Slashdot Mirror


Drone Sightings Near Other Aircraft Up Dramatically

schwit1 writes The government is getting near-daily reports — and sometimes two or three a day — of drones flying near airplanes and helicopters or close to airports without permission, federal and industry officials tell The Associated Press. It's a sharp increase from just two years ago when such reports were still unusual. Many of the reports are filed with the Federal Aviation Administration by airline pilots. But other pilots, airport officials and local authorities often file reports as well, said the officials, who agreed to discuss the matter only on the condition that they not be named because they weren't authorized to speak publicly. Michael Toscano, president of a drone industry trade group, said FAA officials also have verified the increase to him. While many of the reports are unconfirmed, raising the possibility that pilots may have mistaken a bird or another plane in the distance for a drone, the officials said other reports appear to be credible.

132 comments

  1. These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by ZorinLynx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Drones are so much fun and you can get so many cool photos and video from them.

    Yet these morons flying drones near airports are going to ruin it for everyone. Expect to see them heavily regulated or banned soon.

    This is why we can't have nice things. :(

    1. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Drones are so much fun and you can get so many cool photos and video from them.

      Yet these morons flying drones near airports are going to ruin it for everyone. Expect to see them heavily regulated or banned soon.

      This is why we can't have nice things. :(

      No need to worry. The Free Market will sort this out.

    2. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hold on a second, the article makes it quite clear that the pilots reporting these sightings could easily mistake a bird for a drone, and frankly I think that's what's happening here. As more pilots hear about drones they're going to come to the wrong conclusion every time when quickly glancing at an object as they fly past at 100s mph.

    3. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just attach laser beams to it, no one can stop them!

    4. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by ElderKorean · · Score: 1

      Drones are so much fun and you can get so many cool photos and video from them.

      Yet these morons flying drones near airports are going to ruin it for everyone. Expect to see them heavily regulated or banned soon.

      ...

      Recently on the news in Australia. If they see drones operating near bushfire where water bombing aircraft/helicopters are flying they will ground them.

      http://www.abc.net.au/news/201...

      Current regulations are that drones have to be 30 metres away from people, they are not be used in built-up areas, not to exceed 400 feet in height and not be flown in controlled air space, but there is no law against flying near bushfires. Drones must not create a hazard for other aircraft, but if the device was several hundred metres away from its operator, how would they know if a firefighting aircraft was approaching?

    5. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      that makes no sense. who are the "they" and how could they ground the drones??? as for drones exceeded 400 feet in height, that woudl be one tall motherflippin badass drone.

    6. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Slagothor · · Score: 1

      In the USA, I believe that we classify a drone as a flying vehicle which can be remotely piloted via either instrument or visual feedback. Anything else is just R/C stuff. I believe that is what these craft are. Although I did see one listed at frys.com going for $250 USD that had FPV video included in the controller. But I digress, my point is that anyone operating these type of craft "drones" should be operating like they would any other flying vehicle and be aware of their surroundings. It's a damn quad-copter with FPV feedback!, why the hell wouldn't you be constantly looking around? If more parents had taught their ignorant children, people would know better, but Nooooo. Some idiot has to shit in the gene pool.

    7. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... how could they ground the drones??? ...

      It's amazing what a large bout of water does to a drone...

    8. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Joe's shotgun takes down drones as well as birds. :)

    9. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      No, our retarded fire chief wants to ground the firefighter aircraft and then blame any resulting fire death on the operator of the drone.

      Because you know a 2kg drone is really going to survive getting anywhere near the prop wash of a giant support helicopter and take it out...

    10. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      But I digress, my point is that anyone operating these type of craft "drones" should be operating like they would any other flying vehicle and be aware of their surroundings. It's a damn quad-copter with FPV feedback!, why the hell wouldn't you be constantly looking around?

      It's not like sitting in the aircraft, and even pilots sitting in the aircraft miss other aircraft now and then. You've got a dinky little monitor and a relatively narrow-angle camera, and you're trying to see incoming aircraft? Good luck with that.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by tlhIngan · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In the USA, I believe that we classify a drone as a flying vehicle which can be remotely piloted via either instrument or visual feedback. Anything else is just R/C stuff. I believe that is what these craft are. Although I did see one listed at frys.com going for $250 USD that had FPV video included in the controller. But I digress, my point is that anyone operating these type of craft "drones" should be operating like they would any other flying vehicle and be aware of their surroundings. It's a damn quad-copter with FPV feedback!, why the hell wouldn't you be constantly looking around? If more parents had taught their ignorant children, people would know better, but Nooooo. Some idiot has to shit in the gene pool.

      The problem is that R/C and your modern drone are completely different beasts.

      In the R/C world, you're constantly controlling your vehicle - because if you don't, you'll either bust airspace or it'll crash. You have to FLY an RC vehicle.

      Modern drones though, basically do "all the hard stuff" for you. You basically tell it to take off, and boom, it's in a stable hover 1m above the ground in front of you, and it'll do that with zero input from you until the batteries or fuel runs out. The autopilot on board keeps it in a stable position.

      The user of a drone basically just commands the drone to go to places, while the onboard computer figures out how to do that and maintain stable flight. There isn't much more to ones that can go from GPS waypoint to waypoint.

      The fact that the user doesn't really need to "fly" the vehicle leads to dumb users (they are REALLY that simple to fly) to do stupid things. FPV gets addicting, so they're concentrating on that rather than watching what their drone is doing, and oh, you just crashed into something you didn't see because your eyes were on the camera feed and not on the craft. (In the R/C world, you can never take your eyes off the aircraft or you can lose it).

      Basically the ability of the drones to fly themselves results in the pilots going from having to learn how to fly (and learning the rules and regulations as a side effect) to basically ordering it off of Amazon, opening the box, clicking "fly", and boom they're in the landing path of aircraft.

