Slashdot Mirror


Federal Prison System Wants Anti-Drone Technology (networkworld.com)

coondoggie writes: Looking to counter the threat unmanned aircraft might bring to Federal prison guards and prisoners, the Federal Bureau of Prisons is looking at what types of technology could be used to defeat the drones. The group, which is an agency of the Department of Justice, issued a Request for Information specifically targeting what it called a fully integrated system that will allow for the detection, tracking, interdiction, engagement and neutralization of small — less than 55lb — unmanned aerial systems.

156 comments

  1. Nets... by moosehooey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just put up a fucking net over the whole thing...

    1. Re:Nets... by MobSwatter · · Score: 3, Funny

      That takes all the sport out of the whole damn thing. They already have anti drone tech and it's called a Benelli Super 90, perhaps they can't see it over the Dunkin Doughnuts box.

    2. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      simple jamming device would do.

    3. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly what I was thinking. Farmers already do this to keep birds out of orchards. Why spend what will probably be millions on new tech when simple nets will work.

    4. Re:Nets... by PPH · · Score: 1

      Benelli Super 90

      There's the target aquisition and tracking problem. That could be an issue at night when drones can fly GPS or inertial guidance (night/day doesn't matter to a drone).

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    5. Re:Nets... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Because, as an engineer, this is a really fun thing to work on.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    6. Re: Nets... by slasher999 · · Score: 0

      There is the answer. Put up a net that prevents drones from entering or dropping items into the prison areas. High tech isn't the answer to every problem. Sometimes low tech works just as well plus saves the taxpayers lots of cash!

    7. Re:Nets... by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Get the patents, too, because you'll sell a bunch to many people, ranging from the GetOffMyLawn-types, It'sMyAirSpace peeps, to those that simply ITCH to have a reason to shoot something with a large caliber.

      I favor the lock-and-load general purpose laser, myself. Fry 'em, especially when they try to catch my neighbor sunning herself. Or perhaps the OCR version, which checks to see if it's from Amazon, FedEx, Walmart, or a three letter agency.

      This should all go totally out of control very shortly as capitalism once again rubs up against perceived civil liberties.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    8. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jamming exactly what frequency?
      Are you assuming that someone is controlling the drone? It doesn't have to be that way. It can fly autonomously with GPS or even better - inertial guidance.

      So, no, simple jamming device would not do.

    9. Re:Nets... by ChaseTec · · Score: 1

      Do what exactly? You can program routes into drones and have them fly by gps.

      --
      My Hello World is 512 bytes. But it's also a valid Fat12 boot sector, Fat12 file reader, and Pmode routine.
    10. Re:Nets... by metrix007 · · Score: 1

      Not really. It takes about 5 minutes of thought.

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
    11. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just add a electric shock capability to the net and you get the hangers and climbers with miniature circular saws in their tiny, robotic hands.

    12. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do what exactly? You can program routes into drones and have them fly by gps.

      GPS is a radio that can be jammed.

      However you can easily jam an IMU that could use dead reckoning and a pre-programmed map and route.

    13. Re:Nets... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Give the prisoners shotguns with bird shot, afterall it's perfectly safe!

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    14. Re:Nets... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Sure, 5 minutes for the broad strokes. And a few months of work. And you get to play with drones and directed electrical thingies.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    15. Re:Nets... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      My personal favorite way to solve it would probably limit me to government customers, because I would probably combine detection with a directed RF jammer. Both the detection and the jammer are likely to use FCC-frowny methods. Lasers are probably a no-go because of the potential to harm aircraft and the cost of such a laser. A shotgun would be almost as much fun, anyway :)

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    16. Re:Nets... by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Yeah, RF jammers will be frowned on-- especially because there's no guarantee that any specific frequency or mode is being used. Non-visual lasers, have a possibility, as do bald eagles.

      The Net-Over-Everything has potential, too. The best idea? $10,000 bounty for the carcass.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    17. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They use something like the net in the image link to protect many 10's of hectares of fish hatchery near me.
      http://www.advancednets.com.au/uploads/7/4/3/1/7431634/2942844_orig.jpg
      It would be so easy.

    18. Re:Nets... by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      Jamming device?

      I was thinking trained owls

      But I suppose a jamming device would work.

      It'd be illegal of course. But who is going to serve a warrant on the warden for operating an illegal RF transmitter?

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    19. Re:Nets... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Net-over-everything is definitely the least fun and most effective :)

      Though to be fair, I can imagine that it wouldn't be too hard to rig a drone that drops it's payload in packets small enough to pass through any practical net size.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    20. Re:Nets... by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      Correctly installed, the net senses this. I want to see a good-for-four-miles radar with a goo bazooka. Plop that sucker with peanut butter. Imagine the squirrels.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
    21. Re:Nets... by geoskd · · Score: 1

      I favor the lock-and-load general purpose laser, myself. Fry 'em, especially when they try to catch my neighbor sunning herself.

