I'm surprised, given your background, that you are unaware of the demonstrated weaponization of consumer drones. Countering them is an active research area, both in the public and private sectors. How long ago did you retire?
Whoops! Looks like I have unleashed a torrent of negativity. Sorry for that. When an article about easily purchased, off the shelf consumer drones appears on the front page of a major countrywide newspaper, it just gives me the creeps that this riles up the general public. I am only trying to make my beloved drone community aware of this negative press, and again, to fly responsibly.
This is a tall tale to increase funding , its shameful that the Military cannot beat a hobby drone and even more shameful for putting out the idea to everyone . Before this there were kites, Balloons, that could do the same thing,
I am pretty sure I read an article about a hunter being successfully prosecuted
It's a long way from a "demonstration" to something actually useful. Some things that look obvious on the surface are less useful in practice. Let's just consider that the cheap consumer drones mentioned in the article have limited payload, limited range and require LOS for accurate targeting. In most cases, an RPG would be much more effective under the same conditions.
You misunderstand my use of "demonstrated". I don't mean proof of principle - I mean they have been used in that way and are actively being developed.
Very true, but not in this case.
No. With even a Mavic-sized drone you can send a payload of around 1 lb many miles via autonomous flight and deliver it to a location with an accuracy of a few meters - even better if WAAS is available. For a soft target that's far more effective than an RPG. And it's only a relatively small step up to increasing payload to tens of lbs with off-the-shelf technology.
A fallacious argument. The fact that we research a range of threats, some of which don't amount to anything, does not imply that all threats that we research fall into that category. This one is real, which is why numerous agencies are working on countermeasures. That's a simple fact, not any kind of "press hype".
I know I’m giving the general public way more benefit of the doubt than they deserve, but hopefully they will understand the difference between a bad actor who would weaponize a drone and hobbyists and professionals who use them for their intended purpose. Automobiles are used in the commission of crimes all the time, but nobody thinks that all cars are bad and that all drivers harbor evil intent. Whatever the case, I don’t think that this article will do much to sway someone who doesn’t have a negative view of drones into now thinking negatively of them. Sure, those who already have a negative view of drones will use this as another “example” of why they’re bad, but there’s still no net change to public perception. You either read an article like this and think it’s a shame that there are bad apples among a much larger group of safe, responsible drone pilots, or you use it to reinforce what you already believe.
It's nice that you were to achieve a convert however the majority of the anties that I encounter have no intention of listening. They have an agenda to be right much like Don Quixote clones out to spear themselves a windmill. Myopic little freaks on a mission. Programmed and brain dead. I find it easier to convert animals as they will become accustomed to drones in time finding they pose no threat obviously they are more adept to independent thought.
I'd reconsider flying in a shocker field, drones and shocks don't go well together!
Yeah, and a bad attempt at humor on my part! Had this happen in a shocker field a few years back:
