Fly high. Don't loiter. Think about area security when you launch and recover your drone.
Sent from my iPhone using MavicPilots
Sent from my iPhone using MavicPilots
Would someone please settle this..can a landowner shoot down our drones or not?
- Thread starter gixxerbill
- Start date
You have some preconceived facts that are incorrect. It only takes one pellet from bird shot to take out a single motor. A single motor taken out on a quad drone,....brings down your bird.. Thus another shot would not be necessary. Flying along at 40mph in almost all cases would not upset anyone. It is when you would be hovering and panning to get the shot you need that you would most likely upset a home owner/camper or hunter. And make no mistake about it,.....if you are hovering,....a single shot with a rifle to anyone whom has handled that gun for a while is not that difficult of a task.
Check the gun regs... it's not legal to discharge firearms in residential areas in lots of cities/states. I'm from Canada so that is most definitely against the law. It's dangerous and stupid. Bullets come down out of the sky and hit people and property at basically the same velocity they leave the gun. It shocks me that anyone would think it was ok to discharge a firearm inside a city. All that goes without saying the obvious that the drone is now falling out of the sky and represents a hazard in itself.
Sent from my iPhone using MavicPilots
Sent from my iPhone using MavicPilots
I had no preconceived incorrect facts in what I stated about either guns or shotguns whatsoever. I never even talked about how many pellets it takes to take out a rotor (so I don't know where that one even comes from), or discussed what the chances were if you were hovering like an idiot waiting for someone to take a bead on you with a rifle or handgun. In both cases I was speaking of properly-moving (at the regulated height via the FAA regs for the condition) drones, not hovering-over-people-drones like you are describing that would raise obvious invasion of privacy issues from the outset. The FAA regs prohibit the kind of flying around others that you are raising with your words and your reworded rendition of what I said, words which bear no relation to what I was even talking about, really. I assumed we were talking about flying legally and being in the right, not flying illegally and being in the wrong.
Check my words closely. I said few could hit "..a flying drone..." with a bullet, not a hovering one as you misstated and misquoted. (Perhaps even you could shoot at and hit a hovering drone. Who couldn't if they are even the slightest bit gun savvy?) And for the record, most of the videos I've seen of drone shootings are shotgun blast attacks, not bullets flying through the air, same goes with the accounts I've read about, too.
So I'll be sticking by my words.
Last edited:
Hovering is still flying. But as I stated earlier,....if you are just flying,,..say at 25 mph,..how could someone grab a shot gun and come out to blast you out of the sky. And then you quoted how quick birdshot spreads. It does that indeed. But I have spent a lot of time behind a gun. And have brought down many a fowl. Sometimes only breaking a wing because the shot had spread and only a few pellets hit the actual bird. Non the less,...the bird,....just as a drone would come down.
As far as flying,...I just cannot see anyone becoming upset over a fast flying drone. However,....a drone hovering over their property whether it be filming an animal,...or a scenic field or stream could bring up the ire of someone. Hunters upset because you are scaring their game away,.....etc. Why waste a shell,..or several as you suggest on something that has done nothing to myself,..and will be in and out of my sight in seconds,.....that I cannot eat. Not to mention,....have someone really upset with me for damaging their property. I would almost guarantee,...if your drone is being shot at,.... it's because you have hung around for a bit. (In most cases,..giving the shooter time to attain the weapon,....possibly load the weapon or remove gun locks if he is a responsible gun owner,....get back outside to line up a bead on the drone. So as with you,.....unless you are a gun owner who just spends his whole life waiting for a drone to fly by,....I'd say someone was hanging out and hovering to get shot at. So my original reply also stands.
Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots
As far as flying,...I just cannot see anyone becoming upset over a fast flying drone. However,....a drone hovering over their property whether it be filming an animal,...or a scenic field or stream could bring up the ire of someone. Hunters upset because you are scaring their game away,.....etc. Why waste a shell,..or several as you suggest on something that has done nothing to myself,..and will be in and out of my sight in seconds,.....that I cannot eat. Not to mention,....have someone really upset with me for damaging their property. I would almost guarantee,...if your drone is being shot at,.... it's because you have hung around for a bit. (In most cases,..giving the shooter time to attain the weapon,....possibly load the weapon or remove gun locks if he is a responsible gun owner,....get back outside to line up a bead on the drone. So as with you,.....unless you are a gun owner who just spends his whole life waiting for a drone to fly by,....I'd say someone was hanging out and hovering to get shot at. So my original reply also stands.
Sent from my iPad using MavicPilots
Blucenturion
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2017
- Messages
- 379
- Reactions
- 180
- Age
- 80
I emulate the Saturn V if I'm at home, and don't go laterally till at least 250' altitude, so this is all academic for me and anyone who practices the same.
Actually no on your velocity of a bullet falling theory, but still hazardous and stupid behavior none the less.
????
I read your reply but I still do not think you are following me or what I'm saying here. But, alas, there are other fish to fry.
Apparently you and I are not going to get anywhere together on this topic, so let's just agree to disagree like gentlemen, shall we? I am rushing to an early morning doctor's appointment for a very bad back (running a few minutes late as usual) and my brain has not yet caught up with my feet, but to paraphrase a famous American figure whose name escapes me at the moment, "While I disagree with what you say, I will fight to the death your right to say it."
Good to see a man who has the power of his convictions in his hands. This nation needs more of that these days. Perhaps you and I will meet again, maybe on the same side of the next topic. Stay cool, be safe flying, and have fun filming and photo taking. Talk with you later.
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it-Evelyn Beatrice Hall in 1906. I admit I have heard that many times,....but also forgot whom had made that statement. My friend Google reminded myself.
I agree to disagree with only some of your comments. I think it is more of a disagreement on situations than on the physical dynamics of actions.
I am new to the hobby of quad copters. (Did spend some time with helicopters) So arguing over Drone situations leaves me looking the fool. However, I have spent a good many years in the military, using many types of arms. Some people might even say I know which end of a gun does the damage. So on that subject I could indeed have some convictions. One conviction I have is NO ONE should ever,..under any circumstances fire upon a drone or any other property owned by other parties. That's why we pay tax's. If they feel the need,.....call the authorities.
And Yes,....CC Rider,......I do indeed believe that you and I will indeed be on the same side of a debate many times in the future.
I do hope you get your back issue straightened out.
I agree to disagree with only some of your comments. I think it is more of a disagreement on situations than on the physical dynamics of actions.
I am new to the hobby of quad copters. (Did spend some time with helicopters) So arguing over Drone situations leaves me looking the fool. However, I have spent a good many years in the military, using many types of arms. Some people might even say I know which end of a gun does the damage. So on that subject I could indeed have some convictions. One conviction I have is NO ONE should ever,..under any circumstances fire upon a drone or any other property owned by other parties. That's why we pay tax's. If they feel the need,.....call the authorities.
And Yes,....CC Rider,......I do indeed believe that you and I will indeed be on the same side of a debate many times in the future.
I do hope you get your back issue straightened out.
Sir, you are a gentleman AND a scholar. Thank you so much for your gracious words and for solving the puzzle I've walked around with all day about just who made that famous quote. I never would have gotten it. Google is a great friend to have, indeed.
Let me first take my hat off to you as a U.S. veteran and a man who has served this country. You are appreciated and respected by me greatly for your service. No greater calling to be honorably answered exists in my mind. Second, please let me next stand next to you corrected: your military experience clearly indicates that you would have no problem at all taking out a drone with a lone bullet, as I am certain you definitely know which end of the gun does the damage.
I truly appreciate your self-deprecating words, but I sincerely doubt if any situation - including arguing over drones, which you may be new to - could ever leave you "...looking the fool." I have a feeling you are an extremely sharp individual who acquires knowledge rapidly, preserves it, and better yet has the common sense and experience to put it into real-world practical use. I have no doubt you will be teaching us things here in this Forum shortly after your feet are totally wet.
Being on the same side of a debate with you in the future would be a pleasure and a comfortable place to be. I'd welcome it, sir.
If I can ever be of help or service to you in any way simply contact me and you will have all that I can offer to you. Although I am not nearly an expert on the Mavic, I do know what end does the flying! I wish you nothing but fantastic, positive experiences with your Mavic Pro and that it accords you the same thrills, good ol' fashioned fun, preserved unique images and fulfillment that it has given me. Best to you and yours. Salutes to you.
Let me first take my hat off to you as a U.S. veteran and a man who has served this country. You are appreciated and respected by me greatly for your service. No greater calling to be honorably answered exists in my mind. Second, please let me next stand next to you corrected: your military experience clearly indicates that you would have no problem at all taking out a drone with a lone bullet, as I am certain you definitely know which end of the gun does the damage.
I truly appreciate your self-deprecating words, but I sincerely doubt if any situation - including arguing over drones, which you may be new to - could ever leave you "...looking the fool." I have a feeling you are an extremely sharp individual who acquires knowledge rapidly, preserves it, and better yet has the common sense and experience to put it into real-world practical use. I have no doubt you will be teaching us things here in this Forum shortly after your feet are totally wet.