      Reminds me of that Simpsons episode where Sidewhow Bob jumps in a fighter plane, sees how the Air Force has dumbed it down to "Fly" and "Stop" buttons. The modern drone is just like that.

    12. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool, I didn't know props and jet intakes could take 2kg worth of metal and electronics and keep on flying without incident as they sweep in low to release their water...

    13. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Yet these morons flying drones near airports are going to ruin it for everyone. Expect to see them heavily regulated or banned soon.

      Yes, we know how much the government hates people flying unlicensed small aircraft, and you can fly one into a plane's path and cause panic or injury to the passengers. Hey, maybe it would be possible to carry a small about of explosives on one -- it would make a good "instrument of terror", so we have to take them seriously. War on Terror! RAH!

      But lately, more attention has been focused on how innocent hobbyists are being hassled with the new regulations, and folks are starting to wake up to how the whole thing is being blown out of proportion. This is hurting the government's attempts to regulate amateur drone usage to keep us safe. They are trying to convince people this is a very real danger and liberty needs to be relinquished for the common security. If only there was some way to show them the dangers -- simple facts they can read on paper. A danger that they confront, repeatedly, so it gets them thinking about it... like two or three times a day.

    14. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by antdude · · Score: 1

      And that is why we have lame (law/rule)s. :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    15. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Some countries have far stricter laws and model aircraft are restricted to specific parks in built up areas and are not to be flown in public space and most definitely not over other people's properties. Drone usage logically needs to be restricted and licensed and all drones registered. They are not for idiots to fly in public spaces where they can crash into vehicles on the road or people. That is a sound normal restriction for a hobby that can place others at risk. When it comes to explosives, flammable agents or bio-toxins rest assured many countries are in fact working on just that, to improve their countries competitiveness and of course for counter attack. Consider major commodities investors, literally billions of dollars in profit available should another countries produce fail to reach market and supply falls well short of demand. Would modern psychopathic corporations spend, say a couple of hundred thousands dollars spreading plant diseases in order to generate a billion dollars of profit from guessing a major increase in the price of the product they are betting on.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    16. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except a magic bush.

    17. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, our retarded fire chief wants to ground the firefighter aircraft and then blame any resulting fire death on the operator of the drone.

      Because you know a 2kg drone is really going to survive getting anywhere near the prop wash of a giant support helicopter and take it out...

      Why the sarcasm? If the drone flies above the support helo (something they can easily do) it'll get sucked into the blade downwash and damage or even break the blade on its way down. Bye bye helo + crew.
      In fact, helicopter blade vortices are doughnut-shaped near the ground, so a drone flying slightly below or beside a helicopter can still get sucked into the blade wash and severely damage or destroy the blade.
      People seriously underestimate the damage drones can do even to light aircraft.

    18. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Thanshin · · Score: 1

      Drones are so much fun and you can get so many cool photos and video from them.

      Yet these morons flying drones near airports are going to ruin it for everyone. Expect to see them heavily regulated or banned soon.

      This is why we can't have nice things. :(

      Actually, I think someone will find a way to steal them from the air and that will be the end of free roaming drones.

      Once people start seeing news of "my drone suddenly took off and left", people will stop attaching $300 cameras to their bellies.

      And that's why we can't have nice things unless everybody else has nice things too. Which is the most disregarded part of economic inequality and yes the easiest to sell.

    19. Re: These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by pgnas · · Score: 1

      RC enthusiasts have managed this for years without problem. All we need is DHS to follow up on some of these calls, they always manage to find the laser pointer kiddies.. Slap them wirh a day in jail and a $1000 fine and the next time they are caught its 30 days in the slammer and a felony. This is not a big issue. It's minimal. They aren't following up on the sightings they aren't even taking them seriously so why should we take them seriously I don't even take a circle seriously the whole bunch of rhetoric. I agree they are attempting the balloon this up make it sound larger than what it really is regulation simply means licensing licensing simply means money in revenue this and only this is the most important thing on a politicians mind not safety. This kind of stuff usually just boils down to commonsense which average American seems to lack these days. ST earlier hobbyist really had no problem with this and also this article doesn't list any specific sightings. If you think it's bad right now you just wait till Amazon and Google start using these things. That is what's going to edge out the amateur enthusiasts.

    20. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Splab · · Score: 1

      Birdstrikes are known to destroy engines and you really don't want to be flying a fully loaded water bomb and lose half your power...

    21. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Splab · · Score: 1

      Denmark is a good example, they are not to be flown within 150m of any building.

      Interestingly enough, this is not a problem for R/C enthusiasts, but drone "operators" seem to think they can do as they damn well choose.

      Have had people do low flyover with their drone, no marking, no information on how to get hold of them and they are not flying in line of sight, if that fucker crashes into someone and causes bodily harm, its near impossible to pin responsibility.

    22. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by fatmal · · Score: 1

      It's not like sitting in the aircraft, and even pilots sitting in the aircraft miss other aircraft now and then. .

      Miss them all the time! Aircraft are small and the sky REALLY big! I've had warnings from ATC about aircraft on a converging path at the same (reported - probably uncalibrated transponders) altitude, and even though I'm sitting in a low-wing bubble-canopied aircraft (so great vis) did not see a single one! Not a peep on the radio from the other aircraft either - bloody scary!

    23. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      They have yes. But have they ever destroyed a helicopter engine?

      This is a serious point I'm trying to make. Planes move forward at an insane speed. They bring with them very little time to get out of the way and the front facing turbines ingest objects with ease. Helicopters on the other hand move more slowly. When a helicopter is nearby it moves more slowly and due mostly to the fact that it doesn't take advantage of aerodynamic lift across it's non-existent wings it needs to move an incredible amount of air in an incredibly large space.

      No a quadrocopter and a bird will likely get downed by the propwash before it gets anywhere near a helicopter.

    24. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by BlacKSacrificE · · Score: 1

      No a quadrocopter and a bird will likely get downed by the propwash before it gets anywhere near a helicopter.

      Why reply when you have clearly not comprehended the dudes post?
      If a drone gets UNDER the rotor disk, sweet, it gets blown into oblivion. But thats only one of three possible scenarios.
      If it gets ABOVE or LATERALLY CLOSE to the disk, it could either be sucked downwards into the rotor disk, or, as Splab correctly said, be pulled into the tip vortex ring, which would see the drone be lifted over and into the disk. See this diagram for a quick look at the aerodynamics at play.

      --
      [Sorry, this signature is unavailable in your country/region]
    25. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

      Gah! Where are my mod points when I need them? Thanks for an informative and insightful reply.

      --
      'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
    26. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm a general aviation pilot and I can tell the difference between a turkey vulture, a crow, a hawk, a duck, and a goose on the takeoff roll and the final approach. I'm also an RC pilot and I'm sure I could properly identify a quadcopter or RC airplane. I've experienced a near miss with a turkey vulture at 3000' and watched an egret flying towards the coast about 1000' below me. Drones don't have flapping wings or feathers and I don't buy for a second that a light aircraft or helicopter pilot would mistake the two.

    27. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 2

      Not an engine incident, but a bird strike that forced a medical chopper to land yesterday. http://www.ems1.com/animal-attacks/articles/2021439-Bird-strike-downs-Texas-medical-helicopter/

      Also, search for images for bird strike helicopter and see what shows up. Some serious damage.

      --
      Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    28. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      This was my first thought too. But I bet that turkey vulture wasn't flapping its wings. They are masters of riding thermal up drafts and can fly for many many hours without flapping their wings. The one you had a near miss with probably flapped its wing five or six times to get to 3000 feet. It most likely spent hours circling in an up draft to get to that altitude.

    29. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      No, a pilot decided to land a helicopter nothing more. It's written in the article. Helicopters will happily keep flying with broken windows.

    30. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I have, you have not comprehended the differences. There are multiple critical differences that makes it far less of a risk for a helicopter. Two I have mentioned already, speed and wash.

      A third is the prop mass. A turbine blade has very little mass and is very fragile and has incredibly tight tolerances. A helicopter blade is large, heavy, more likely to destroy anything it touches than be destroyed itself, and if you take a chunk out of it its ability function isn't necessarily immediately impaired.

      A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.

    31. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by JWSmythe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At the speeds commercial aircraft are moving, yes, I could see a pilot mistaking a bird soaring for a RC airplane.

      I was in a Cessna, in the pattern to land, I had just a couple seconds to avoid a buzzard. That was, nothing visible to "what's that?" to "oh shit!". I banked hard hard to miss it. The others in the plane were a bit freaked, and happy at the same time. They didn't realize what was happening, but the one who saw the bird barely miss the windshield was very happy I did it. It would have hit his side. That roughly a 5 pound bird with a 65 inch wingspan. That'd be a pretty big drone.

      Here is a video of another pilot with a similar incident, except he didn't even have time to evade. He was going a bit faster than I was.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--XhLJMzRB4

      Commercial aircraft are moving much faster, and the pilots are busy doing pesky things like preparing to land. Seeing a bird or drone is nothing more than a glance and a "I saw something".

      You can find lots of bird strike videos on YouTube.

      With the number of birds (animal kind) in the air versus the number of RC aircraft and drones, statistically I'd say most sightings were birds.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    32. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      As technology advances the list of things that need restrictions will have to grow. There is no avoiding that.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    33. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by hedleyroos · · Score: 1

      According to that logic pilots didn't see that many birds a few years ago and are now suddenly seeing more birds. I'm pretty sure they're seeing drones.

    34. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by dywolf · · Score: 1

      But i was assured that we didnt need regulation for these lil drones! Right here on /.

      They told me regulation would kill a burgeoning small business entrepenaurs by grounding them before they even started.

      And that we could trust them, no regulation needed, to just do what was right.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    35. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by saider · · Score: 1

      Birds have an instinct for survival and will move away from the helicopter.

      Somebody flying a drone and looking through the camera at the fire/police chase/topless neighbor/whatever, will probably not be paying attention to the airspace around them.

      Heck, if you go out to the flying field, people crash into each other all the time, and that is when they are paying attention!

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    36. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      Regulation or banning would be ineffective, it's so easy to order parts online and build the things yourself. Or 3D-print them. A sniper or two with good rifles on airport grounds, though, would most likely work much better.

    37. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by FilmedInNoir · · Score: 1

      They need to keep that excuse in place to explain their UFO sightings.

      --
      Sig. Sig. Sputnik
    38. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by xdor · · Score: 2

      Yet these morons flying drones near airports are going to ruin it for everyone.

      No, the FAA already ruined it for everyone by redefining the rules against congressional legislation. They've also ruined it for business by not having any sort of a plan to allow them to be used commercially.

      IMO people like you who think good behavior will let you have nice things when your government is suppose to work for you are the problem.

    39. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if those "drones" are really alien UFOs pretending to be drones?

      (Insert your own Aliens Guy or Conspiracy Keanu meme pic here)

    40. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coming to an airport near you: US military drones with laser-targeted rail guns! :D

      It won't matter if it's a bird, a drone, a helium balloon, a golf ball, or even a "very small rocks" (ala Monty Python)... if it's in FAA airspace and doesn't have IFF, it's gonna receive a 200KJ visit from the drone's "little friend." :)

      We must have this. And it could be funded by a PPV channel for the engagement feeds!

