It's an Autel. Not likely a legit flight but we'll find out soon. C'mon FAA, get on this:
Last edited:
UNBELIEVABLE: Drone Spotted Near Flight Path at San Diego International Airport!
- Thread starter mavic3usa
- Start date
Wow, just wow!!!
I guess its a newer Evo 2??
It most likely has Remote ID so hopefully the pilot was tracked and can be found and cracked.
I guess its a newer Evo 2??
It most likely has Remote ID so hopefully the pilot was tracked and can be found and cracked.
Absolutely no shortage of stupidity in humanity. The operator may be caught but likely the punishment will not be substantial enough to prevent or deter these types of actions from others.
a2tomm
Well-Known Member
This is the type of ******* that gives responsable drone pilots a bad name
Totally irresponsible and flagrantly demonstrating disregard and disrespect for the law.
Yeah, they should go to jail. They’re gonna ruin it for everybody.
The way the person was flying was as if they had a job flying a lot or property or lot. But there is NO WAY it was legal. That type of crap causes us all to get a bad name. If the people need photos from the air, Google Earth has them…SMH !!!
Not only what you just posted, but most importantly, the remote pilot had much disregard for Pilot and Passenger Safety .
Nothing to worry about really, it was way lower than the plane would ever go.
The drone operator most likley knew where the plane would land and thats why he newer flied higher.
When i got my first drone like 5 years ago, i lived half a mile from the airport and it was an open field close to it, so i used to traind with the drone there for like 2 weeks until some dude came up to me and said he called the police on me for flying the drone.
For sure i had controll over where and when the planes would fly and i never was higher than like 60 ft at most.
No way a plane would be able to hit my drone at that altitude.
You are clearly overreacting on this video.
The drone operator most likley knew where the plane would land and thats why he newer flied higher.
When i got my first drone like 5 years ago, i lived half a mile from the airport and it was an open field close to it, so i used to traind with the drone there for like 2 weeks until some dude came up to me and said he called the police on me for flying the drone.
For sure i had controll over where and when the planes would fly and i never was higher than like 60 ft at most.
No way a plane would be able to hit my drone at that altitude.
You are clearly overreacting on this video.
Remote ID sends the drones and pilots location. My local airport uses a more advanced method to track drones but anyone can download an app for free and track remote id enabled drones. Also many police agencies have capabilities like my local airport and in NJ, the state police always have a system up and running in various areas (NJ is flat and these systems pick up signals for very long distances). These systems save all data and can be used for retro enforcement. Various non law enforcement companies also have networks up and running and sell this service or use it for research and for other use.
It cannot be turned off if standard, and older drones may not have it as well as some older drones have add-on modules that don't have to be used if the RPIC chooses.
It cannot be turned off if standard, and older drones may not have it as well as some older drones have add-on modules that don't have to be used if the RPIC chooses.
If you build your drone and don't put Remote ID on it then Remote ID systems will not be able to track it.
But high end systems track the radio frequencies given off from the drone. They won't get the detailed information like Remote ID and DJI Aeroscope (For DJI products), but will still be able to track a drone.
There are other components to counter uas such as radar and acoustic as well. For the most part these are expensive systems that would need an entity with money to be able to afford them.
Counter UAS using Remote ID is low cost and even free. Remote ID allows for anyone to download a free app and track drones that are close. If you buy a dedicated Remote ID system the price goes up depending on the hardware used.
DJI Aeroscope is a bit pricier.
But high end systems track the radio frequencies given off from the drone. They won't get the detailed information like Remote ID and DJI Aeroscope (For DJI products), but will still be able to track a drone.
There are other components to counter uas such as radar and acoustic as well. For the most part these are expensive systems that would need an entity with money to be able to afford them.
Counter UAS using Remote ID is low cost and even free. Remote ID allows for anyone to download a free app and track drones that are close. If you buy a dedicated Remote ID system the price goes up depending on the hardware used.
DJI Aeroscope is a bit pricier.
Would be nice to know the follow up story rather than just going with a rogue pilot out of control. In the original video, a few comments....
Sounds like the tower was unaware:
Sounds like the tower was unaware:
It is fully possible that this could of been a legit flight.
We had an exercise for an airplane crash at an active Class C airport. We had an Air Space Authorization to fly there and were on an actual closed runway. Planes took off and landed the whole time on the active runway. We were at times 1400 feet away from the active runway and were able to operate up to 250 ft AGL.
We had to keep in contact with ATC by phone and monitor the CT frequency. We were never mentioned on the CT frequency.
Also at this same airport up until recently there was an UOA (Unmanned Aircraft Operations Aea) issued by NOTAM for drone research. It was within 2000 feet of the runways and was there for a year. Someone I went to school with worked there and the UAO was always on display on 1800 Brief and Skyvector.
It is always possible that this could of been legit, but for some reason I think this one may not be, but I could be totally off base with my gut feeling.
We had an exercise for an airplane crash at an active Class C airport. We had an Air Space Authorization to fly there and were on an actual closed runway. Planes took off and landed the whole time on the active runway. We were at times 1400 feet away from the active runway and were able to operate up to 250 ft AGL.
We had to keep in contact with ATC by phone and monitor the CT frequency. We were never mentioned on the CT frequency.
Also at this same airport up until recently there was an UOA (Unmanned Aircraft Operations Aea) issued by NOTAM for drone research. It was within 2000 feet of the runways and was there for a year. Someone I went to school with worked there and the UAO was always on display on 1800 Brief and Skyvector.
It is always possible that this could of been legit, but for some reason I think this one may not be, but I could be totally off base with my gut feeling.
Noone is overreacting to anything.
If you do not have permission to fly literally at an airport you should not. If you do, you should be held accountable.
It does not matter if you in your example or the drone in the video had full control, that isn't the point. Airports are filled with electromagnetic sources which could affect your controller to drone signal making you lose control of your drone.
Drone pilots are flying in air space shared with manned aviation and drones can severely damage planes and helicopters.
If I saw you operating close to an airport I would tell you the hazards and if you didn't land, I would call the police on you too.
If you are going to get into drones as a hobby or business, please do so in an adult manner and please fly compliantly and be a professional.
Similar threads
- Deleted member 8_25_2025a
- General Discussions 2
