Federal Judge Dismisses Suit Against 'Drone Slayer'

[95XL883]

Wake people up to what? OK, you would like to see communication infrastructure wipe off of the face of the earth. Well you may get your wish. It could happen. But in our modern world there will be an awful lot of hardship and suffering without communications. That much I will assure you of.

What is your "lesson to be learned" here? What is your point?

Said in the sprit of good natured kidding. Well people would just concentrate on what they left home to do. (Typed on my iPhone while turkey hunting.)

On a more serious note, yes the electronics can be a distraction but it is really nice to get info immediately if needed. And it is a nice lifeline to have if trouble arises.

 

[TemporaryKubotaOwnerMark]

LoL...and the USA does not have a problem with illegal immigrants because we have laws...!...don't quit yer day job there Sherlock...

You should be a lab specimen somewhere. Such remarkably brainless human still walking around is a wonder.

I never said they are not sold, I specifically said they ARE sold and they ARE used.

And they are illegal.

Please enroll.

 

[mike69440]

Just for perspective, the last time about a year or more I looked into the capability of drone hi resolution photography, there are drones affordable by municipal governments if they want to spend some serious money, Not DARPA/CIA level stuff, that can hover above a city and provide 5 to 25 square miles of instantaneous his resolution monitoring. These things any the size of large model airplanes. They use thousands of little cell phone cameras. Computer program looks for anything suspicious for police surveillance. If your being mugged in a parking lot, smile you are on camera. These things must be a menace to commercial aviation.

Forget privacy.

 

[dickfoster]

Even up here, using those could get you in a more trouble than a shotgun would.

Rgds, D.

Exactly!

 

[dickfoster]

I just want something that will jam the boom box in the car next to me at red lights.

TBS

A .45 will do that nicely.

 

[dickfoster]

As it was explained to me, there's two different radar systems in use. One can see almost all airplanes and determine distance and heading, but it can't determine altitude. The other sends out a signal that transponders recognize. When the transponder detects that second type of radar, it squawks (returns) a number that the pilot was instructed to squawk. Air traffic control keeps track of the altitude they told you to fly at. So, if your have a transponder, and they tell you to squawk 1234, and fly at 10,000 feet, that's how they "best guess" your actual altitude. They are essentially trusting you to fly at the altitude they told you to, but don't really have a great way to verify that you are, indeed, actually at that assigned altitude. Sleep well on that.... :laughing:

Here's a link that explains it better ....

Transponder (aeronautics) - Wikipedia

Actually for several years now transponders have included what is called mode C. In mode C, data from an encoder equipped altimeter is sent to the transponder. When the transponder is interrogated in mode C, it responds with the altitude data but when interrogated in mode A it responds with the swalk code set on the transponder. This was the way it was back when I did avionics and that was going back something like 30 years or so ago. Even most private aircraft had mode C capable transponders as it was mandated by the FAA and only a few older aircraft didn't have them. I forget what the cut off date was for everyone to be on board.

 

[dickfoster]

Turned off by the pilot, or turned off by a fire, or turned off by a power loss.

Bruce

Or turned off by a terrorist.

 

[dickfoster]

I did not know that. Thanks. :thumbsup:

It doesn't take a second transponder all transponders made today do both mode A and mode C where mode C is altitude data. The way the transponder is interrogated, pulse spacing, makes it respone with altitude data or a squawk code that the pilot sets. Also there are standard squawk codes set aside for VFR flight to indicate the aircraft is under visual flight rules and isn't being controlled by ATC, a code if you declare an emergency and a code if you are hijacked.

 

[dickfoster]

Just for perspective, the last time about a year or more I looked into the capability of drone hi resolution photography, there are drones affordable by municipal governments if they want to spend some serious money, Not DARPA/CIA level stuff, that can hover above a city and provide 5 to 25 square miles of instantaneous his resolution monitoring. These things any the size of large model airplanes. They use thousands of little cell phone cameras. Computer program looks for anything suspicious for police surveillance. If your being mugged in a parking lot, smile you are on camera. These things must be a menace to commercial aviation.

Forget privacy.

Most cell phone cameras today are indeed hi resolution. The hard part is not the camera because they are uber cheap, this much I know because I helped to make it so. The hard part is getting all that data down to the ground. What you could have to make it both workable and cheap is to send real time video in say standard definition (about VGA or your old TV) to the ground, then have the camera take hi resolution stills on command and save them to an on board thumb drive that could be retrieved and downloaded later. There are camera chips existing today that will do that and they are also cheap.

 

[TemporaryKubotaOwnerMark]

The hard part is getting all that data down to the ground.

Yep. Backhaul is the buggaboo.