    41. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by sycodon · · Score: 1

      Not to mention the fastest drones (Quadcopters mostly is what we're talking about) can do about 30-40 MPH. It's hard enough to pick out even large twin engine aircraft against the backdrop of a populated city and usually what helps is that fact they are moving against that back ground.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    42. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      Pilots didn't report bird sightings, now replace the idea of birds with the bombardment of info about "drones." Suddenly everything that flies is no longer a bird, but a "drone." This kind of thing happens all of the time in society; so why not to pilots?

    43. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      This has nothing to do with the free market, or competition between business enterprises.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    44. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for a Company that employs UAS operators for the military. This is the exact reason why they work in teams of at least 2 (even with the small UAVs). There is a UAV operator and a sensor operator.

    45. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      They're ALREADY regulated. It's illegal to fly the damned things in "navigable" airspace.

      Further, OUTSIDE navigable airspace, a Federal judge has ruled FAA has no authority over them.

    46. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The drone industry and especially the military contractors want drones to be remotely piloted. Autonomous drones are is a completely different category that the FAA (or DoD) as no clue how to regulate. Autonomous drones are really a different class of aircraft. Lumping them with hobby and FAA rules are asking for a world of hurt.

      Pilots are respected folks on the order of celebrities and sports heros.... drones are basically saying get rid of the pilots. We're already seeing this on the DoD side with fighter pilots vs video game [cough] drone operators fighting for aircraft use. We've found expert commercial pilots really do not know how to fly drones, they are hot news topics, they threaten their business (look at the movie industry, and all those helo pilots are now out of biz), and they say it's not "piloting", and drones can go anywhere which does pose some danger.

      Hence, the chance of VFR false positive drone sightings are actually encouraged/promoted with these pilot perspectives. In the end, it's just a 4 lbs vehicle.

      Basically, my point is you're going to see a split of opinion between pilot/pilot-based drone operators and folks like Amazon and the autonomous folks. Same thing is happen in the autonomous car space.

      Brave new world... and we should embrace it.

    47. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Are you seriously advocating having people shooting guns into the airspace around an airport? Regulating and banning is a great way to deal with this, as it allows sensible use, and any breaches will be dealt with severely. It removes the doubt over whether someone is doing something "bad" or not, and carries the weight of the law. I doubt people are going to go joy-flying their drones anywhere near as much if they know there'll be a rather large fine should they fly them irresponsibly. Flying a drone in an unsafe manner is not a crime of passion.

    48. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I suggest trying out that danger of a little bit of knowledge and google "helicopter bird strike". There is more there than I expected.

    49. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by dbIII · · Score: 1

      How about this one:
      http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-28224917

    50. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not strictly true

      you don't just have to hit the engines to take out the helicopter.

      http://www.stripes.com/news/bird-strike-caused-fatal-helicopter-crash-in-england-air-force-report-says-1.292555

      Admittedly they were incredibly unlucky in getting hit by three geese but depending on the environment you're flying in you don't want to be hit or distracted by anything.

      there's also the suspected airstrike on a seaking that was lost in the Falklands. (19 May 1982 - Royal Navy Sea King HC4 ZA294)

    51. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by deadweight · · Score: 1

      I am a commercial pilot. I can usually tell you what species of bird I almost hit. I *KNOW* the difference between living things and drones.

    52. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by jbwolfe · · Score: 3, Informative

      At the speeds commercial aircraft are moving, yes, I could see a pilot mistaking a bird soaring for a RC airplane.

      It has less to do with relative speed than relative speed vectors. The most difficult target to see, even when advised of its presence, is coming from a constant bearing decreasing range as there is little change in position with respect to field of vision. I have flown past, on three separate occasions, mylar balloons while at cruise flight levels (FL300-FL390) at 400-450 KTAS. The size and shape are arguably similar to drones, so distinguishing a drone from a bird while at drone operating altitudes should be equally trivial, assuming the event wasn't just a flash in the visual periphery.

      Commercial aircraft are moving much faster, and the pilots are busy doing pesky things like preparing to land. Seeing a bird or drone is nothing more than a glance and a "I saw something".

      My VMC scan at cruise is much less rigorous than while in a terminal environment. The flying pilot should be scanning outside (VMC), and leaving box work to the non-flying pilot. "See and avoid..."

      All that said, I have not ever encountered a "drone" in my 15000 hours of flying, respecting the fact that I don't find myself in the environment (which most likely is not large commercial airports) in which drones operate. OTOH I usually have about 1 birdstrike per year, most of which I never see- only hear the impact.

      --
      Have you ever noticed that anybody driving slower than you is an idiot, and anyone going faster than you is a maniac?
    53. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by joe_frisch · · Score: 1

      Maybe this suggests a technical solution.
      Equip drones with GPS and nav databases so that they will not fly in controlled airspace. (with the ability to override with some sort of approval).

      There are flights in uncontrolled airspace but it is much less of an issue.

    54. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      you're my favorite kind of troll, the deliberately obtuse dimwit. srsly, no criticism, I do it all the time and it's hilarious when I see others do it.

    55. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess is also the media attention they are now getting. Idiot sees Youtube video thinks it's cool buys DJI Phantom and goes flying somewhere an idiot shouldn't.

    56. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      Are you seriously advocating having people shooting guns into the airspace around an airport?

      Of course not, you silly, it was sarcasm. Shooting drones down would be more fun than legislating them, though.

    57. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Patent+Lover · · Score: 1

      So the next question is can the pilots tell us what kind of drone they are seeing? Quadricopters are obviously much different than a model F-4. These sightings need a bit more information.

    58. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well now you fucking know, smartass. I have seen an engine get absolutely trashed by just one little screw or chunk of rag, and then I've seen an entire person get sucked in and blown out the back- both unharmed. You know nothing, Jon Snow.