      That would work double duty at the prisons too! Fry the drones coming and *and* the prisoners going out...

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    22. Re: Nets... by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      Saving taxpayers cash?? Prisons are for profit now! Extra high tech shit is more stuff you can bill the government for.

    23. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just use the rockets red glare andsee if your drone is still there?

    24. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, the high tension power lines would certainly do in any drone that got too close. Just make sure the prison isn't running off that power, though, otherwise you'll get a drone-induced blackout like they had in LA during the last week or so.

    25. Re:Nets... by peragrin · · Score: 1

      RF only works if it isn't flying on autopilot. a GPS jammer would work in most cases.

      Personally I think rapid fire large paint balls filled with a frictionless electrically conductive gel would be better. (they use a similar gel to forceable stop trucks).

      The frictionless gel would completely screw up all propellers and balance systems. the physical impact will do small damage, etc.

      The targeting system is easy enough to due with radar, infrared, and various other sensors.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    26. Re:Nets... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      If you can hit it with a paintball, you can hit it with birdshot. The guards already have 12 gauges.

      The real problem is finding/noticing the drones. A microphone and a computer could be programmed to listen for small propellers and sound an alarm. They run much higher RPM then light aircraft. Bonus, catches fixed wing RC contraband drops as well.

      Then you are back to where we are now, smugglers would have to payoff a crooked screw to get something larger than their sphincter in.

      To me the deeper question is: Which entrenched interest in prison contraband logistics is behind this push against drones?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    27. Re: Nets... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Going to have to be an awful fine net to prevent drops.

      All they can do is get the packages down to sphincter size and restore the status-quo.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    28. Re:Nets... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      GPS is still RF :)

      And the jamming of GPS is one of the reasons I'd only get government customers...

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    29. Re:Nets... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Any solution that involves squirrels is automatically a winner.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    30. Re:Nets... by BlueStrat · · Score: 2

      I favor the lock-and-load general purpose laser, myself.

      Give me a phased-plasma rifle in the 40-watt range.

      (We both know you repeated it under your breathe with Arnie's accent after you read it.)

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    31. Re:Nets... by nodonn · · Score: 1

      Give the Squirrels lasers. I for one welcome our new Laser wielding Squirrel Overlords.

    32. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And think of the money you would save because your project cutover plan would have a very small budget assigned to end user training on how to use the new anti-drone system.

    33. Re:Nets... by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      Some of the smaller drones will fly through something as small as chicken wire.

    34. Re: Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Going to have to be an awful fine net to prevent drops.

      What kind of net are you thinking about?
      A wire fence net will hold for anything that a drone can carry.
      Cover it with the typical insect net used for crops and nothing larger than a mosquito will get through.

      Sure, you can probably outfit a drone with tools to cut through or whatever, but then it starts to become complicated, which means it is likely to fail.
      You can drop something flammable on the net and then try to drop a knife through it, but fire is very detectable.

    35. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A drone small enough to pass through a chicken wire couldn't carry anything useful.
      No-one cares about the size of the drone, the interesting part if the size of the payload you can drop through the net.
      A chicken wire fence limits the payload size to small knives, possibly gun parts, but it requires that the dropped objects doesn't rotate and land horizontally.
      It would be fairly easy to drop drugs.
      Cover the chicken fence net it with a mosquito net and it should stop most things that anyone wants to get through.

    36. Re:Nets... by jonwil · · Score: 1

      The problem with nets is that the area you need to cover is massive.

      I did some measuring on Google Maps of the US federal prison outside Atlanta (just as an example) and the space inside the main fence is equivilant to over 21 NFL football fields in area.

      Now I dont know how much netting costs these days but even at the bulk buy cheap pricing the government would be getting it at, 1214732.80sq ft worth of netting is a LOT of money.

    37. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Catapults or trebaches -you could make a game show out of it . the public remotely control the huge seige engines and if they win they get afree convict all expenses paid by the feds indentured servant for 30 years.

    38. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just give 1/2 dozen crims with slingshots and ball bearings, and if they down a drone, they get to keep the payload and the 100gms of coke in the governors safe.

    39. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet, genetically engineered giant spiders! Putting a simple net is too boring (and cheap) solution. Where's the chance to make some money in the expense of tax payers?

    40. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of you 1%ers... and your Benelli... for us 99%ers, we will just use a Remington... ( viva la revolution ) ;)

    41. Re:Nets... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      're vo lu tion' jew meme bs. after real men got rid of the british tools of the jews, idiots allowed jews to make up fraud 'govt', jews started doing all the naming labeling bullshit. 're vo lu tionary war', scum jew 'bolshevik revolution', china controlled by jews 'chinese communist re vol ution', always naming to steer dupes.
      see 'govt prison jew schemes' post above.

    42. Re:Nets... by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      That was my first thought as well. Maybe some sort of system to detect if there's a tear in the nets, but otherwise it should be pretty easy to just throw some nets up.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
  2. Shotguns! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hear shotguns work. Just give all the inmates shotguns...

