Drone Pilot Pleads Guilty to Crashing into Super Scooper.

[The Droning Company]

Drone Pilot Pleads Guilty to Crashing into Super Scooper

 

[GadgetGuy]

Press Conference:

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

 

[GadgetGuy]

Plea Agreement:

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/akemann-plea-agreement.pdf

 

[GadgetGuy]

Mini 3 Pro flown from a parking garage roof 1.5 miles away.

"Pilot was Peter Akemann and is not merely a drone hobbyist who made a very bad decision. He is also the former president and chief technology officer of Skydance Interactive, a video-game developer. He is also the co-founder of Treyarch studios, which produced the Call of Duty and Spider-Man games."

 

[Starz]

He is also the co-founder

So, the wallet part probably isn’t an issue.

 

[Cafguy]

So, the wallet part probably isn’t an issue.

Thats a shame. I wonder what the damages will actually come too tho? You know the Government they bill you, then bill you for billing you and so on.

 

[tstr14]

Thats a shame. I wonder what the damages will actually come too tho? You know the Government they bill you, then bill you for billing you and so on.

One story reported damages at $65k, so it's not exactly chicken feed.

 

[Starz]

damages at $65k

And then there is the cost of the Grey Suits. (Which could be tax deductible)

 

[Droning on and on...]

And then there is the cost of the Grey Suits. (Which could be tax deductible)

I understand the cost of the Egyptian Special Intel interrogators they used runs around $135k, so there's that.

 

[RedBaron2]

"After Akemann's drone, which police claim was operating in restricted area on January 9, collided with a Super Scooper, he was charged with unsafe operation of an unmanned aircraft.
According to Davis, there was no proof Akemann caused the incident on purpose.
"However operating drones in a restricted area could be disastrous," Davis said."
150 hours of community service, possibly additional unnamed penalties/costs. Seems low for many reasons.

 

[mavic3usa]

Press Conference:

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

Authorities said it several times the rogue pilot was "curious" which speaks to intent. Not clicks and likes or money or any other silly reason.

Authorities also said "If you fly, we cannot" and /s we never will because we just don't have what it takes to protect ourselves from the rogue drone pilots out there.

I understand the prosecution message and letting everyone know we will find you if you violate the law and we won't stop looking. How that resonates with the community I cannot comment on how they come across with their skills and ability to track you down but a flurry and series of plea bargains says a lot.

 

[GadgetGuy]

This is an interesting aspect not previously published.
He relied upon GEO, and it failed him!
Perhaps that is why DJI abandoned GEO just 4 days later!

"He accepts responsibility for his grave error in judgment, and is cooperating with the government in effort to make amends," the statement reads. "There are a number of mitigating factors that will come to light during the court proceedings including Mr Akemann's reliance on the DJI Drone's geo fencing safeguard feature and the failure of that feature."

Drone operator who damaged LA firefighting plane was Peter Akemann, who co-founded Treyarch back in the '90s

Akemann is 'deeply sorry' and will plead guilty to a misdemeanor offense after his drone collided with an aircraft fighting the Palisades Fire in January.

www.pcgamer.com

 

[GadgetGuy]

So, the wallet part probably isn’t an issue.

He can definitely afford to make restitution for the damage caused to the Canadian Superscooper. However, there could also be civil lawsuits filed by homeowners whose homes might have been saved by the Superscooper deployment during the 5 days it had to be taken out of service during the repairs. That might even bankrupt even him, if they can prove their case.

"Akemann co-founded Treyarch in 1996, and in 2001 the studio was purchased by Activision, which morphed it into a Call of Duty house. Akemann then co-founded The Workshop, which supported development of Gears of War 4, XCOM 2, and a few other major games. That studio became Skydance Interactive after being acquired by Skydance Media, and Akemann was president of the division for a time."

 

[mavic3usa]

He can definitely afford to make restitution for the damage caused to the Canadian Superscooper. However, there could also be civil lawsuits filed by homeowners whose homes might have been saved by the Superscooper deployment during the 5 days it had to be taken out of service during the repairs. That might even bankrupt even him, if they can prove their case.

