OH GREAT A DIY DRONE KILLER
- Thread starter Omar Dairky
- Start date
If you are foolish enough to fly that close over someone's property then to bad. Worries me not.
PatR
Premium Pilot
It'll sure make some fabrication shops happy. Note the video started with an illegal BLOS flight. I'm with Steve, there are people flying that would deserve this.
Some people have FAR too much time on their hands. Very clever idea, however, all he had to do was to just close the door to his shed.
FlushVision
Premium Pilot
Probably wrap that net around some child's neck. I wonder how many 'takes' it took to show it hitting the aircraft. I do agree with earlier comments, though. Anyone flying so close deserves to be taken out.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2017
- Messages
- 110
- Reaction score
- 21
- Age
- 33
I suggest you check how much you are going to lose if you take a drone out of the sky.
The FAA considers a drone as an aircraft. There is no difference in taking down a drone to taking down a plane or a helicopter. The FAA says its a $250000 fine and up to 5 years in prison for taking down a drone.
As a side note, when you buy a house you dont purchase the airspace above it. You purchase the land area (lenght x width), you are given the dimensions in square feet, not in cubic feet.
So, my suggestion is put that thing back in the closet cause the day you run into an angry drone pilot you will regret to have purchased or built that thing.
The FAA considers a drone as an aircraft. There is no difference in taking down a drone to taking down a plane or a helicopter. The FAA says its a $250000 fine and up to 5 years in prison for taking down a drone.
As a side note, when you buy a house you dont purchase the airspace above it. You purchase the land area (lenght x width), you are given the dimensions in square feet, not in cubic feet.
So, my suggestion is put that thing back in the closet cause the day you run into an angry drone pilot you will regret to have purchased or built that thing.
I believe John Tayor's successful lawsuit against the FAA wipes out that ruling by the FAA that drones are considered aircraft.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2017
- Messages
- 110
- Reaction score
- 21
- Age
- 33
John Taylor was claiming that under Part 48 no model aircraft was required to have a registration and he won. However, that only applies to drones used for private purposes. Those used for commercial purposes are still required to have an aircraft registration number, therefore are and will continue to be considered "Aircraft". I am checking right now the court documents and it explicitly says "This ruling does NOT apply to commercial or public aircraft". So, if you take down a drone that is being used as a hobby, congratulations!, BUT if you are unlucky enough to take down one that's being used commercially, oh boy you have a problem!
Since you can't see farther than 100ft away if the drone has a registration number or not, why risk it?
If you want to take drones down using this Net Catching System, you will face charges as per the court ruling previously mentioned. AND, if you decide to go the extra mile and pull out your .45cal or 12 gauge shootgun and blast it out of the sky, you will face way more serious federal charges which include, but are not limited to Shooting ammo to the air without a safety reason, shooting down a registered aircraft flying in FAA Airspace. among others they might come up with.
In most states shooting bullets to the air is just that... illegal.
Have you heard all bullets come down?
There is a LOT more to lose than to earn in this case.
Since you can't see farther than 100ft away if the drone has a registration number or not, why risk it?
If you want to take drones down using this Net Catching System, you will face charges as per the court ruling previously mentioned. AND, if you decide to go the extra mile and pull out your .45cal or 12 gauge shootgun and blast it out of the sky, you will face way more serious federal charges which include, but are not limited to Shooting ammo to the air without a safety reason, shooting down a registered aircraft flying in FAA Airspace. among others they might come up with.
In most states shooting bullets to the air is just that... illegal.
Have you heard all bullets come down?
There is a LOT more to lose than to earn in this case.
Last edited:
Well, said, Hernandez.... and, like you said before, they'll be dealing with one very angry drone pilot!
PatR
Premium Pilot
I was told by a senior engineer once that all solutions must be "elegant". A year later he didn't work there any more. Closing the door would not be elegant.
LOL - big difference between 'elegance' 'efficiency' and 'practicality'.