    1. Re:Shotguns! by bobbutts · · Score: 1

      It would be fun, but not very effective.

  3. sure by roman_mir · · Score: 2

    The group, which is an agency of the Department of Justice issued a Request for Information specifically targeting what it called a fully integrated systems that will allow for the detection, tracking, interdiction, engagement and neutralization of small â" less the 55lb â" unmanned aerial system.

    - introducing: the NET. This technology combined with the technology known as the MAN will provide a fully integrated system that will allow for the detection, tracking, interdiction, engagement and neutralization of small - less than the 55lb - unmanned aerial systems.

    Not to be confused with the FLYSWATTER system though, which is a much weaker solution.

    1. Re:sure by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      For someone who read the requirements, you missed that it had to operate at 1+ mile(s) away. That's a pretty fucking expensive net.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  4. What Threat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looking to counter the threat unmanned aircraft might bring to Federal prison guards and prisoners

    And exactly what threat might that be? Is this like the perceived and imaginary threat of loss of privacy will nude sunbathing in your yard?

    So far the only claimed "threat" has been cigarette and drug delivery.

    1. Re:What Threat? by Capt.Albatross · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So far the only claimed "threat" has been cigarette and drug delivery.

      I think there are some fairly obvious extensions to that threat.

    2. Re:What Threat? by PPH · · Score: 2

      Drugs, cigarettes, weapons, cell phones.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:What Threat? by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Couldn't cigarettes and drugs be parachuted in just as easily? Drones are a lot noisier, therefore more noticeable.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    4. Re:What Threat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, the guards (literally) want all the drug, cigarette, weapon & cell phone action for themselves.

      Nets and/or other coverings would be the appropriate technology for the application

    5. Re:What Threat? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      stuff them inside a pumpkin and catapult it into the prison yard. Next we'll have ban the sport of Pumpkin chucking to keep prisons safe.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    6. Re:What Threat? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Prisoners already have a solution involving stuff them inside things.

      It's not the prisons are anywhere close to drug/cell phone free.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    7. Re:What Threat? by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but if I have to visit my buddies in prison and there is a way I can avoid stuffing a bunch of junk up my butt, I think I'd at least consider that option.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    8. Re:What Threat? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I feel you.

      It's got to be a long hard road that makes 'suitcasing' someone's job.

      The fact is, I've had neighborhood friends from childhood go to prison, and one 'associate' that still might be going (not sure, we had that 'until this blows over, just leave me alone' talk). I didn't visit. The prospect of the search was enough.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  5. Fire the guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That are supposed to be watching the prisoners and perimeter.

    1. Re: Fire the guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't understand. Wouldn't that take a pretty large cannon? It doesn't seem practical.

    2. Re: Fire the guards by Falos · · Score: 1

      You voice a valid concern, sir or madam. Summon the chief architect that we may begin drafting trebuchet blueprints posthaste.

  6. Maybe use...a shotgun? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Federal prison system still uses guns, correct? If so, use a shotgun! Unless they've started placing Federal prisons in residential neighborhoods, there shouldn't be a problem.

    BTW, which important Federal program lost funding in order to fund drone prevention research at Federal prisons? Fucking stupid.

  7. Ballfield Net FTW by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 2

    Really, really? Put a net such that anything less than 1-inch in size gets snagged. $100 and a trip to Home Depot and you're fucking done.

    The DOC of the states can comment to this post if they want to send me a check for (puts pinkie to mouth) ONE MILLION DOLLARS!!! for this technological masterpiece of innovation.

    God, being a fucking brilliant Irate Engineer is fucking hard. Will all you nitwits shut to hell up and let me think? I'm trying to cure your pattern baldness and homosexuality, dammit, and it's not an easy problem. I might have to submit to a higher authority, which I hate.

    --

    Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

    Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    1. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Really, really? Put a net such that anything less than 1-inch in size gets snagged. $100 and a trip to Home Depot and you're fucking done.

      Please find me such a device or materials to make such a device at homedepot.com or amazon.com or alibaba.com or wherever.
      You can go up to $1000 if you want.

      Snagging shit MORE than 1 inch across along its thinnest axis is easy.

    2. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Really, really? Put a net such that anything less than 1-inch in size gets snagged. $100 and a trip to Home Depot and you're fucking done.

      The DOC of the states can comment to this post if they want to send me a check for (puts pinkie to mouth) ONE MILLION DOLLARS!!! for this technological masterpiece of innovation.

      God, being a fucking brilliant Irate Engineer is fucking hard. Will all you nitwits shut to hell up and let me think? I'm trying to cure your pattern baldness and homosexuality, dammit, and it's not an easy problem. I might have to submit to a higher authority, which I hate.