    59. Re:These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 1

      It might have been the pilot's choice, but it negates the assertion that the downwash would prevent a bird or drone from reaching the chopper's hull.

      --
      Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
  2. Are they drones? by For+a+Free+Internet · · Score: 1, Informative

    Or are they remote-controlled Italian hyperspace toads being flown by Wi-Fi signals from an evil stealth Toad satellite over Chicago?

    --
    UNITE with the Campaign for a Free Internet because today, our future begins with tomorrow!
    1. Re:Are they drones? by Thanshin · · Score: 1

      Why the fuck would someone post shit like that under their user account? The mods have already come down on you and there are only two posts as I type this.

      Usually because at the moment of writing they found it funny. It happens often when one posts before the first coffee or minutes after leaving the workplace. In the first case, because the humor detectors are still asleep and say to the brain "Yeah, whatever, that's hilarious, go with it.". In the latter case, the thought process is more like "WOHOO! one minute to GO! Everything's great! Everything's fantastic! Share your happiness with the world!"

    2. Re:Are they drones? by Travis+Mansbridge · · Score: 1

      Sometimes, but not in this case. Check his other posts.

  3. That's weird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I was about to say that I've noticed a lot more planes around my drones lately.

  4. Ever notice how many drones there are in bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    neighborhoods? It's the Republican's plan to harm children. They keep them up with their constant drone noise in order to make sure they can't sleep so they can't sleep in school. It's the same reason their kind builds so many freeways in poor areas. They hate us and want to doom our children to low paying jobs.

    1. Re:Ever notice how many drones there are in bad... by MildlyTangy · · Score: 1

      neighborhoods?

      huh?

      what are you trying to ask?

    2. Re:Ever notice how many drones there are in bad... by torsmo · · Score: 1

      He is from the Boötes void, so he probably has no idea what neighborhood is.

  5. What is a drone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to fly remote controlled model airplanes when I was a kid. Some of them were quite large - larger than any remote controlled quadcopter I've ever seen. Never called them drones, though. So, what makes a drone, a drone? A camera? A weapon? More than one engine?

    1. Re:What is a drone? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Operator has line of sight to craft = RC.

      Otherwise, drone.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:What is a drone? by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 2

      There are no defnitions of it, a drone should be a completely unmanned autonomous aircraft, but those don't exist. So for now it's anything that flys around without a person inside. Kites are just drones with strings nowadays.

  6. What's the reason? by freeze128 · · Score: 1

    Why would a drone pilot need to fly near an airport? Those things can go anywhere. This just doesn't make any sense that there are that many drone pilots that figure that they need to fly near the airport.

    1. Re: What's the reason? by pgnas · · Score: 1

      RC enthusiasts have managed this for years without problem. All we need is DHS to follow up on some of these calls, they always manage to find the laser pointer kiddies.. Slap them wirh a day in jail and a $1000 fine and the next time they are caught its 30 days in the slammer and a felony. This is not a big issue. It's minimal. They aren't following up on the sightings they aren't even taking them seriously so why should we take them seriously I don't even take a circle seriously the whole bunch of rhetoric.

    2. Re:What's the reason? by BlacKSacrificE · · Score: 1

      I'd guess a decent chunk of (actual) drone sightings around airports may be plane spotters looking for that killer take off/landing shot of their favourite bird. You would hope they know enough about aviation to know how stupid it is to do, but like there have been trainspotters killed for being to close to the tracks, I'm sure there are plane spotters out there who are too retarded to realise hovering a camera 200 feet above the threshold for that "perfect" landing shot is a really, REALLY bad idea. This is literally the only scenario I have seen where the idea of signal jamming does not seem like a completely stupid and over reactionary move. Considering a lot of these drones either waypoint home or just maintain position (as opposed to dropping from the sky like you'd want), this may not be a solution though.

      --
      [Sorry, this signature is unavailable in your country/region]
    3. Re: What's the reason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that when they took them to court, the FAA lost.
      The kids hadn't broken any valid regs because the FAA had not followed proper reg making regs.

      DHS needs rules to enforce.
      FAA needs to make some.

      Until then, the laser pointer plan doesn't seen to apply.

    4. Re: What's the reason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm glad to know you're one of those fuckers that when you don't get your way, you decide that everyone needs to be a felon, so they'll learn their lesson for the rest of their lives and you can feel good that you "did something". Fuck right off.

  7. So now webelieve them? by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    Our government has for decades refused to believe pilots when they report seeing UFOs, even when there is radar evidence to back them up. Now, when they want to prohibit the use of drones, they are suddenly willing to believe any sighting a pilot makes?

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
    1. Re:So now webelieve them? by Stormwatch · · Score: 1

      They never refused to believe. They always knew what it was, and pretended not to.

    2. Re:So now webelieve them? by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Of course they pretended to not know what they were. If you keep telling people that it is just weather balloons and no one believed you, I'd start pretending that nothing happened too.

  8. In Canada... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    In Canada, drones are more widely used than in the US, mostly because you can actually legally use a drone for commercial purposes. There are laws about drones: no flying at night, no flying within 5 miles of an airport, no flying above 1200 feet. Spying on people is also illegal. You can take pictures of people on the beach, not through bedroom windows of a 20 story building. Laws are fairly heavily enforced. The police have drones too, and theirs will go after yours. At the most fun: you lose your drone (you can keep the remote, but the drone is gone). At the least fun: the drone is gone, and the remote, and the fingerprints on it lead back to you, and now you stare at the world from the window of the crowbar hotel.

  9. It is annoying when much of a comment is left in by Stormwatch · · Score: 0

    its title.

  10. Unauthorized FAA Leaks by MildlyTangy · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Not only does the FAA have to deal with these unauthorized drone flights, they have to deal with leaks from within the FAA to the media. These leakers are publicly stating that they are in no way authorized to speak to the media, freely declaring their guilt.

