Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The View From Inside A Fireworks Show

Posted by Unknown on from the things-that-go-boom dept.

kdataman (1687444) writes "There is a breathtaking video on Youtube of someone flying a quadcopter around and through a professional fireworks display. Of course, it was an illegal and dangerous thing to do. It also may inspire someone else to do something even more dangerous. But even so, I have watched it 4 times and get goosebumps every time. An article in Forbes says that unit is a DJI Phantom 2 with a GoPro Hero 3 Silver camera. The fireworks are in West Palm Beach, Florida."

31 of 200 comments (clear)

  1. Illegal and Dangerous? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why on Earth did TFA call it 'illegal and dangerous'?

    It's only dangerous to the drone. There are no humans up there to crash into.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    1. Re:Illegal and Dangerous? by Twinbee · · Score: 2

      Perhaps he meant dangerous if the firework destroys the copter, making it crash and potentially hit someone?

      --
      Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
    2. Re:Illegal and Dangerous? by SuperTechnoNerd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Read about the new ridiculous rules the FAA imposed about drones.. Then you will understand.
      Don't you know we are living in a time when someone does something cool, it is automatically illegal?

    3. Re:Illegal and Dangerous? by sjames · · Score: 2

      It was over water, so even if it caught fire, it would just splash.

    4. Re:Illegal and Dangerous? by Rich0 · · Score: 2

      Read about the new ridiculous rules the FAA imposed about drones.. Then you will understand. Don't you know we are living in a time when someone does something cool, it is automatically illegal?

      What rules? I see nothing in the Code of Federal Regulations or US Code covering these matters. A Federal Court has already ruled that all these FAA press releases have no binding power over anybody, dismissing the only case the FAA has brought which has gone to judgement so far.

      Federal agencies can't just issue press releases and demand that people follow them. The US is a nation governed by laws, which means the government needs a law or regulation to cite when taking action against somebody.

      I don't deny that the FAA has the legal authority to create regulations governing UAVs. They just haven't done it yet.

    5. Re:Illegal and Dangerous? by Nkwe · · Score: 2

      Maybe and maybe not. There is always the chance that the firework could malfunction on it's own. Possible malfunction is one of they many reasons that in professional shows, no one gets to sit under where the fireworks are intended to go or anywhere a wind shift or malfunction may take them. I suppose if a drone collided with a mortar very close to the ground as the mortar was being launched it might alter the trajectory, but at the altitude from where the pictures were being taken, the firework has gone where it is going to go.

      Acknowledged that in some smaller shows you used to be able to sit right under the fireworks and having the smoldering hunks of cardboard rain down on you. This was kind of cool, but in my experience, hasn't been an option for a long time.

    6. Re:Illegal and Dangerous? by MrKaos · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Read about the new ridiculous rules the FAA imposed about drones...

      Until some moron flys one into the path of a commercial airliner, small plane, or helicopter, and people die - than it's "why isn't the FAA doing something about this?"

      Rules won't stop someone from doing that because it's obviously intended to try to hurt someone. I say try because in a battle between a jet engine with the power to push 400 tons of steel into the sky VS a drone I'm going to put my money on the jet engine lasting long enough for them to turn around and land again. Anything with more planning than that is an attack.

      Most of the people who have been here for a while know how to do these things but choose not to because they don't want to fuck it up for people who want to do something cool. Assholes do these things because they don't have enough imagination to do something cool.

      In reality this is the argument, the cool people who want to do something cool with technology VS the assholes who want to do something assholic with technology and fucking things up for the cool people. They're the people that do something assholic and force authorities to kneejerk into making anti asshole regulations, which also prevents people from doing something cool.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    7. Re:Illegal and Dangerous? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, this copter was flying high. Would take a split second for it to dive down. Or be trivial for anybody else to purposefully fly a drone at 50 feet above the ground... in the dark right up to the launch site.

      Split second? No. Falling from a height of 500 feet would take approximately 5.5 seconds, discounting air resistance. There is no way this drone could drop that far "in a split second."

      If they were "right up to the launch site", there would be too many lift charges going off and too much smoke for them to see where the craft was, so that's not possible either. Even IF one of the shells were to hit the copter, they weigh MUCH MORE than this thing does, so physics dictates their path would barely be affected at all. They would likely go right through the copter, deviate by a couple of degrees, and the pieces of the copter would splash into the water.

      If you're at all uncomfortable with any old yahoo coming along and doing that, you agree with it being "dangerous"

      I'm sorry, "dangerous" != "something that makes me uncomfortable." Let me guess, you think guns are dangerous because they look scary to you, right?

      Grow a pair, you fucking pussy.