All things said, this concept, while it may look impressive, is not what I would call practical and while it may gain a lot of 'hits' on the YT channel, it isn't really worth debating in too much detail.
Bottom line, if you are reckless enough to fly too close to someone, or their property (as demonstrated in the video), and the owner of that property has enough time on their hands, plus the equipment or budget to fabricate such a device, then so be it.
Let's hope that the majority of multi rotor pilots have enough common sense to negate this ever happening.
Just a thought.....I wonder if the RS module could pick up, and avoid, a fast approaching net being shot at it?? I think not.
All things said, this concept, while it may look impressive, is not what I would call practical and while it may gain a lot of 'hits' on the YT channel, it isn't really worth debating in too much detail.
Bottom line, if you are reckless enough to fly too close to someone, or their property (as demonstrated in the video), and the owner of that property has enough time on their hands, plus the equipment or budget to fabricate such a device, then so be it.
Let's hope that the majority of multi rotor pilots have enough common sense to negate this ever happening.
Just a thought.....I wonder if the RS module could pick up, and avoid, a fast approaching net being shot at it?? I think not.
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2017
- Messages
- 128
- Reaction score
- 41
- Age
- 48
You are right bout those rules. I have mine registered. Commercial drones have different rules than recreational. I cant fly all my drones the same. One is commercial use and the others recreational. If anyone takes the part 107 test they will understand the dos and donts of this hobby.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2016
- Messages
- 8
- Reaction score
- 3
- Age
- 53
Actually, isn't the rule based on usage rather than the bird itself? For example, I have each of my AV/AP UAVs registered for commercial usage, but I still use them for non-commercial purposes too. I also have (and don't mind keeping) a recreational reg. no. from the FAA, which applies to all my birds, big and small.
My understanding has been that when flying as a hobbyist I abide by the hobbyist rules, and when I'm getting paid (or compensated in any way...), I abide by the commercial rules.
For example, we have a 10 acre family property in the mountains where I fly everything from my AV/AP birds to FPV racers to tiny whoops. This is all recreational. On the flip side, I've wondered if I want to use my Tiny Whoop to capture some fun, quirky video for a job I'm doing, should I just go ahead and get a commercial reg. no. for it? Technically it's easily less than .5 lbs, but I'm getting compensated to use it...
No one's asked me for that type of footage yet, so this is all just theorhetical, but still a curiousity to me
My understanding has been that when flying as a hobbyist I abide by the hobbyist rules, and when I'm getting paid (or compensated in any way...), I abide by the commercial rules.
For example, we have a 10 acre family property in the mountains where I fly everything from my AV/AP birds to FPV racers to tiny whoops. This is all recreational. On the flip side, I've wondered if I want to use my Tiny Whoop to capture some fun, quirky video for a job I'm doing, should I just go ahead and get a commercial reg. no. for it? Technically it's easily less than .5 lbs, but I'm getting compensated to use it...
No one's asked me for that type of footage yet, so this is all just theorhetical, but still a curiousity to me
Having been a machinist in the Army, I was fascinated with the construction of the project, but not it's purpose. Makes perfect sense that the person flying the drone had no business flying it invasively close to another persons property. But is makes no sense to use an unsafe weapon and shoot it down. Common sense needs to prevail on both sides.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2017
- Messages
- 110
- Reaction score
- 21
- Age
- 33
I have a Private Registration Number I got form the FAA the first day they started requiring drone registration. And I also have a commercial drone registration (which has a different number btw) that I have in my Q500 4K at all times, I also have my phone number affixed to the bird as well.
Therefore, I consider my Q500 4K to be used as commercial everytime I am flying it, because it has a commercial number stuck in it at all times.
Therefore, I consider my Q500 4K to be used as commercial everytime I am flying it, because it has a commercial number stuck in it at all times.
Look up the word "elegant":
"(of a scientific theory or solution to a problem) pleasingly ingenious and simple."
The net solution was not elegant, but extreme, as the video site specializes in. In this case, closing the shop door would be the elegant solution.