    When is the FAA going to crack down on these officials who are leaking information to the media when they have been banned?

    This seems to be happening quite alot, and it seems that these officials are able to leak information with impunity, knowing that nobody is going to get fired for unauthorized leaks.

    This is not a good look.

  11. Re:Thank ypou for your comments, fool! by MildlyTangy · · Score: 1

    We speak the truth, no matter what!

    So when are you actually going to start speaking the truth then?

    All I see is lolgibberish.

  12. go figger by afaiktoit · · Score: 1

    people fascinated with drones are fascinated with planes too

    1. Re:go figger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, people are not. Republicans are. That is the way of their kind. They worship pilots because of they are able to kill so many people in the Air Force.

    2. Re:go figger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, that is exactly it. They love pilots because they kill people.

      I remember I was once at an after-party for a Republican conference. We had a good old time telling stories of carpet bombings while we were served hor d'oevres of fried kitten and fresh blood from the poor people we had tied up in the wine cellar.

      Drones... I mean, we're bloodthirsty tyrants and all, but we certainly could think of no way to cause death and chaos with drones.

      Nope. Pilots. Need those pilots for our evil plans. Accept no substitutes.

  13. the Government by swell · · Score: 4

    "The government is getting near-daily reports..."

    I want Slashdot readers to know I love them for so many insights. But let's not be arrogant about US citizenship. Many readers are not so blessed, and when we say "the government" they may be confused about which we are referring to.

    Please, then, say "the US government" if that is what you are speaking of. Notice that most of those outsiders specify which government they are speaking of. And for all you little foreigners, I hope you benefit from this message.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:the Government by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      "The Government" as reported by "The Associated Press" which quotes people from the "Federal Aviation Administration" not to mention a website run by Americans.

      That description with so many country specific parties can only really match one government. I don't think anyone here is actually confused about this.

    2. Re: the Government by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Slashdot is unabashedly an American site and always has been. Here's an idea, instead of complaining, why don't you start your own news tech website? No, seriously.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    3. Re:the Government by swell · · Score: 1

      "The government is getting near-daily reports..."

      As I hinted, 'the government' is a useless phrase. Are we referring to the US Commerce Dept? The US FDA? The California Dept. of Food and Agriculture? The Texas Dept. of White Supremacy? There are ten thousand agencies, most unrelated to the others and few that the US Administration can be held responsible for (but go ahead, blame Obama). It is helpful to be specific.

      --
      ...omphaloskepsis often...
    4. Re:the Government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I want Slashdot readers to know I love them for so many insights. But let's not be arrogant about US citizenship.

      Slashdot has always been a US-centric site and never pretended to be otherwise. It used to be in the FAQ.

    5. Re:the Government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is true. It was definitely in the FAQ. I wasn't aware they took that out, but this is a US site and articles are usually from that default context.

      And when you're in the US, most people know "the government" is the Federal government, unless the article or the site is specifically about state governments.

      When I am reading a UK site, or a site in India, I don't become confused about what government they are talking about.

    6. Re: the Government by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      why don't you start your own news tech website? No, seriously.

      Please. I'll give you money...

  14. Dangerous? Really? by Chocolate+Teapot · · Score: 1

    OK, I'm talking more about commercial airliners here rather than piston engined aircraft, but don't they test those engines by firing frozen chickens onto them? If a lightweight plastic drone presents such a risk to an Airbus, then I might holiday closer to home on the future. Do flocks of drones really sit around on the grass at airports waiting to throw themselves into the path of approaching aircraft? Of course I'm not seriously suggesting that they present zero risk, until some loon packs them with explosives before deliberately placing them in a flight path.

    --
    Modest doubt is called the beacon of the wise. - William Shakespeare
    1. Re:Dangerous? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Hudson "landing" was caused by a flock of geese (and only possible with an experienced pilot with balls of steel and a shitload of luck). What jet engines are tested for is that they won't explode and damage and take the plane down with them right away. They are not guaranteed to keep working and they sure as hell don't provide normal thrust afterwards. Bird strikes are critical events. A single bird can bring down a plane if it strikes close to ground (during take off or landing).

    2. Re:Dangerous? Really? by mjwx · · Score: 2

      OK, I'm talking more about commercial airliners here rather than piston engined aircraft, but don't they test those engines by firing frozen chickens onto them? If a lightweight plastic drone presents such a risk to an Airbus, then I might holiday closer to home on the future. Do flocks of drones really sit around on the grass at airports waiting to throw themselves into the path of approaching aircraft? Of course I'm not seriously suggesting that they present zero risk, until some loon packs them with explosives before deliberately placing them in a flight path.

      Aircraft engine casinga are designed to contain a fan blade breaking lose. They're designed to explode outwards (as demonstrated by the Trent 900's) and aircraft are designed to fly even when you've got one engine out of commission... however.

      1. Do you really want to test how well they're built on a regular basis when they're in operation.
      2. Do you really want to pay more for air travel because they're replacing engines due to "drone strikes".

      So sure as shit an Airbus (or Boeing) will survive a drone being sucked into engine #2, but that flight will be turning right around, disgorging it's passengers and heading to the maintenance shed for a new engine. Meanwhile you'll be placed onto later scheduled flights and you'd better hope it's not a once a day flight.

      I live in Perth, Western Australia, there is nowhere close to here worth holidaying in (its shit and its expensive), so I'd rather not have my flight play chicken with some moron's drone.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    3. Re:Dangerous? Really? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      but don't they test those engines by firing frozen chickens onto them?

      Yep and the passing criteria is that the engine doesn't destroy the wing to which it is attached and is able to shut down before it sheds it's blades in every direction.

      Now that said I pilot should be able to safely land with one engine.