      You can buy enough netting (that will stand up to years of exposure) and support structure at Home Depot to cover a large (1 acre? 2 acre?) Prison Yard for $100? Which home depot to you shop at?

    3. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 1

      Why don't you, you lazy bastard? Why do I need to supply all your inadequacies? Go Google it.

      When you admit that you fail (as you surely will, as you're lazy) I'll be happy to supply the necessary links. I'd hate to deny you an opportunity to learn, since you have so much to learn.

      --

      Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

      Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    4. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 1

      Snagging shit MORE than 1 inch across along its thinnest axis is easy.

      Oh, and I'll go for the low hanging fruit in your post and say that you're a pro at this ;) Google, turd-burglar! Google!

      --

      Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

      Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    5. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by sexconker · · Score: 0

      LOL U R DUM

      "Put a net such that anything less than 1-inch in size gets snagged."

      DO YOU GET IT YET? DO U SEE UR FUCKUP?

    6. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 1

      You can buy enough netting (that will stand up to years of exposure) and support structure at Home Depot to cover a large (1 acre? 2 acre?) Prison Yard for $100? Which home depot to you shop at?

      At the Fucking Awesome Thank God the Irate Engineer Came By so We could Suck His Imperial Cock Home Depot. It's located in downtown Awesome. You certainly haven't been allowed anywhere near that place.

      --

      Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

      Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    7. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Please find me such a device or materials to make such a device at homedepot.com or amazon.com

      Here you go.

    8. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Informative

      cover a large (1 acre? 2 acre?) Prison Yard for $100?

      Most prison yards are no where near an acre. Last time I was in jail, our outdoor exercise area was 20x50ft, with high concrete walls. They only thing visible was the sky. We called it the "dog kennel". In the movies, they often show large yards, because that allows for more drama. Real prisons like to avoid drama.

    9. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 1

      LOL U R DUM

      "Put a net such that anything greater than 1-inch in size gets snagged."

      DO YOU GET IT YET? DO U SEE UR FUCKUP?

      Well, I can see that you can't spell worth a shit, but if I understand your patois correctly, no, not seeing a fuckup.

      --

      Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

      Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    10. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by hawguy · · Score: 2

      cover a large (1 acre? 2 acre?) Prison Yard for $100?

      Most prison yards are no where near an acre. Last time I was in jail, our outdoor exercise area was 20x50ft, with high concrete walls. They only thing visible was the sky. We called it the "dog kennel". In the movies, they often show large yards, because that allows for more drama. Real prisons like to avoid drama.

      Rockview State Prison: http://www.cor.pa.gov/Faciliti...

      35 acres within the perimeter. Inmates aren't allowed outside of the inner secure yard all the time, but to prevent contraband from being smuggled in, it would have to cover the entire secure perimeter.

    11. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Put a net such that anything greater than 1-inch in size gets snagged."

      That's not what you said, though. So not only are you stupid, you're a liar as well. Here's what you originally said:

      "Put a net such that anything less than 1-inch in size gets snagged."
       

    12. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Ants won't be snagged by that. Ants are less than 1 inch in size.

    13. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by sexconker · · Score: 1

      This is why Slashdot doesn't allow editing.
      Your original post, as well as my posts quoting you, preserve your stupidity for all to see.

    14. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, jail rec areas tend to be small and limited to the pod. Prisons tend to allow more mixing and mingling of different prisoners and larger general areas (like a rec area). The difference can be very stark, as the standards for what is a reasonable rec area are different for someone in for 10 months vs 10 years.

    15. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      1. That's 2-inch mesh.
      2. That's 200 sqft of fence. How many of those do you need to cover a whole prison yard?
      3. You can't just drape chain link fence over an arbitrarily large span. That shit is going to sag.

    16. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Ants won't be snagged by that. Ants are less than 1 inch in size.

      So? Neutrinos are also less than 1 inch in size, and they won't be stopped by a million miles of lead.

      Chicken wire is enough to stop a drone, and is enough to catch almost anything dropped by a drone. Drones can't carry much.

    17. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      Well I guess all prisons must be like the one you were in.

    18. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Irate+Engineer · · Score: 2

      I think all you proved is how uninteresting it is to have conversations with pedantic fuckwads like you. Typos give you boners. Girls do not.

      --

      Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!

      Vote for Bernie in 2016!

    19. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1
      1.5" drones will fly straight through.

      http://www.amazon.com/KiiToys%...

    20. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about prisons, but I do know all petulant, friendless assholes really are like you.

    21. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prison and jail are not the same. The rec yard situation is not either.

    22. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called shade cloth. It's available commercially in huge quantities.

    23. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL "less than" "more than" I see what you did there. Granted, $100 isn't actually a whole lot of netting. The amount of material needed grows at best, geometrically with the range. The most effective system would probably be one that delivers the net to the general area of the target. That or a 4-mile-long bug zapper. (LOL, j/k although that would be 'interesting' to see. I mean terrifying)

    24. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, really? Put a net such that anything less than 1-inch in size gets snagged. $100 and a trip to Home Depot and you're fucking done.

