Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Another Drone Crashes Near White House (roboticstrends.com)

Posted by samzenpus on from the learning-to-fly dept.

An anonymous reader writes: A man has been given a citation for flying a Drone near the Washington Monument and crashing on the Ellipse, a grassy area outside of the security perimeter near the White House South Lawn. Howard Solomon III said he had been trying to take pictures of the monument and that the wind blew the drone across a street that divides the Ellipse from the grounds of the Washington Monument. A spokeswoman for the U.S. Park Police says Solomon didn't appear to be doing anything 'nefarious' but added, hat this was the ninth time a drone has been flown in a national park in the greater Washington area in 2015 and the 26th since 2013.

34 of 58 comments (clear)

  1. 9 drones? Sounds like an invasion.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously, 9 TERRORIST drones have been flown in national parks?
    And how many KILLER Frisbees?
    What about ASSASSIN boomerangs?

    IMHO, they should define the difference between the small TOY drones and the bigger commercial metal ones based on weight, and quit worrying about the toys.

    Because they have no significant payload, no great momentum if they crash and don't pose a threat except in the imagination of security theater budget justifiers.

    1. Re:9 drones? Sounds like an invasion.... by KGIII · · Score: 1

      They should and I agree - though privacy aspects should be relative to all of them, regardless of size. That said, and I'll say again, you'll find that your hobby is going to be really restricted because of the attitudes you (not you specifically) keep professing to have. Your failure to police and educate your own is going to result in draconian laws that limit your rights. Whining isn't going to stop that nor is assuming one has a right to use it wherever they want. Simply, you are going to get fucked. Hard.

      Why do I care? Empathy. I absolutely abhor restrictions on rights that are pointless and abusive. I despise it. I care because I don't want YOU to lose YOUR rights. There's no way this will impact me - not at all. I don't own, want to own, or have a use for a remotely controlled toy capable of flight. I have nary a nickel involved but I do care about your rights and freedoms. I do care about draconian responses to things that could have been resolved easier and with less fanfare.

      I'm afraid it's too late now. You probably should have started an online forum that was included in all manufacturer's documentation and offered some sort of voluntary online certification process (free certificates that they can print out) and gotten the buy-in from the OEMs. You should have encouraged club joining. You should have encouraged education and polite use. Instead, we get mouth drooling morons who think they can do whatever they want and the threads are full of them - it's not like I'm revising history here.

      You probably should have done something to reassure the people who have complained about them instead of saying that you'll fly over their property if you want and record them doing anything they want - even if they're behind a fence and obviously want privacy. There was one guy here who wanted to scour the neighborhood for plant pots and reasoned that he could spy on them with binoculars and a tall ladder/building so it was okay to go ahead and do so with a R/C aircraft. And people agreed...

      You're going to get spanked and have your toys taken away by people with guns and power. And you're going to complain... Instead of listening to reason you keep hearing about people doing the same shit, day in and day out. And you support them... And you minimize... And you emulate... And you'll get what you probably don't deserve but will, predictably, get. If you spit in the eye of a bully then you're probably going to get the shit kicked out of you. Don't spit in the eye of a bully. Well, unless you like getting the shit kicked out of you.

      And before someone chimes in with, "They can't stop me!!!" Well, no... Laws don't work like that. They don't stop anyone or the laws against murder would mean nobody gets murdered. What they do is establish some really crappy penalties for your behavior and they WILL catch you. You're not that smart and they only need to be lucky once while you have to be lucky every time. Good luck with that.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  2. Crashes? by plopez · · Score: 1

    Or shot down?

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  3. Did they realize they were in a National Park? by pollarda · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I bet that most of the people flying their drones in and around Washington monuments didn't even realize they were in a National Park. When people think of National Parks, they think of Yellow Stone, Yosemite, etc. out in the middle of the wilderness -- not in the middle of the city. Then there is probably an even smaller percentage that know that flying drones inside National Parks is illegal.

    Of course, flying your drone around the White House is plain stupid. With all the security the President gets you know that flying drones around the White House is simply asking for trouble -- no matter the legality.

