A interesting post on the Legal News & Discussion facebook page by Vic Moss this morning. I edited out what was not important.
"
Discussion about why drones need to be locked out or self authorized in certain areas.
There is a major airport with a drone detection system semi-permanently set up to record (record only) drone incursions into restricted airspace.
All flights were from 2-5 miles out from the end of the runway, and within the enhanced warning zone so they had to be intentionally flown. No accidental violations. All recorded flights were in 100' UASFM grids.
Here are the findings:
~Number of flights: 219
~Average AGL: 325'
~Number of flights exceeding 1000'AGL (in the 100' grid): 11.
That's only within a one week timeframe, and many were directly in the flight path.
I do not know how many of these flights were coordinated with ATC, but I can guaranty most were not. Especially the 1000' flights inside a 100' gird.
This information will be used an upcoming demonstration for FAA investigators.
Enforcement is coming folks. And this is why. Based on these findings, if public enforcement doesn't happen soon, it's an eventuality that more restrictions are coming.
This is not good. The report is sobering, and we all need to wakeup to the fact that if something doesn't happen soon, we will see more regulations, and possible pay to fly, in areas around airports."
Now the first post after that was:
"I am curious of how Accurate this recording system is though. As someone who works on an Airfield and deals with these kind of issues. I have many times seen manned aviation report UAS that turned out to be birds, how does this system work to determine the difference between a goose and a uas."
The response was:
"100% accurate. Does NOT detect anything non-electronic. With DeDrone which might be the system in use here. It detects drones based in part on RF emission and sonic signature. There's zero chance of it mis-identifying a bird as a drone. It uses an aggregate of various sensors to identify a drone in flight and locate it spatially. So it would detect the RF signal from the drone and the transmitter, and could even tell you where the pilot was standing if the location could be triangulated. For identifying the drone, it used camera image processing, directional microphones and sound signature of the motors in addition to the RF. Once the drone was detected, the system would record its video feed (if it was analog) for later payback, including identifying the pilot or evidence of activity."
Sounds like a wake up call for the UAV world.
"
Discussion about why drones need to be locked out or self authorized in certain areas.
There is a major airport with a drone detection system semi-permanently set up to record (record only) drone incursions into restricted airspace.
All flights were from 2-5 miles out from the end of the runway, and within the enhanced warning zone so they had to be intentionally flown. No accidental violations. All recorded flights were in 100' UASFM grids.
Here are the findings:
~Number of flights: 219
~Average AGL: 325'
~Number of flights exceeding 1000'AGL (in the 100' grid): 11.
That's only within a one week timeframe, and many were directly in the flight path.
I do not know how many of these flights were coordinated with ATC, but I can guaranty most were not. Especially the 1000' flights inside a 100' gird.
This information will be used an upcoming demonstration for FAA investigators.
Enforcement is coming folks. And this is why. Based on these findings, if public enforcement doesn't happen soon, it's an eventuality that more restrictions are coming.
This is not good. The report is sobering, and we all need to wakeup to the fact that if something doesn't happen soon, we will see more regulations, and possible pay to fly, in areas around airports."
Now the first post after that was:
"I am curious of how Accurate this recording system is though. As someone who works on an Airfield and deals with these kind of issues. I have many times seen manned aviation report UAS that turned out to be birds, how does this system work to determine the difference between a goose and a uas."
The response was:
"100% accurate. Does NOT detect anything non-electronic. With DeDrone which might be the system in use here. It detects drones based in part on RF emission and sonic signature. There's zero chance of it mis-identifying a bird as a drone. It uses an aggregate of various sensors to identify a drone in flight and locate it spatially. So it would detect the RF signal from the drone and the transmitter, and could even tell you where the pilot was standing if the location could be triangulated. For identifying the drone, it used camera image processing, directional microphones and sound signature of the motors in addition to the RF. Once the drone was detected, the system would record its video feed (if it was analog) for later payback, including identifying the pilot or evidence of activity."
Sounds like a wake up call for the UAV world.