      The DOC of the states can comment to this post if they want to send me a check for (puts pinkie to mouth) ONE MILLION DOLLARS!!! for this technological masterpiece of innovation.

      God, being a fucking brilliant Irate Engineer is fucking hard. Will all you nitwits shut to hell up and let me think? I'm trying to cure your pattern baldness and homosexuality, dammit, and it's not an easy problem. I might have to submit to a higher authority, which I hate.

      Curing pattern baldness is overrated. Just buff the cranium with Turtle Wax and call it a day.

    25. Re:Ballfield Net FTW by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 1

      More importantly their cargo will drop right through

  8. just a first generation proof of concept by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    the Feds have to start somewhere (domestically) with anti-drone tech so it will be improved and cheaper then all law enforcement can have some

    1. Re:just a first generation proof of concept by bswarm · · Score: 1

      There's supposed to be anti-drone devices in the works due to drones interfering with firefighter aircraft in California.

  9. They're oversimplifying the problem by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

    The real problem for prisons is helicopters:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Sort of difficult to jam the control system for a vehicle carrying a pilot inside it, isn't it?

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:They're oversimplifying the problem by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      True. But on the other hand, a full size helicopter is much easier to detect and shoot.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:They're oversimplifying the problem by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 1

      True. But on the other hand, a full size helicopter is much easier to detect and shoot.

      You'd think, but guards actually aren't good at it. I was looking over a list of helicopter prison escapes and while the guards have shot at helicopers, I haven't seen one where they hit it.

      The reality is that unless you can hit the pilot, which isn't easy to do when the helicopter is a few hundred yards away and moving in three dimensions, you aren't likely to stop a helicopter with an AR-15 or similar light rifle.

      Sure, with a M-60, M-240, or even M2, you could do it, with some training and practice, and tracer ammo...

      But really, are you going to open up with a heavy machine gun anywhere remotely close to a city or other place people live?

      No, of course not, that would be stupid.

  10. Sea-Wiz by Wintermute__ · · Score: 1
    1. Re:Sea-Wiz by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 1

      This one :-D And with the bonus of getting rid of helicopters as well

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  11. fighters by bigdavex · · Score: 1

    Defensive drones, so they can dogfight.

    --
    -Dave
    1. Re:fighters by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      They included that the system being proposed must be able to distinguish friendly drones. So there's some plan for DOJ drones around prisons, or at least planning ahead.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re: fighters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That seems cool, like battlebots but in the sky.
      I'd opt for grab and crush though, for my anti drone drone.

  12. I hear they have this stuff called fence by coolmoe2 · · Score: 1

    They use it everywhere in prisons in fact some max prisons even have it over the prison yard.
    Drone drops payload and it sits on top of that out of reach of the inmates. Then you track the drone and arrest the operators and make them inmates too.
    See win win

  13. Felony by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Isn't it already a felony? It's trespass and in most cases it's the smuggling of contraband into a prison.

    Maybe enforce the laws on the books first, else we might think this is yet another political power grab.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re:Felony by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Maybe enforce the laws on the books first, else we might think this is yet another political power grab.

      Er, that's the point. To enforce the law properly you need suitable counter-measure.
      Did you actually read anything in the article or summary, or did you just jump at the first opportunity to be anti-establishment?

    2. Re:Felony by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      It's not about enforcing the law. It's about the guards getting cut out of their graft.

      Prisons are awash with drugs and other contraband. How do you think it gets in? Carrier pigeon?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:Felony by mjr167 · · Score: 1

      Cause if I'm smuggling cigarettes and booze to my buddy in prison I care that it's a felony...

    4. Re:Felony by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      It's not about enforcing the law. It's about the guards getting cut out of their graft.

      Prisons are awash with drugs and other contraband. How do you think it gets in? Carrier pigeon?

      Probably lots of methods, one of which is drone drop. I fail to see how attempting to remove one of those methods is a bad thing?

    5. Re:Felony by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Only removing the method that the guards couldn't tax is a good thing? I suppose if you're a guard that's true.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    6. Re:Felony by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      No-one said this is the only method, the article is merely reporting on a the latest technique, since drone stories make good headlines.
      Tin foil hat much?

  14. Better idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I’d prefer anti-prison technology. Fortunately we already have it; we just need to use it.

  15. Efence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Interesting problem

    It would take some sort of surveillance radar system.
    Kind of an Efence, except in 3d.
    That makes a much bigger search volume than just looking for folks on the ground.
    Bistatic might make stealth harder.

    There are systems that could probably do that, but being willing to hook them to something to automatically intercept takes this to a whole nuther level of hard.
    Perhaps the first step should be to make a drone warning system that provides awareness that one is coming in.
    If that works, the a directional jammer (for the drone, not the radar) might be the next step.

    Keeping track of what cell phones are in the prison and why from their emissions might be a better goal?