    4. Re:Dangerous? Really? by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      What if, say, an ISIS sympathizer strapped some explosives (C4, etc) and nails onto the drone, and successfully got it sucked up into the engine?
      Granted most of these drones are the result of idiots - the same kind who shine 5mw or higher lasers at planes for kicks.. but drones could potentially be used as an effective terror weapon.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    5. Re:Dangerous? Really? by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Oh, that would be nasty, but it would be nothing compared to the danger of simply causing a jet engine to fall apart from obstruction. And with intakes, you don't even really have to be all that accurate, because the engine helps out by sucking in everything in front of it.

      Yes, these could could be effective at causing fear, but their use to terrorism doesn't even really require them to be explosive.

      Frankly, though, I think that the amount of work that they would need to put into a sustained drone program, would be relatively heavy compared to simply planning a hijacking. Drone "strikes" on planes with lightweight drones are never going to be particularly spectacular and you need to keep trying and trying to make a hit. If you have suicide-ready people, I'd say that such a campaign would not be the best use of such "resources".

      If I was a terrorist, I might build some drone models that could do the work, and let them fall into the hands of the press, who could sensationalize the finds. I would then concentrate on something else. Fear is spread, without needing to actually go through with it.

      One thing that we need to be aware of is that the most potent weapon of terrorists are journalists and media companies whom they can manipulate into spreading fear. In fact, this is really the only good weapon that terrorists have. Otherwise they are irregular fighters who can't really do much to truly disrupt anything important.

    6. Re:Dangerous? Really? by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      True, it wouldn't' be easy to get the drone in just the right place to get sucked up. But one successful attempt, and like you say, the media would be all over that.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  15. Re:Source? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (Footnote... *if Snowden, not "of Snowden" and I I know it's "there" not "they're". I generally proof these before hitting post but sometimes something slips by. )

  16. Open season on Drones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just try getting a "cool photo" from me. Your drone will be scrap with a bullet through it.

    1. Re:Open season on Drones by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      You're going to be firing bullets into the air? Sounds like a smart move.

  17. I'm shocked! Once again the obvious is ignored. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps this could be that there are a lot more "drones" flying today than were two years ago? The technology, at an affordable consumer level, is relatively new.

  18. assholes ruin it by AndyKron · · Score: 1

    Fucking idiots. Go drone yourself.

  19. What Drones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm seeing, and reading about, remote controlled aircraft. What drones is the media talking about exactly, because as far as I know, actual drone aircraft, are priced way outside of the average consumers pocket book.

    The ship on correct verbage here may have sailed, but I'm still going to correct anyone who gets it wrong.

  20. Remote control toys with cameras are not drones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if UAV = DRONE then =! RC QUADCOPTER

  21. No, you're wrong by Viol8 · · Score: 1

    "Modern drones though, basically do "all the hard stuff" for you."

    No they don't - they have auto stabilisation and thats it. You fly a drone in any kind of wind and it'll drift and you have to constantly adjust the throttle to keep it at the right height. Perhaps the really expensive kit has GPS and can keep itself at a certain location and height but the cheap ones most certainly do not.

    1. Re:No, you're wrong by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      No they don't - they have auto stabilisation and thats it. You fly a drone in any kind of wind and it'll drift and you have to constantly adjust the throttle to keep it at the right height. Perhaps the really expensive kit has GPS and can keep itself at a certain location and height but the cheap ones most certainly do not.

      You need to keep up. Unless for you, "really expensive" is $350.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:No, you're wrong by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      No they don't - they have auto stabilisation and thats it. You fly a drone in any kind of wind and it'll drift and you have to constantly adjust the throttle to keep it at the right height. Perhaps the really expensive kit has GPS and can keep itself at a certain location and height but the cheap ones most certainly do not.

      You might want to reacquaint yourself with modern drones. They HAVE altitude control. Throttle? You have two buttons, "Up" and "Down". They do everything for you. And you don't need GPS to stay in one place - a downward pointing camera is more than adequate for position holding.

      And that's a cheap sub-$300 toy drone. There are plenty of open-source Arducopter ones that for under $1000 give you GPS, camera platforms and hex- octa- rotor configurations. And that's all in, too, save the PC you use to control it (waypoint control, fpv, the open-source stuff is pretty impressive).

      You know what? A modern drone costs less than getting into R/C helicopters after you add in the cost of the kit, engine, good radio, gyro, servos, etc. Bit more than R/C planes, maybe.

      Heck, they're going to approach the cost of those cheap toy helicopters soon.

    3. Re:No, you're wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are there really $350 ones that really support FPV and a reasonable flight time (15-20 minutes) and a reasonable operating distance (400+ meters)?

      I've always been interested in playing with them but...
      1) I live 3 blocks from a small airport (but could certainly travel to a park or friends farm)
      2) the flight specs for the cheaper ones are like 7 minutes flight time, 200 feet range.
      3) the FPV always seems to be a couple hundred $$$ addon

      I guess a better question for those in the know.
      What would you recommend for a starter system (FPV, 20 minute flight time, 400 meter range)?

    4. Re:No, you're wrong by ScentCone · · Score: 2

      Point was that cheap (enough) ones absolutely have the ability to maintain position (including altitude) via GPS. When you want to start hanging a decent camera, video TX, the downlink receiver/display, and the beefier batteries/props that become part of hoisting the extras in the air and keeping them up there for over 10 minutes, you're getting closer to a $1000 machine. A lot of it depends on how willing you are to source individually cheaper components and do the build yourself, vs buying something (like a DJI products) that just works out of the box, but at more of a premium. Hang out at a forum like RCGroups.com, and you'll see lots of helpful people who cover that whole spectrum every day.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    5. Re:No, you're wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awesome, thanks for the info, the last time I looked at anything was several years ago but then the cost was pushing $10k. My end goal was an idea of doing crop flyovers for farmers. There have been some fixed wing options for a while but those have some issues, I've seen a few companies advertising quadcopters and similar services but their cost is very high and they sell it like a service not a product. But then there is also the whole commercial vs personal use stuff.

