Near miss with helicopter at South Hollywood beach, Florida.

[Zeawop]

It might be covered with non skid which is non reflective unlike the other surfaces and may give that illusion

Sorry, I am not convinced

 

[sar104]

Sorry, I am not convinced

View attachment 44058View attachment 44058 View attachment 44058

Not convinced of what? Did you watch the video? You think someone went through the video, frame by frame, badly erasing a single part of the helicopter?

 

[Weaponized]

Yeah I had initially seen that and that was my initial thought as well but we're not exactly dealing with 1st hand information here either. I don't know if the guy had air space authorization or ATC clearance. Not that that would absolve him but I do know this… I would never operate UAS the way that guy did. I used to be one of those guys doing a fly over of the beach after a long mission. We always had clearance to do it and at the time we didn't have to worry about drones. Things have definitely changed.

If you watch the entire video in the OP, it is determined that he was also in controlled airspace.
So, no question who is at fault.

 

[Weaponized]

Sorry, I am not convinced

View attachment 44058

It's just a theory. I can't really explain it other than that. Maybe it's the Russians

 

[Zeawop]

Not convinced of what? Did you watch the video? You think someone went through the video, frame by frame, badly erasing a single part of the helicopter?

Sure I watched the video, frame by frame and each has been erased

View attachment upload_2018-8-23_2-20-44.jpeg

 

[Weaponized]

Another thought about the video being fake...why? I don't think a catastrophic incident with a drone is a matter of "if". It's a matter of "when".

The operator faking it just to look cool is quite dumb and will be easily found out through analysis.

Some other entity faking it to try and make drones look more dangerous than they really are is a complete waste of time. An accident will eventually happen all by itself.

There's not a whole lot that would make sense in faking such a video.

 

[sar104]

If you watch the entire video in the OP, it is determined that he was also in controlled airspace.
So, no question who is at fault.

Actually it's easy to identify the location exactly enough from Google Earth imagery to show that it was probably (just) Class G airspace:



That location (red x) is under 1200 ft Class C airspace and appears to be 5.2 NM from FLL.

If he was flying Part 107 then he was okay for location, but he was a little above 400 ft AGL - the tall building directly opposite is exactly the height of the drone and the top is 445 ft.

If he was flying Part 101 then he was okay in terms of location (not even needing airport notification unless I've missed a heliport) but above the recommended 400 ft ceiling.

 

[sar104]

Sure I watched the video, frame by frame and each has been erased

View attachment 44059

That's both pointless and ridiculous. It's just a compression artifact.

 

[sar104]

I'm referring to who's at fault.

Then agreed.

 

[Weaponized]

Actually it's easy to identify the location exactly enough from Google Earth imagery to show that it was probably (just) Class G airspace:

View attachment 44060

That location (red x) is under 1200 ft Class C airspace and appears to be 5.2 NM from FLL.

If he was flying Part 107 then he was okay for location, but he was a little above 400 ft AGL - the tall building directly opposite is exactly the height of the drone and the top is 445 ft.

If he was flying Part 101 then he was okay in terms of location (not even needing airport notification unless I've missed a heliport) but above the recommended 400 ft ceiling.

I think if he was flying part 107 he doesn't know his air space very well. In the context that I'm just a casual observer in this and I can readily tell that this is a dangerous place to fly a drone.

 

[sar104]

I think if he was flying part 107 he doesn't know his air space very well. In the context that I'm just a casual observer in this and I can readily tell that this is a dangerous place to fly a drone.

Yes - different question. It's rather obviously a risky place to fly even if it is Class G - there is generally a lot of low-level traffic along these kinds of coastal locations.

 

[Zeawop]

That's both pointless and ridiculous. It's just a compression artifact.

How to explain to meet a compression artifact only and exactly at the place of the right footboard, on each frame of the video and while the helico is moving.
It's clear the photographs have been retouched but why and who ???

 

[ac0j]

How to explain to meet a compression artifact only and exactly at the place of the right footboard, on each frame of the video and while the helico is moving.
It's clear the photographs have been retouched but why and who ???

LOL! really man? The right foot board is the deciding factor for you? It is obviously there, it is too small to have any markings they would want to hide, so whats the big deal? If they were going to edit every single frame just to blur the foot board, what would be the motive? If they wanted to edit the photo, they could have put a reflection of the drone on the Helo's windscreen a lot easier the that.

 

[sar104]

How to explain to meet a compression artifact only and exactly at the place of the right footboard, on each frame of the video and while the helico is moving.
It's clear the photographs have been retouched but why and who ???

No - it's not remotely clear that anything has been retouched. There are compression artifacts all over every frame of that video. The lack of contrast between that structure and the background, combined with the low bit-rate of the MP video, has simply washed it out. But you are obviously determined to stick with your theory, even if it makes absolutely no sense.

 

[sar104]

LOL! really man? The right foot board is the deciding factor for you? It is obviously there, it is too small to have any markings they would want to hide, so whats the big deal? If they were going to edit every single frame just to blur the foot board, what would be the motive? If they wanted to edit the photo, they could have put a reflection of the drone on the Helo's windscreen a lot easier the that.

Exactly - it seems quite incredible that we are even having this discussion.

 

[Weaponized]

Exactly - it seems quite incredible that we are even having this discussion.

It got me to read the Wikipedia definition of compression artifacts so it wasn't a complete waste. If that step was in fact covered with non skid that might explain why it was so easily washed out.

 

[CaveDrone]

Show me a pilot in that cockpit

Upon a closer look, I can see and arm and hand on the right side of the picture.

 

[lmel2005]

What's the point of all this over analysis and over investigation, each time a similar "near something" video is posted?

Ok, some drone users, take some risks for themselves to be in trouble, and (mainly) putting in danger the safety of other people.

And ok, "we must be careful".

But 150 and 300 posts every time, to say what? Is crime investigation the purpose of this site?

 

[ac0j]

What's the point of all this over analysis and over investigation, each time a similar "near something" video is posted?

But 150 and 300 posts every time, to say what? Is crime investigation the purpose of this site?

Yes. this is a discussion forum. Nice thing is, we dont make you read anything.

 

[sar104]

What's the point of all this over analysis and over investigation, each time a similar "near something" video is posted?

Ok, some drone users, take some risks for themselves to be in trouble, and (mainly) putting in danger the safety of other people.

And ok, "we must be careful".

But 150 and 300 posts every time, to say what? Is crime investigation the purpose of this site?

Yes. this is a discussion forum. Nice thing is, we dont make you read anything.

Agreed - if you are not interested then find a different thread, or a different forum. But quit whining about others discussing subjects that they may find interesting or relevant.