    1. Re:Efence by SpectreBlofeld · · Score: 1

      Radar will be tricky because of, you know, birds. You'd have to be able to distinguish.

      Perhaps radar combined with wide-band frequency sniffers to see if any 'birds' are putting out radio signals. Then you could triangulate the drone's operator using sniffers placed in a network covering a few miles around the prison, and send the police after him quickly. Assuming the drone isn't autonomous of course. But I think you could identify a drone, what frequencies it's operating on, and find the pilot hanging out in his van nearby pretty quickly if you set it up right.

  16. Fool's Errand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Directional "zapping" of the control frequencies (normally ISM or RC bands) won't do diddly as long if the idiot is flying on GPS.
    Broad-spectrum jamming of the 802.11b won't do diddly, since that is usually a down-link frequency.
    Mavlink "jamming" won't do diddly, because not everything that flies uses Mavlink.

    Most of the "buy and go fly" junk out there is cheap quads. Most cheap quads can't dynamically compensate for a loss of a rotor.

    So, from stand-off range, you have four options:
    1. Directed RF
    2. Directed Frangible.
    3. Laser
    4. Shotgun
    5. Taser

    Directed RF is going to cause problems, unless you are talking a 1 degree beamwidth (128x128 TX elements) at the frequencies you are using. Jamming GPS is a bad idea. Nuking a hospitals patient monitoring system is also a bad idea. That cute multi-element yagi gun isn't going to work except on junk (otherwise known as CCCs - Cheap Chinese Crap - clones of DJIs).
    Directed Frangible is only good a short range.
    Laser, similar to the THEL, would work, but then you also have the problem of over-shoot.
    Shotgun - Pigeon Net.
    Taser: Find the perp with the control unit and nuke him until his teeth glow.

  17. bzzt! by kaatochacha · · Score: 1

    I realize it's overkill, but how awesome would a phalanx system be?

    1. Re:bzzt! by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Not overkill if scaled correctly. The concept of the Phalanx could be scaled down to BB sized projectiles, enough to take out a drone but not incur too much collateral damage.

    2. Re:bzzt! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      You used to be able to order BB machine guns out of the back of 'Boy's Life'. Good old days.

      A 5 HP compressor and 100 of those on gimbles/servos and you're putting up a wall of copper. If I did it, they would find something illegal about it.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:bzzt! by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Now that's something to take to Burning Man.

  18. EMP guns by VernonNemitz · · Score: 1

    If you fry the electronics of a drone, it won't fly so well.

    1. Re:EMP guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regular guns probably work better

    2. Re:EMP guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or you could give the inmates guns that fire nets ... what could possibly go wrong?

  19. Well that should be easy... by LessThanObvious · · Score: 1

    "fully integrated systems that will allow for the detection, tracking, interdiction, engagement and neutralization of small â" less than 55lb â" unmanned aerial system."

    Sure no problem, I'm sure that will be a highly successful project. It's good they didn't set an overly ambitious goal. Nothing a few sharks and laser beams couldn't handle. Plenty of cheap prison labor to dig the shark moat.

  20. More guards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As it is, prisons did a very poor job of keeping contraband out before drones, and lacked the manpower to maintain order (read how gangs are mostly non-existent in British prisons, yet thrive in the US).

    Not to mention the BOP does a miraculous job of pissing away money, and yet wants a technological fix that doesn't address the core problems.

    Nope, this is just signing on with a new trend, hoping more dollars will be passed its' way, and accomplishing nothing.

  21. Please Ignore This Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    7bc3 6e94 a8b6 0595
    a8c2 2c26 1f05 c6b8
    367a 616a a75a 6924
    a780 d67f ecbe 9eb2
    7567 e5d0 17ab 4c12
    48c5 97fc 6b91 96ce
    662b 189c 9452 1501
    da4e 4eca 9c08 cc89

  22. Not a new problem by SJ · · Score: 1

    Long range catapult?

    The only change that drones give you is range and accuracy, which admittedly is significant, but not a deal breaker.

  23. Geese by nowsharing · · Score: 2

    Geese beware.

    1. Re:Geese by GNious · · Score: 1

      only sub-55lb geese

  24. Re: jews dictate - no jammers - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seek psychiatric help, seriously.

  25. Birdshot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I understand that shotguns work pretty well against drones. At least in some parts of the US.

  26. Robot Wars in the sky... by matbury · · Score: 1

    Turn it into a free-for-all TV show: "Robot Wars in the sky." It'll be a big hit, I guarantee it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  27. I second the RF jammer by Pollux · · Score: 1

    This makes no sense to me. Why does our government need Boeing-grade solutions to very simple problems? Can our federal IT department not spend 60 seconds on Google, look up "Drone Jammer", and find this well-documented solution? Why can't they make something like this? FCC? Psh...these are the feds we're talking about. If Stingrays aren't a problem for them, jamming commercial drone frequencies won't be either. Maybe the electrical diagrams too complex for Uncle Sam to know what to do with? Oh, they want to detect them also? Another 60 seconds with "Sonar to detect drones" tells me that our friends across the pond have developed drone sonar for Heathrow. I'm pretty sure we're good friends with the Brits and can figure out how to use this technology in our prisons. Seriously...I've seen high school science fair projects look more complicated than this.

