plane will be unaffected. So I will turn the argument around.

Where is your test data to prove that a small hobbyist drone CANNOT bring down an aeroplane?


Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots

 

[slr001]

I will be nice and say. I appreciate the time you spent in your well crafted response. But ... you didn't answer my question. How many verified drone strike has there been. That resulted in a manned aircraft crash or the death of someone on the ground.. In the entire world how many? That's it.. Taking every drone flying into account I think I may have heard of one incident..in the world. I realize exactly what my responsibility is flying mine that's not the point of my post so save the sermon.. I believe in physics.. probabilities and real danger. There was a guy who made some bad choices on this board. He reported his story here and everyone banged on him for flying outside of VLOS. I read the story and made a few comments on how he could find his bird... nobody even picked up on the most dangerous thing he did that day. One that was 100,000 times more likely to really injure or kill someone..

He said he was driving with his TX out the window looking for his bird. Not a peep!! Nothing, nobody said a thing. The folks on here were commenting about him flying 7000 feet down range outside of VLOS. Are you kidding me. He said he was driving down a populated street with his transmitter out of the car window looking up for his bird.. 3000 pound car.. distracted driving.. far more dangerous than plastic Mavic. So I understand the danger.. I understand the problems caused by not obeying the rules but .. let's get a little perspective here and use a little common sense on both sides of the "rules arguement."

m0j0, sorry for hijacking your post, just wanted to agree with and add to it.

Very well said... Driving while eating a sandwich, putting on makeup, texting, etc... Is far more likely to cause injury and/or damage to property than flying a Mavic over a park with some people in it.

Any Mavic sucked into a jet engine is just a ludicrous thought. Just exactly how is that going to happen. Last I checked there were no jets flying at 400 ft over my local park, or city.

Flying a Mavic over a highway at rush hour? Probably not a good idea. But as bolded above, Probabilities. How often do they fall out of the air, when they do how often are the over people, when they fall, and are over people how often do they hit those people?

Please link me to plane strike, people strike, vehicle strike articles. If there are so MANY idiots out there, and un educated hobbiest out there, and Youtube Warriors out there, there must be plenty of examples of the death and destruction they have caused.

 

[halley]

It's not about statistics, it's about regulation. The less we self-police, the more the government will do it for us. How many hijackers in America since 9/11? If none, will they remove the rape-i-scan machines in the airports? Hell no, they are hiring more flunkies every year to fondle our luggage.