    1. Re:Did they realize they were in a National Park? by zippthorne · · Score: 2

      Well sure.. but shouldn't it be fine to fly a RC helicopter to take some pictures in a national park?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:Did they realize they were in a National Park? by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Apparently not. All RC aircraft, of any kind, are completely banned from use in any area managed by the parks department. That includes thousands of miles of coastline and riverfronts, huge swaths of unoccupied forest, large areas of unoccupied desert, and so on. We certainly can't have some photographer using a 4-pound plastic quad copter to take pictures from 50' feet in the air out in the middle of a huge forest. But we can allow your visit to a national monument to be disrupted by a pack of screaming children, or someone wearing toxic levels of perfume, or people jousting with selfie sticks in front of Abraham Lincoln, because that's different.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:Did they realize they were in a National Park? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      MOST National Park land isn't anything that resembles wildnerness where a drone (or a real helicopter for that matter) would not be noticed. Yes, there are parks like Mount Rainier, North Cascades, Glacier, etc where a drone could easily be lost but many parks look like the tourist traps that they are.

      Even the wilderness-type parks have the majority of humans clustered in small areas.

      And the Park Service has to deal with all manner of idiot on routine basis. From the yo-yo that thinks it's OK to get close enough to some large wild animal to get forensic pictures of nose hair to the moron who tries to tramp up a glacier encrusted mountain in flip flops. And all of their first cousins.

      So yeah, the first reaction to drones or anything remotely like them will be to say no. Even trying to get a helicopter to shoot professional video takes months of going back and forth to get permission. And we users of the less traveled roads in National Parks like it that way. I just bought a couple of miniature drones (Hubsun 4 and similar) to play with until I can get good enough to risk and expensive version out in the boonies and the temptation to use them anywhere is certainly there. They're a lot of fun and the capabilities of a $1000 drone are awfully impressive. That combo is going to bring out the people with both disposable income and disposable brains.

      The Park Service can't stop families or perfumaholics or the ever present selfie stick. They can't stop stupid. The Park Service is a complex beast run by bureaucrats in Washington who think that a giant Coca-Cola sign on the wall of the Grand Canyon would be an OK idea if they got paid enough for it. It is managed by lots of individual folks in the field, some of which are impressively competent and caring. Others not so much.

      But until we have ways of actually controlling this entertaining new concept, I'd agree with NPS and keep the fuckers mostly out.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    4. Re:Did they realize they were in a National Park? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I have to say I could not disagree more. National parks are the one place where the likely damage caused by an out of control drone is incredibly limited and at the same time the footage obtained can be quite stunning. This is a good incentive to get idiots with out of control drones out of the crowded cities.

    5. Re:Did they realize they were in a National Park? by PPH · · Score: 1

      MOST National Park land isn't anything that resembles wildnerness

      My mistake. Wilderness areas and Washington DC both appear to be populated largely by bumps on logs. Sorry about that.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    6. Re:Did they realize they were in a National Park? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      They may well have those laws because of the way people acted. I don't know, I've not researched. However, that's probably the case. Did you expect a different outcome?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    7. Re:Did they realize they were in a National Park? by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      Some people with RC Heli's act like this. So i wouldn't expect them to behave well in public.

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    8. Re:Did they realize they were in a National Park? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      That thing is wound up pretty damned tight. Holy shit! They're in the house, at eye level, and hammering on it. At least they appear to be able to keep it under control but shit happens. Dumb asses. Ah well... I was young and stupid too, I guess. However, I was a bit more respectful of other people and their safety. It's okay to endanger myself. It's not okay to risk other people.

      You guys want heavy-handed restrictions? This is how you get restrictions. Read some of the damned posts in this threads. They are going to ruin it for others. I care because, well, I hate the idea of people getting screwed over and losing their rights even if it doesn't impact me. It just means that they'll come for my hobbies next. Assholes.

      We can't shoot them but I'd suggest that other hobbyists find them and punch them in the nuts. It's too late for them to try what I suggested. Dumb asses. Egotistical, selfish, ignorant, jackasses. *sighs* Yay! More encroachment by the government. It *is* coming. There is no doubt about it, at this point we're past the event horizon. Good luck. Idiots.

      They had a good thing going too. Thanks for the link.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    9. Re:Did they realize they were in a National Park? by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

      I like to fly RC helis and planes and have a lot of respect for them. I have had some minor scrapes but mostly through stupidity when I was initially learning. People are buying these quadcopters to film stuff(I think it might have become a new trend) and flying them in places where I would never operate a small heli due to the dangers they pose. If I didn't have a few hectares to fly/crash in I probably wouldn't bother at all.