    Or maybe I'm not getting the point. Maybe our government just doesn't want to bother coming up with their own solutions. Maybe they just want to throw our tax money away.

    1. Re:I second the RF jammer by CaptQuark · · Score: 1

      You're assuming the bad guys will use common frequencies that match your jammer. They can change the frequency they operate at faster than you can reprogram your jammer. Plus, all new transmitters use Spread Spectrum technology to combat both accidental and intentional interference.

      You would be surprised at what some competitors will do at RC contests (turning on an older transmitter on the same frequency) to destabilize an opponents aircraft on purpose. Spread Spectrum technology and serial number encryption are used to prevent this.

      --

    2. Re:I second the RF jammer by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      At the moment, they are doing exactly what you say they should do: request for information. If after this they decide that they need something completely home-grown, then we can criticize. Right now they are just seeing what is available.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  28. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  29. Ceiling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use a ceiling!

  30. 0.177 BB Phalanx CIWS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    0.177 BB Phalanx CIWS
    Convert the Phalanx CIWS to a Gatling BB gun.

    Problem solved.

  31. Now we know who flew that drone into that prison.. by GrantRobertson · · Score: 1

    ...the manufacturer of some worthless yet insanely expensive anti-drone system which is soon to be implemented in all prisons as mandated by a law sponsored by the senators for whatever state said manufacturer calls home.

  32. Got it! by ememisya · · Score: 1

    A really powerful hair dryer! You're welcome.

    1. Re: Got it! by ememisya · · Score: 1

      Lazers! Wait, scan the area with high frequency sonar first, then lazerz!

    2. Re: Got it! by ememisya · · Score: 1

      If it's small it's going to be loud, if it's big it's going to be detectable. You can't jam all of them but you can jam most of them. Say it's a small drone with sound dampeners, automated flight path, faraday caged, random movements based on insect life in the area added to the flight path. Say it is also disguised as an insect. Your most powerful defense against this thing is its biggest weakness, it's flying. So, giant fans on the roof, strong enough to cover the compound so there will be a wind shield at night. During the day it's okay (supervise the prisoners). Good luck with the actual birds.

  33. Shotgun. by jcr · · Score: 1

    Problem solved.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  34. Anti-drone drones! by cyn1c77 · · Score: 1

    And the arms race begins!

  35. Launched nets? by Ihlosi · · Score: 1

    I assume you could load a cartridge (12ga? 10ga?) with a net that is launched at a relatively low velocity. The rest is just a matter of target acquisition and tracking.

  36. Jammer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see a few solutions.
    The first is the classic net - Low tech. works.
    The other is the navy laser cannon. Could shoot down everything detected in the airspace. But I think a problem is detecting it, as they can be pretty small.
    Send out false GPS signal, so autonomous drones will go elsewhere (position must change)
    Use a wideband jammer to jam most frequencies, like all phone, 2.4G, 5.8G, 900Mhz, 1.1GHz, 1.3GHz, 866MHz, 433MHz, 40MHz, 27MHz, etc etc. The listed frequencies are the most widely used bands for remote controlling drones.
    Put an EMP transmitter on a tower, and send out a pulse whenever a drone is detected, killing all electronics within a mile.

  37. Well - there's always the FCC by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    Because if I'm right they're going to block the 900Mhz to 2,400MHz band around such facilities. But that will run afoul of the FCC regulations because that big chunk of bandwidth also includes cellular, amateur, and wifi.

    Good luck with that.

  38. Proof read! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "less the 55lb — unmanned aerial system."

    That should presumably be "less THAN 55lb — unmanned aerial systemS."

    Americans...

  39. Screen by bl968 · · Score: 1

    www.homedepot.com/p/Phifer-96-in-x-100-ft-Black-Pet-Screen-3004131/204187914

    Lets light in and keeps the bugs out
    96" x 100 ft

    --
    "GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
  40. Re:jew bs- by dargaud · · Score: 1

    Are you an experimental trolling bot ? If so I'd suggest to your creators that they failed hard.

    --
    Non-Linux Penguins ?
  41. Chain Link by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    Simply cover the exercise yard or any other portion of the prison using chain link as a roof. That way a drone could not hope to deliver much of anything to the prison yards. And if a drone lowered itself enough to carefully pass an item through that ceiling it would make a good test of the guards use of shotguns.

  42. Pull! by mbrotzman.jhu · · Score: 1

    Strange that prison guards don't seem to know about shotguns.

  43. Use what you have! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You already have guard towers manned with people who have shotguns. Use them!