"Akemann co-founded Treyarch in 1996, and in 2001 the studio was purchased by Activision, which morphed it into a Call of Duty house. Akemann then co-founded The Workshop, which supported development of Gears of War 4, XCOM 2, and a few other major games. That studio became Skydance Interactive after being acquired by Skydance Media, and Akemann was president of the division for a time."

residents are not angry at the lone drone flyer who grounded some of their equipment for 6 days, they are angry at others. their lawsuits won't go wasted.

I gotta say im pretty shocked. all that preventable devastation and no one wants to address the elephant in the room. anyone who thinks all the carnage and all the evil that descended on the region was caused by a single careless (reckless) intentional acts that took out loaner equipment.....can we at least care about what happened to those folks? I know this is a drone forum and we like to talk down on the drone community but does anyone have a bad word to say about the entire event or do we just don't give a crap as long as it doesn't have anything to do with drones.

 

[Droning on and on...]

This is an interesting aspect not previously published.
He relied upon GEO, and it failed him!
Perhaps that is why DJI abandoned GEO just 4 days later!

Careless moron. Even the TRUST microgauntlet is absolutely clear about restricted airspace, how to check it, and the regulatory requirement to do so.

Relying on the crutch of DJI GEO is not an allowance in the regs.

Classic drooling idiot drone moron. This guy is in a class of user we all know, most have encountered at the park or somewhere, and don't qualify as either a recreational or professional sUAV "pilot".

Grabbing a Mini 3 Pro as an impulse buy in the checkout line at at the local weed dispensary doesn't make you a pilot.

 

[Droning on and on...]

He can definitely afford to make restitution for the damage caused to the Canadian Superscooper. However, there could also be civil lawsuits filed by homeowners whose homes might have been saved by the Superscooper deployment during the 5 days it had to be taken out of service during the repairs. That might even bankrupt even him, if they can prove their case.

Impossible case to prove.

If speculation is allowed by the plaintiff, it's allowed by the defendant. Who can offer all sorts of speculative reasons that exact tanker could have been grounded for other reasons.

The only case that might have a chance would be a home the tanker was beginning a release on top of right when the collision took place, aborting the release.

That's not what happened.

 

[VegasFlyer]

One thing not mentioned here is the absence of RID isn't going to save you. Any flyer can be found if the event is sufficiently egregious. Additionally, the drone did not fly into the plane. Gotta love the media for that phrasing. I'm not buying the premise that Akeman was ignorant of the rules regarding flying near an emergency. I think he knew exactly what he was doing and believed he could get away with it. Do we know the altitude of the drone? I haven't gone through all of the articles.

 

[mavic3usa]

One thing not mentioned here is the absence of RID isn't going to save you. Any flyer can be found if the event is sufficiently egregious. Additionally, the drone did not fly into the plane. Gotta love the media for that phrasing. I'm not buying the premise that Akeman was ignorant of the rules regarding flying near an emergency. I think he knew exactly what he was doing and believed he could get away with it. Do we know the altitude of the drone? I haven't gone through all of the articles.

Sorry I am only able to personally agree with you in part based on what little we know "for sure" and for whatever hasn't been revealed. For sure, RID isn't going to save you from getting caught. We know that years ago, plenty of drone pilots were tracked down for their illegal activities and even recently that has been the case. This isn't going to be mentioned (by the FAA) because it would point to the failure of RID and honestly, they don't need to bring it up. "We will find you!" is all they need to bellow. In my opinion, the absence of RID (among other things) weakened the government case to where they had little choice but to offer a plea deal. IANAL but even I can rip into their case (absent of a confession which is what I believe they got) should they bring up RID in a courtroom. The FAA does NOT want to bring up RID; now is not a good time.