      There is going to be some horrific accident in the news soon and the hobby will be ruined for those that actually enjoy it.

      Here is some real quality heli flying

      --
      The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
    10. Re:Did they realize they were in a National Park? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      That is either really good or really bad. I have no idea if he's mashing buttons or if he knows what he's doing. Parts of it look like a dragonfly. It's kind of neat. It's not something I'd bother to learn or do but I feel sorry for those who are going to be restricted because they have a hobby that's getting popular. I sort of know what that's like.

      Since day one, here on this site - of all places, I've pointed out that the behavior is going to result in regulation. I've been insulted and told that they'd just violate the law anyways and that they were uncatchable. I am sorry for your loss. It's those people, the ones that said they were entitled to do anything they wanted with them, that are ruining it for you. They're right here and some have kept it up in this same thread - it's starting to die down a little now but funnily nobody has yet said they were sorry and wrong.

      You're going to get screwed and it's not your fault. I suggested getting a nice educational group going - a consortium if you will, and making a site with all the resources you could amass and then getting vendor buy in by having them list the URL in their packaging, offer updates and courses through the site, and things like that. You could have done a nice interface where they trained online (maybe even a flash game or something too) where they'd complete a small course and get voluntarily certified. They could print it out or get official copies, one of you get a notary license (they're cheap and easy to get) and give them an official seal.

      That, just that one thing, would have helped. I imagine vendors would have jumped all over it to sponsor the site. It'd pay for itself and maybe even turn into a job for a few people if it got big enough. What did I get? Told they could fly it over my house and it was the same thing as a satellite looking down at me. You're fucked. I tried to help because I hate seeing anyone's rights eroded.

      It's probably past the event horizon now. I don't think you can still do that - it might be worth trying though. Hell, I still have a fairly unused colo. I probably would have helped. Then it turned out the group was rotten to the core - not you but the most vocal of the hobbyists. It's a shame too because, frankly, that looked like he was having fun and it sounded like there was a whole crowd of people who were enjoying the show. (I had no idea they did that sort of thing - that was kind of neat.)

      I don't know if you need to do any reflection concerning how you've acted. You seem to be a rational person and I don't recall you opining negatively in the past. I'm sorry for your loss. At this point, really, it's destiny and it may be too late to act on it in time to prevent it or at least dull the edges a little. Even though every time I've mentioned this I've been shot down, so to speak, I still wish no ill and hope you do resolve this without the need of intervention. I still figure it is inevitable but, if you're really wanting to, then you may want to see what you and your peers can come up with. You're a talented group and creative.

      Unfortunately, you've got some crazy zealots who seem to be the most vocal and the bad behavior is being emphasized. Well, at least that is what it looks like from the outside looking in. I can say, first hand, that the treatment I've received by your peers has been deplorable. All while I was as polite as I am being now. I've enough of a post history to show that I'm not usually an asshole and I'm usually very open to admitting my own errors and to learning new things. So, I don't think it's me. I saw similar behavior directed towards others. We've expected maturity (because that's what the RC group has been, historically) and we got petulant children with entitlement issues and an unwillingness to accept that they're not in charge.

      I don't want to say you, you personally, deserve it because you don't. Historically the group has been impeccable until recently. I suspect it's the barrier to enter the hobby that is the issue. That and showing off is

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  4. "drones" eh? by rubycodez · · Score: 3, Insightful

    remote control hobbyist planes existed when I was a kid. I'm over 50.

    1. Re:"drones" eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I wonder if paper airplanes are illegal to fly near the WH. "We have an unpowered ultralight drone flying over the fence, initiate code 3 and activate anti-aircraft lasers".

    2. Re:"drones" eh? by rubycodez · · Score: 2

      we made more threatening things sometimes too, rubber band powered paper plate planes. Terrorists in training!

    3. Re:"drones" eh? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      VTOL changes things, so does cost of entry...

    4. Re:"drones" eh? by rsmith-mac · · Score: 1

      VTOL changes things, so does cost of entry...

      And the ability to receive real-time video so that you can fly beyond the line of sight.