  44. Old School by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Guards that actually guard, shotgun with birdshot and a bounty on drones
    All this sitting looking at a screen makes for a fat ass and forgetting the old school tech
    Look up from the tablet and scan the area you are supposed to be watching.... meh worst case ... a few less pigeons fly around the yard and some lucky inmates have squab for supper.

  45. Gun control by dl_sledding · · Score: 1

    Let's treat this the same way the Government wants to handle citizen gun ownership. Just make the area above and around the prisons a "no fly zone". That'll stop the bad guys from using drones.

    It's logical, right? Using their ideas in this situation? And if it doesn't work here, why the hell would it work with "gun free zones"? It can be a teaching moment...

  46. Target practice! by martinfb · · Score: 1

    Have the guards spot and shoot any drones they see! It's target practice. I shoot any near my castle!

    --


    Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
  47. Fire Host by herbierobinson · · Score: 1

    A fire hose spraying diluted Coke syrup ought to do the trick...

    Or paintball guns...

    Good practice for the guards, too.

    --
    An engineer who ran for Congress. http://herbrobinson.us
  48. scum jews- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    scum jew troll, you know and I know that 90% of all 'comments' on the fraud scum jew 'web' are you scum jews and also your bullshit computer generated posts. I beat the shit out of your scum jew lies, which is why you scums post bs to distract from it. fck off scum jew -

    ---
    -others, copy my posts from above to re read, here also is more -

    They are millions in the tribe, they have butchered the world over, now the target is you, and they already killed here, vengeance is mass past overdue. 'civil war' fraud, 'war one' fraud' 'war two' fraud', 'banking' ripoff fraud', the mass 'welfare' scum fraud making whites pay for jews and everyone else, the 'minorities' shit, Waco, Oaklahoma city, all the false flags bs to take guns, their 911 assault. more fraud 'wars' to get more trillions in weapons, mass immigration to replace you, now they are spraying you.
    Note to add to posts above, copy, jews using scum dupes, the fraud 'civil' war, the south was seceding to be free of jew 'government', so the jews, who brought and owned the slaves, started screeching 'free the slaves' to set up a bogus 'war' to kill the southerners, the scum northern dupes 'went along' and killed their southern racial white kin. The jews left the south before the killing of the southerners started, then returned afterward, 'hired' back their slaves, and more jews swarmed in to take over the dead southerner's property. Scum dupes killing for the jew. A dozen fraud 'wars' later now You are the southerners. Chemtrail virus. The jews are a race. Extermination of all other races except ashkenazi jews in the tribe and their chinese slaves.

    On another thread a scum jew troll replied with this shit - "The good news is that if the Russians do their job, your part of the world will soon be without Internet service."

    The scum jews bragging in your face their scum 'russian' jew race bolshevik troops will be raping and butchering including your kids, those left over from the virus. Further, the 'russian' bs, 'cutting off the internet', the scum jews have their own real internet while you have jew shit. They will cut off everything whether you 'go along or not', you are being Sprayed. They take it all and kill you if you keep sitting on your ass. The electric/power utilities are OURS, it is you and I, not the scum jews who build and paid for it, the scum jews schemed them away into their bogus 'cities' or 'private' companies and hide behind 'public stock' scam while they rape your elec rates and give 'free' electric to scum jews in the tribe and mass immigrant parasites. It's all your to take back. If you wait until you're dying from the virus it's too late. You can't do anything without a tribe. That's why scum jews scheme to keep everyone else separated. Make your own tribes, the scum frauds in every 'govt' 'state' 'city' the scum fraud 'skools', the more you sit the closer the slaughter comes. see 'scum jew' post above, mass of information and links you would never find on your own, hand out notes to meet others, make your own tribes -

    Here is from all above so you can copy all at once -
    The scum jew 'anti semetic' bullshit. The ashkenazi jews are only part semetic, after killing over 500,000 nordic whites in the 'black death' by poisong the wells, killing over half of all whites on earth, they bred with nordic whites to blend in to better do their crimes and world takeover. Don't bother 'searching' all you will find are a few bullshit pages put up by jews sniveling 'blamed da po jew threw them all in the fire'. After the scum jews mass murder of whites, a few of the decimated towns managed to burn a couple hundred jews. A couple hundred, after the scum jews killed half our race, and have since then used scum dupe 'troops' to slaughter hundreds of million more whites in jew fraud 'wars', fraud 'civil war', fraud 'war two' slaughter of Germans, and other races in fraud 'wars' who were trying to be free of the scum jews. This while scum jew bolsheviks killed over 100 million nordic whites, paid for be ameriscums, as with all t

  49. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    - correction on post two above -

    - they will try to keep their 'states' fraud going which will still be the jews, after the cull swarming in more immigrant scum to replace the dead from the virus, suing more idiot immigrants to crush the immigrant idiots already here, -

    type suiing - should be using more iidot immigrants
    copy posts, save -