Being on the same side of a debate with you in the future would be a pleasure and a comfortable place to be. I'd welcome it, sir.
If I can ever be of help or service to you in any way simply contact me and you will have all that I can offer to you. Although I am not nearly an expert on the Mavic, I do know what end does the flying! I wish you nothing but fantastic, positive experiences with your Mavic Pro and that it accords you the same thrills, good ol' fashioned fun, preserved unique images and fulfillment that it has given me. Best to you and yours. Salutes to you.
Thanks for the fact check!
You're right, I assumed the air resistance was pretty minimal, but I'm a microbiologist by training and the only high school physics I teach is rudimentary enough to discount air resistance. Regardless, the terminal velocities of bullets are still terrifyingly high (see the Wikipedia article on celebratory gunfire).
You are both wonderful. The Mavic forums need more of this constructive attitude.
Sent from my iPhone using MavicPilots
Thanks for the fact check!
You're right, I assumed the air resistance was pretty minimal, but I'm a microbiologist by training and the only high school physics I teach is rudimentary enough to discount air resistance. Regardless, the terminal velocities of bullets are still terrifyingly high (see the Wikipedia article on celebratory gunfire).
Look, I'm not justifying the person shooting drones down, and I wasn't trying to be argumentative. The information you stated is wrong, like your quote is only one half of the equation to try and prove a point in your favor. Had you read a little more or looked for a better source you would know the difference between muzzle and terminal velocity and how it affects projectiles, and within that there are other variables like: barrel length, rifling, round loading variances, etc. But hey who am I to argue with the mighty Wikipedia.
Now i'm being argumentative.
As far as the OP's original concern, I do not know what the laws are for the townships/cities across the United States, but if privacy was such a big concern I might as well start smacking all the selfie taking trolls phones out of their hands while they take their picture with me in the background. The skynet rounds just seem way to excessive a means to resolve something that could have been handled with less volatility.
According to the FAA “regardless of the situation, shooting at any aircraft — including unmanned aircraft — poses a significant safety hazard. An unmanned aircraft hit by gunfire could crash, causing damage to persons or property on the ground, or it could collide with other objects in the air. ”
To reach this justification, the FAA turned to 18 U.S.C. 32, a law that in part expands “United States jurisdiction over aircraft sabotage to include destruction of any aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States.” The FAA, as the part of government that oversees that sky, could have made an exception when applying this law to small, uncrewed aircraft. That it didn’t fits into a larger pattern: whenever the FAA is given the opportunity to treat drones as regular aircraft, it chooses to do so. That means pilot’s licenses for drone business operators, and it means that when the FAA bans aircraft for miles around the Super Bowl, that ban applies to drones too.
It also poses a complication for some local and state laws, like Utah’s proposed HB 420, which would let police shoot down drones in emergency situations. While the FAA may have answered decided that drone shootdowns are already illegal under existing law, we’ll have to see how drone shootdown cases proceed in the courts to know if that assertion will hold.
And if it does, would it apply to bringing down drones with nets or eagles as well?
TAGS: DRONES UAVS UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES DRONE LAWS FAA AVIATION
To reach this justification, the FAA turned to 18 U.S.C. 32, a law that in part expands “United States jurisdiction over aircraft sabotage to include destruction of any aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States.” The FAA, as the part of government that oversees that sky, could have made an exception when applying this law to small, uncrewed aircraft. That it didn’t fits into a larger pattern: whenever the FAA is given the opportunity to treat drones as regular aircraft, it chooses to do so. That means pilot’s licenses for drone business operators, and it means that when the FAA bans aircraft for miles around the Super Bowl, that ban applies to drones too.
It also poses a complication for some local and state laws, like Utah’s proposed HB 420, which would let police shoot down drones in emergency situations. While the FAA may have answered decided that drone shootdowns are already illegal under existing law, we’ll have to see how drone shootdown cases proceed in the courts to know if that assertion will hold.
And if it does, would it apply to bringing down drones with nets or eagles as well?
TAGS: DRONES UAVS UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES DRONE LAWS FAA AVIATION
stratos
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2016
- Messages
- 737
- Reactions
- 374
- Age
- 45
Well I would have probably go balistic as this lady. Obviously the drone pilot looks to be harassing them. If you want to go and fly, go do it, but general rule never hover close to anyone property.
still legally she couldnt shoot the drone.
Similar threads