      Modern drones are not your old school RC planes, least of all because of how much more accessible these are to nimrods like the one in TFA.

    5. Re:"drones" eh? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      http://www.poweruptoys.com/

    6. Re:"drones" eh? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Real-time video feeds from remotely controlled hobby aircraft was a possibility in the 1970s, it's just that the toy would have cost your average Joe 10+ month's wages. Most people had one hobby or the other, but the cost of combining the two was just foolish, given the risk you are putting the equipment into.

      So, today, we bitch and moan about a $2500 pricetag, but even at a "you want fries with that?" job, you can earn the money in less than 2 months, people who went to college and got a degree in something employable bring that home in a biweekly paycheck.

  5. We should inspire... by FlopEJoe · · Score: 4, Funny

    Cool drone, Howard. Want to bring it to the White House? We should inspire more people like you to like science. It's what makes America great.

    1. Re:We should inspire... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It would be even more awesome if Howie could attach a clock he invented to the drone.

    2. Re:We should inspire... by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      Cool drone, Howard. Want to bring it to the White House? We should inspire more people like you to like science. It's what makes America great.

      Good one; not holding my breath on that ...

  6. Million toy drones may be sold Xmas by peter303 · · Score: 1

    So expect lots more drone stories. With 20M million age 8-20 and 40M age 20-40, amillion is not a whole lot.

  7. Re:Americans are too paranoid by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

    Looks like common sense prevailed this time. He didn't get guantanamo'd, he wasn't hauled off in handcuffs; he just got a citation for flying his drone where he wasn't supposed to.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  8. Easy solution by kimvette · · Score: 2

    There is a relatively easy solution to this problem to avoid any confusion.

    Offer permits for such drone flights around monuments and installations such as the Capitol, with the contract signed upon applying for the permit acknowledging the limits on flight ceiling, proximity to the installation and to other people, and a hotline to call to report your location when you start flying and verify the time is okay (you never know if a national security issue has arisen there), if you have a mishap, etc. and when you've finished getting your shots. Even better would be to require that you have a cellphone on you and are reachable in case any sort of "lockdown" event occurs and the drone flight needs to be cancelled to eliminate distraction of security personnel.

    This puts security at ease, preserves your right as The People to view what your tax dollars are paying for, and is a reasonable compromise both sides of the issue. It also eliminates the excuse of "but I didn't know it wasn't okay to hover outside the oval office for 20 minutes!" and "I didn't know it wasn't okay to buzz the President's helicopter!"

    Allowing flights ad-hoc over such installations is chaotic and is a distraction, but disallowing them completely is too extreme. Allowing them under controlled conditions outside the perimeter when there is nothing serious going on is not unreasonable.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  9. If it was a DRONE by fred911 · · Score: 1

    #1 "He" wouldn't have been flying it, it would have been autonomous

    #2 It probably wouldn't have crashed. .

      Besides the rant, this guys got to be a real knuckle dagger or have other motivation as the camera resolution is 640x480. Here's some pictures and a review so you can see the toy he was flying.

    http://www.rcgroups.com/forums...
     

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  10. Re:Move the White House by tlambert · · Score: 1

    to the top of Mt. Denali.

    Problem solved

    Even better! Rearrange the letters afterwards to confuse people, and rename it "Mt. Denial".

  11. Do Chevy Citations even meet current EPA regs? by tlambert · · Score: 1

    Do Chevy Citations even meet current EPA regs?

    I mean, those cars are from 30 years ago, at best! What kind of monster would give someone a Chevy Citation, just for fly a toy quadcopter?!?

  12. Re:You Fucking Cowards! by KGIII · · Score: 1

    See the post above? See that? You want draconian laws and further encroachment on your rights? Well, that is how you get draconian laws and fewer rights.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  13. Re:Americans are too paranoid by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

    If no ones told you today. Fuck off.

    --
    The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  14. Speaking of Nimrods by uninformedLuddite · · Score: 1

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    --
    The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
  15. I am in favor of free airspace... by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

    I am generally in favor of free airspace (when talking about devices with enough weight to maybe scratch a car if they go wrong)

    But on the other hand: if you at any point *lose control* of your drone, to such an extent that it flies into a restricted-for-a-good-reason zone, then I think that's worthy of a fine.

    --
    -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All