    8. Re:Illegal and Dangerous? by robbak · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Professional fireworks are mortar-fired shells, not rockets that can go off-course if nudged. So if a shell hit the drone on the way up, it would smash straight through it and keep on going. There is not enough mass in a drone, and a drone is not solid enough, to deflect the solid mass of a firework shell travelling at speed. It might not quite reach the same height by a few meters, or might end up a couple of feet off target, but neither of these things would matter.

      And if the drone is up at altitude where the shells explode, then there is even less speed involved. The shell has reached it's height - so what if it taps a drone before detonating.

      There is also whole lot of sky, and both shells and drones are small. The chance of the two coming together is practically nil.

      Amazing pictures captured with zero risk. Images from a drone up there amongst it all should be a permanent feature of firework presentations.

      --
      Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
    9. Re:Illegal and Dangerous? by dougmc · · Score: 4, Informative

      FAA limits model aircraft to a height of 500 feet

      No it doesn't.

      The 400 (not 500) foot figure comes from FAA advisory circular 91-57 made back in 1981, and the key thing about this is that it's *advisory*, not mandatory.

      The AMA safety code says "Not fly higher than approximately 400 feet above ground level within three (3) miles of an airport without notifying the airport operator." -- but those are just safety rules for AMA members (and a good idea for everybody) -- but they do not have the force of law behind them.

      Now, the FAA may change the laws in the future, but so far ... this 400 foot ceiling people talk about does not exist. (Some places have restricted airspace ... that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about this blanket 400 foot height limit people keep bringing up that doesn't exist.

    10. Re:Illegal and Dangerous? by mbeckman · · Score: 3, Informative

      I say try because in a battle between a jet engine with the power to push 400 tons of steel into the sky VS a drone I'm going to put my money on the jet engine lasting long enough for them to turn around and land again.

      You would lose that bet. Turbine aircraft can be disabled by stray metal bits as small as a single bolt. An entire drone, with many metal components, would undoubtedly render a turbine engine inoperable. For this reason, airport operators routinely inspect and pick up all debris on runways and taxiways. It's called FOD (foreign object damage), and is an ever-present risk to aircraft.

    11. Re:Illegal and Dangerous? by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      my father shoots off professional shows and I asked him about this. he said the worst case scenario he can think of would be if the drone was low, like within 20 feet of the launch and it blasted it with a direct hit. he said the crowds generally would be safe as they do take mishaps like a rogue firework into consideration when planning the location and the distance of the viewers. on the other hand that could potentially cause issues with the people setting them off. he says where the thing was in relation to the show, hes thinking about doing it himself from now on at all of his shows

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
  2. Cool video by richy+freeway · · Score: 2

    Crappy camera work but I enjoyed it anyway. Surprised I haven't seen someone do it before (I realise someone may have).

    The question remains though, when did this place become digg?

    1. Re:Cool video by Huntr · · Score: 3, Informative

      "The question remains though, when did this place become digg?"

      Right around Dec '04.

    2. Re:Cool video by dougmc · · Score: 2

      Crappy camera work? I take it you'd do better?

      It's not like it's an easy place to put an expensive camera into. Anything bigger than a small R/C plane and they'd have stopped the fireworks entirely -- and personally, I'm sort of surprised that they didn't when they saw this craft up there. The odds of having the craft hit by a shell and crashing into the water were significant as well.

      And it's quite dark, so we're stuck with high iso mode.

      Personally, I thought it was quite excellent for what it was.

  3. Re:this is why we can't have nice things... by sjames · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you look closer, the fireworks and the drone are over water. So much more likely, drone struck by fireworks makes a splash, fish startled.

  4. Absolutely Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't understand the negative comments here. This is using technology to get a viewpoint of something in a way that a few years previously would have been impossible. Love it.

  5. Re:kind of like a small town fireworks show? by Rei · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't get why American fireworks displays are so small. I'd love to see this copter fly through fireworks in Reykjavík on New Years Eve. The Macy's 4th of july fireworks display in New York shoots off about 10 tons of fireworks. Iceland (most of the population being in Reykjavík and its adjacent municipalities, about 250k people) shoots off about 600 tons of fireworks on New Years, the weight of about 5 adult blue whales. The whole city looks like this for literally about an hour. It's not organized, it's just everyone shooting off an average of about 9 kilograms / 20 pounds per family - some more, some less. You see fireworks like the stuff that copter flew through in little towns of 1-2 thousand people. Even if you only count organized displays, it just seems to be so disproportionately little in the US. Pretty much every festival that does fireworks here shoots off several tons. Or otherwise just burns pretty much everything that's not nailed down. Or as more often is the case, both at the same time.

    --
    I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
  6. Re:Idiotic by Dins · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How is this idiotic? Unless you're talking about the potential idiocy of wasting all that money on a drone and a Gopro camera potentially blown up by fireworks. This was filmed over water. Nobody was in danger except the drone owner's bank account. (And maybe the one in a million chance of the drone falling on the odd boater...)

