As soon as I saw this report last night in the news I thought-“thanks idiot” another unsafe stupid individual who can afford to buy a drone and then drive another nail a little more into the certainty that there will be more legislation to limit our freedom to fly. Some mixed metaphors there but you know what I mean! Not sure anyone above has mentioned that this is under the direct westerly approach to LHR (no more than 4 miles to the threshold) and am sure it’s controlled anyway. It’s not made massive headlines here so hope that’s the end of media coverage-until they ID the perp.
Idiots at a football match
- Thread starter Sangria
- Start date
I agree in part, but at the same time better to be safe than sorry. Unless you are the pilot or the person that put the drone in the air, it would be very difficult to know if the drone has anything on it not stock. Blame the stoppage of play on the drone pilot not on the officials stopping play.
I wonder if broadcasters will start using drones at some point, rather than those blimp overhead shots or the "skycams" they run on wires over the field.
Many events already use UAS for LIVE Broadcasting. I know Nascar does and IIRC I saw a road race on TV that was using highspeed FPV drones to live stream last fall.
IIRC didn't they use a drone outside one of the football game venues? Out of the stadium where they fit the pre game and post game. NCAA championship game. Can't recall exact event but they had some banners in the sidewalk/ approach area.
They also use them on dirt oval racing.
YES I have; Even cut myself with an Autel evo 2's blades. That's worse than a mav2 pro. Cut my fingers to the bone, the blades broke and it crashed. Being and EMT, I was able to repair the lacerations myself. The biggest issue would be an eye injury. Maybe you all believe someone will get their carotid arteries or femorial arteries sliced open? Those would be the only lacerations that could possibly cause a life threatening injury, Otherwise, you just have a bloody minor mess. Yeah, it wasn't fun having two fingers sliced open. Repair was simple. Even the tendon sheath was cut on one finger, but the tendon was not cut. But then, not everyone's an EMT and has a laceration kit laying around.
Ya, but more importantly, did the mere sighting of a drone cause all the soccer players to fall to the ground rolling around pretending their legs were broken to draw penalties on the other team?
They've been using them in ETCR last year as well - this one is impressive around a narrow street circuit:
chiangmaicharlies
Well-Known Member
Have a picture of this tragic event.
Attachments
snowghost
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2017
- Messages
- 219
- Reactions
- 196
- Age
- 69
Minor mess? Tell that to the little kid in England that got her eye sliced and lost it to a drone prop.
A couple of things.
Yes, that sucked. And we all feel bad for the kid. But it was a racing drone, and it was being flown irresponsibly by the kid's uncle. That was 100% pilot error.
But that is the most extreme drone injury to date. And using the extreme to disqualify the norm isn't a very good strategy.
And lack of similar incidents (to date) are actually an extremely good argument for the safety of drones. There have been 10s (100s?) of millions of drone flights around the world. And it can be counted on your fingers the number of injuries sustained by non-participants. That's an incredibly safety record.
I'm not saying that justifies the actions of idiots, I'm just saying that perspective is everything when discussing drone safety. If we used that same logic with bicycles, we'd be laughed out of every bicycle safety discussion we joined.
And on this, I almost totally disagree.
It was incredibly stupid that play wasn't stopped in the Bengals issue. They knew it was there (thanks for Aerial Armor), yet never relayed that info to the crew on the field.
When an incursion like London or Cincinnati instances happen, the facility has to think of attendee safety first and foremost.
I've had this very discussion with our local FBI agent. I met him when I was legally flying at a Monday Night Football Preseason Broncos game, and we're been able to sit down afterwards and talk about these things.
Incursion issues are two fold with stadium security.
First is actual. It would be incredibly easy for someone to launch a drone carrying a dangerous cargo (fentanyl, C4, etc.) close enough that would prevent security forces from doing something about it. This is the single largest fear when it comes to what First Responders train for in the U.S.
The second is largely theoretical. When I flew the Broncos game, NFL security and the FBI came out to make sure I was flying safely and legally. Their second great fear is a panic situation where someone sees the drone and panics. That could quite possibly create a dangerous situation where people would get hurt in the ensuing melee. It can be argued that situation has been fostered by the paranoia spread in the media. But even if it has, it's a real issue.
So no, this has nothing to do with us being a "meek and fearful society." It's a real thing. Dismissing it as a societal issue does nothing to help the situation.
These types of activity are categorized three ways. These people are either clueless, careless, or criminal.
I think we all agree that no set of laws or regulations will stop the criminal mindset. By definition they are not going to stop just because a law tells them to. So they're not really a logical part of any discussion like this.
It's the careless and clueless that are the major issue. And I'd consider both the London issue and the Cincinnati issue careless of clueless. Although the Bengals guy said he knew it was illegal and didn't care. So he would also fall into the criminal category. And based on some of his other YT videos, this describes him to a "T".
Publicly stopping play in these instances serves two purposes. First, it creates even more publicity and makes even more people aware of the issues. Education the clueless and careless can help prevent more of this. Second, but even more important, it gives security the best chance to get the situation under control.
Just like snowghost, using extremes to illustrate the norm defeats the purpose of the argument. Without logic (in either argument), the presenter of that argument loses credibility.
Fentanyl?
What do they do spray aerosols and the fans can OD?
So we've gone from Goodyear blimp carrying an explosive payload to 2 pound drones carrying C4? What kind of payload can consumer drones carry? What kind of detonation mechanism would they have?
What do they do spray aerosols and the fans can OD?
So we've gone from Goodyear blimp carrying an explosive payload to 2 pound drones carrying C4? What kind of payload can consumer drones carry? What kind of detonation mechanism would they have?
A small balloon with 100g of fentanyl can be deadly. 2mg of it can kill. The method of delivery is quite simple.
Also quite simple to do.
I won't go into the details of how in either case, it's easy enough for someone to find on their own.
You were literally using the most extreme case to date. You can't get any more extreme.
I do agree here.
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
New Threads
-
-
Can a DJI Drone Purchased in China be Used in the USA- Started by Greatsign1
- Replies: 6
-
Help please!! Mavic isnt connecting to controller wont bind!!
- Started by Connorkingdomofmii
- Replies: 0
-
-
Forum statistics