      Thanks again for the info, might be time to lurk around the forums a little.

    6. Re:No, you're wrong by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      "ou might want to reacquaint yourself with modern drones. They HAVE altitude control."

      Not the ones I've seen. I'm sure if your the same type of rich boomer who can afford 1K for a plaything then you can buy any sort of functionality, but I'm talking about the sort of drones you find in high street shops.

      "Throttle? You have two buttons, "Up" and "Down"."

      Seriously? Mine has throttle, rotate, forward/backwards, left/right plus trim buttons for all the them.

      "And you don't need GPS to stay in one place - a downward pointing camera is more than adequate for position holding."

      Bullshit. If you're a foot off the ground sure. Try maintaining position when its at 100 feet and you're looking through a small screen with VGA quality.

  22. Simple solution by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2

    Pay Bubba and his buddies to do patrols around the airport. Any drone which flies within a certain area is fair game for target practice.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  23. This has the smell by John+Jorsett · · Score: 0

    This has the smell of a government agency putting out a story to justify the actions it has taken or is about to take. The FAA is obviously getting concerned that there's too much loose talk about reining in its rulemaking in this area, or circumscribing it, and wants to get out ahead of that. What better way to achieve that than to portray drones as endangering the public's lives every time they fly?

    1. Re:This has the smell by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Only if they're in controlled airspace, where they *clearly don't belong* and can be a real danger, or at least, a major inconvenience to hundreds of people.
      I just had a 1500 mile flight last week on a 757, one engine's starter valve was defective, we all had to board a different jet, it caused a 2 hour delay. The people picking us up at the destination also had to reschedule. Multiply that by 200 to 300 passengers, and that's a best case scenario.
      Put the tinfoil back, it's better used to keep celery fresh.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  24. ce ne sont pas un troll by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    PHAH!
    Pilots can't tell the planet Venus from a UFO, even when clearly marked. Granted, this presupposes the pilot knew "Arabic" for that bit of Looney Tunes ontological camouflage to work
    Highly trained observers my ass.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  25. CURSES! You've divulged my evil business plan! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Great, now we have to accelerate our schedule and start building anti anti-drone drones.
    Thanks a lot, Thanshin!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  26. Identify yourself! by gibbson · · Score: 1

    Make it mandatory to have transponders that identify it as not a bird to any aircraft that's near by. That should help cool the fears of killing another bird,

  27. They ARE out there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arguments that these pilots are seeing something besides a drone are possible, but unlikely.
    It seems more likely that the pilots are only seeing a few of what is actually out there.

    There are lots of folks doing fun, safe and, useful things with these gadgets.
    But there ARE some morons (pronounced first o extra long) out there doing dumb things.
    There are U-tube videos shot from drones flying over airports at night likely with autonomous flight.
    I have personally seen one one in the air near my plane.

    Remember Churchill's comment about the Americans.
    You can always count on them to do the right thing after trying all the other options.
    The FAA seems to be following this strategy.
    We need less foot dragging and more providing teeth for the AMA's proven rule set.

    1. Re:They ARE out there by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Yup.

      So what is the ratio of sightings to collision incidents?

    2. Re:They ARE out there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank goodness, the ratio is infinite and probably doubling every 6 months.

      To say that this makes things ok is like NASA saying that the shuttle is safe because then have launched it N times without incident.
      N+1 was a real eye opener.

      The only thing that is preventing a collision is that we have a big sky and a few pilots (myself included) have managed to use see and avoid when that didn't work.
      Hoping things will be ok is not a strategy
      Rules should be preventing this.
      Luck should be reserved as a backup when the rules fail.

    3. Re:They ARE out there by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Yes but the fact that there are zero incidents arising from these sightings implies there should be a considered and measured response, not people running around with their hair on fire.

  28. Re:Thank ypou for your comments, fool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdort.

    hahahahah.

    I'm using that from now on.

  29. Mistaking birds for drones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess it could be worse.. they could mistake other planets as planes.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/17/uk-canada-aircanada-incident-idUSLNE83G01820120417

  30. These idiots are going to ruin it for everyone by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 1

    Expect to see them heavily regulated or banned soon.

    Exactly how are they going to ban them? Short of banning them completely from stores -- a heavy-handed move that would likely meet significant legal obstacles -- they're going to be out there. You can't control where people fly these things, either. You could try jamming commonly-used RC frequencies to stop people from manually flying them here or there, but you can't stop someone who might pre-program a GPS-guided drone to deliberately go into controlled airspace without also jamming GPS -- and that would piss off too many people. And if that fails, really determined bad guy/idiot could put together an inertial guidance setup and *still* get into your airspace.

    The only way to be sure is to shoot them down, but that's also impractical. These things are here to stay. I'm not saying I like it anymore than you because, I agree, some fool is going to fly their shiny quadcopter into the intake of a plane during takeoff and kill a bunch of people. I just don't see a way to stop them that's both legal (i.e. respects the safe, legal use of drones for legitimate purposes) and practical (you can't just shoot them all down).

    --
    In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  31. It's the military's drones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live at a marina where the navy stupidly trains their pilots over, despite the fact that over the marina is also a common flight zone for military aircraft coming into the north island runway (coronado, ca). Late at night I have been woken up by unmanned aircraft circling the marina around 2 am. When I moved my boat close to the airport in San Diego, again at 2 am, a military unmanned aircraft circling the harbor very close to the airport (within 100 meters). The planes don't usually fly at 2 am, but it is still a risk.