  7. Definitely Dangerous by roger10-4 · · Score: 2

    While it was cool, I can see how this could be considered dangerous. I don't know much about fireworks, but I can imagine that a collision between a UAV and the firework itself could potentially alter the trajectory of the firework leading it to go somewhere it shouldn't. You get enough senseless idiots flying these things around pyrotechnics, something bad will eventually happen.

  8. Pilots View in WWII over Germany by BoRegardless · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Though not as colorful, you can now imagine what it was like for a pilot and copilot doing raids in WWII. Scaaaary!

  9. Re:kind of like a small town fireworks show? by Rei · · Score: 3, Informative

    Whoops, included the wrong link for the "The whole city looks like this" part - it was supposed to be this link. The first one is a link to just a small festival display.

    --
    I was watching this thing on TV about some guy named Hitler. Someone should stop him!
  10. Re:kind of like a small town fireworks show? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    about 600 tons of fireworks on New Years, the weight of about 5 adult blue whales

    Thanks for a new unit of measurement: adult blue whales of fireworks. Comparing fireworks to adult blue whales really helps make your number something I can relate to in my everyday life.

  11. Re:kind of like a small town fireworks show? by rasmusbr · · Score: 2

    The main reason why many governments have regulations for how much fireworks you can fire off in one night is that fireworks produce toxic smoke. Reykjavik is a relatively small city situated in what I believe is a windy area far away from any other major urban centers, so I would think that the potential for humans to be exposed being exposed to smoke from fireworks is unusually low there.

    Or perhaps the city just wants to live up to its name...

  12. What with all the other debris? by robbak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The area under a fireworks show already gets peppered with the remains of all the exploded shells. A little added debris from a drone struck by part of the fireworks would make no difference. They always make sure that the fallout zone is in a safe area.

    Add to that that the shells are mortar-fired, not rockets, and the risk of this is practically nil. Way less than the risks of just using and handling all that explosive.

    Every professional fireworks show - at least, all those that are televised - should include shots from a drone up there amongst it all. The spectacular pictures are well worth the tiny risk.

    --
    Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
    1. Re:What with all the other debris? by anubi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think what he was getting at is a firework intercepting a quadcopter will revector its trajectory.

      Someone had already planned every path the fireworks were to take, so the spent shells would not land at the wrong place.

      However, having hit a quadcopter, a live firework, its payload yet to be spent, could have its trajectory revectored to a viewing area, with likely tragic consequences.

      Someone designed that thing to go off a hundred feet up, not spuzzing around under the seats of the audience because it hit something on the way up.

      I am sure the safety of the quadcopter was the least of their worries... it is that deflected live firework that I would be worried about.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

    2. Re:What with all the other debris? by sjames · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They are unpowered shells shot from a mortar, not rockets. If they hit the copter (unlikely), they will explode lower than planned, but still well up there and over the water. Considering that the copter was flying around their planned burst altitude anyway, it is likely that only the pilot would notice the collision.

  13. Heavy solid shell, light fragile drone. by robbak · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The shell smashes the drone into tiny bits of confetti, and continues on it's merry way. Or, more likely the shell snaps off a rotor arm without noticing.

    They will not bounce off each other like billiard balls. That's what happens when you have a collision between equal mass objects in which kinetic energy is conserved. This would be a collision between different mass objects where energy is lost to work - destroying the drone. The one with the most momentum wins.

    --
    Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
  14. Re:Video is fake by naughtynaughty · · Score: 2

    There is a nice video out there of a quadcopter that loses control and flips. But because it uses a stabilized camera mount the picture is still perfectly oriented with the horizon all the way to the ground, while the quadcopter is all over the place. That you don't understand something doesn't make it a fake. No reason to even get into the silliness of assuming that there is some massive shock wave that would have flipped the copter over.

  15. Re:GoPro by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

    I suggest that you visit Youtube, and do a search for Isle of Man TT. There are a lot of videos, and the very best are shot from helicopters. The second best are shot from beside the roadway, by professionals. Onboard video shot with GoPros are decidedly lesser quality in most cases, but the are still better quality than professional equipment was when I was a child. All that quality, packed into a unit easily mounted on a person's head, or on the forks of a motorcycle.

    GoPros are damned good!

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  16. Re:kind of like a small town fireworks show? by drkim · · Score: 2

    about 600 tons of fireworks on New Years, the weight of about 5 adult blue whales

    Thanks for a new unit of measurement: adult blue whales of fireworks. Comparing fireworks to adult blue whales really helps make your number something I can relate to in my everyday life.

    Good point.
    Think of 600 tons as 27.3 Viking Longboats, each boat loaded with 160 Aardvarks.