To be honest, I don't know what saved him. Some will say the FAA leniency and the fact they lean toward education rather than punishment with the appropriate restitution. I didn't "study" the case in detail but it really doesn't sound like to me the pilot sought to "get away with it" any more than a car driver who bumps a pedestrian intends to do harm. Not saying it was an unfortunate accident but I agree with the government case interpretation that it might be somewhere in between. And I say that because if the FAA thought for even a second this is a big, bad criminal with total disregard for the law (and I know that's the prevalent sentiment for most drone community members except for the tiniest of minuscule violation), why would they excuse it with a slap on the wrist?

Yes for sure he flew his drone in a location where he likely knew he wasn't supposed to fly and yes he probably thought he could get away it like he didn't the 2 times earlier that week he flew but we are all PICs, everything we do can be considered deliberate and not on accident. Malicious with ill intent, unlikely. Careless and reckless, sure.

 

[VegasFlyer]

Sorry I am only able to personally agree with you in part based on what little we know "for sure" and for whatever hasn't been revealed. For sure, RID isn't going to save you from getting caught. We know that years ago, plenty of drone pilots were tracked down for their illegal activities and even recently that has been the case. This isn't going to be mentioned (by the FAA) because it would point to the failure of RID and honestly, they don't need to bring it up. "We will find you!" is all they need to bellow. In my opinion, the absence of RID (among other things) weakened the government case to where they had little choice but to offer a plea deal. IANAL but even I can rip into their case (absent of a confession which is what I believe they got) should they bring up RID in a courtroom. The FAA does NOT want to bring up RID; now is not a good time.

To be honest, I don't know what saved him. Some will say the FAA leniency and the fact they lean toward education rather than punishment with the appropriate restitution. I didn't "study" the case in detail but it really doesn't sound like to me the pilot sought to "get away with it" any more than a car driver who bumps a pedestrian intends to do harm. Not saying it was an unfortunate accident but I agree with the government case interpretation that it might be somewhere in between. And I say that because if the FAA thought for even a second this is a big, bad criminal with total disregard for the law (and I know that's the prevalent sentiment for most drone community members except for the tiniest of minuscule violation), why would they excuse it with a slap on the wrist?

Yes for sure he flew his drone in a location where he likely knew he wasn't supposed to fly and yes he probably thought he could get away it like he didn't the 2 times earlier that week he flew but we are all PICs, everything we do can be considered deliberate and not on accident. Malicious with ill intent, unlikely. Careless and reckless, sure.

I do not believe there was any malicious intent on Akemann's part, and I don't know what saved him. His standing and deep pockets may have held some sway. Short of imprisonment, which, I believe, is a punishment the FAA cannot levy, I wonder what might have happened to a reckless hobbyist? Nevertheless, a message needed to be sent (and rightly so), and Akemann could afford to pay. Getting those fires put out was priority number one, and I don't think dragging this out in court or the media would have been in anyone's best interest. Both parties might have felt that way, hence the confession and fine. It would have only served as an unnecessary distraction from the more pressing issue.

 

[mavic3usa]

^not disagreeing with you except for the part that sending him to prison will send it message to the drone flying community. it won't. it absolutely will not. harsh prison sentences *never* deter crime and only impact the community when the sentences becomes cruel and unusual or starts to heavily impose on the otherwise innocent law-abiding citizen. when hobbyists start going to jail week (since there are weekly, if not more frequent tfr violations) then yes, there's going to be a problem. however, all it will do is cause the alleged criminals going forward to push back and make it even harder for the government to gain compliance and enforce their laws, in fact, they may have to give up on some of those "laws" should they decide to start sending people to prison when there is no one hurt or killed (directly). nobody legit in the drone community is going to confess to jail time; flying a drone is not a crime.

but of course a judge apparently does have the option to impose jail time and if he does despite the spirit of the plea agreement; makes me skeptical. I just don't see where attaching a lifetime felony record in federal prison and serving time in federal prison helps any of us. I would much rather see this guy spend a month in the trenches fighting the fires as part of his community service. I honestly don't believe the regular hobbyist would have a different legal fate than this guy (read: a slap on the wrist; pretty feckless).