jayanderson
-
Posts
0 -
Joined
-
Last visited
jayanderson's Achievements
-
How about a slingshot or catapult. You raise an important point, it is indeed pretty convenient to use drones for delivery of various products, regardless of whether it'd be pizza or c4. That is why drones should be regulated. I don't know any government that would like to outright just ban drones. If a country would chose to ban them it would be their loss really, because drones are the future of delivery, logistics, safety, surveillance, art and more.
-
I don't believe that will ever happen. While drones are an incredibly convenient way of delivering bombs, so are a lot of other things. Governments don't just ban anything that can possibly be used for terrorism.
-
I have not, but I've seen fragments. I'll try to look up the full episode.
-
A multicopter on it's own is a very inefficient weapon. It is very unlikely to sustain lethal injuries from something as small and weak as a Phantom, though if you hit your face it would definitely do permanent damage. Someone from reddit recently hit himself with a Phantom and cut of part of his nose; he is very lucky he still has both eyes. I'm telling you this not to start fearing drones, but to just understand that they are not harmless, just like any other tool or vehicle. If you took a dremel or car to the face the results wouldn't be any better.
-
Drones are in fact very strictly regulated in a lot of countries, but those regulations are very poorly enforced. The propellers are the really dangerous part. It would have to be a very unlucky hit to die from a Phantom, but you can definitely do some permanent damage.
-
Legislation for small drones is very tricky, but there are no regulations regarding speed. And there probably never will be, because speed is never regulated in airspace regulations. The height is regulated in all countries that have any regulations regarding drones; the general idea is that the limit is 400ft, because that's when full-sized aircraft can start to appear. If there is a specific need to go higher it should be legal to go higher as long as it is coordinated with the local air control tower.
-
It is really hard to draw a line between what is or isn't private use. A multicopter carrying mirrorless camera on a stabilising gimbal is likely to weigh about 5-8 kg. One likely to carry a DSLR or something of that kind is likely to weigh up to 12kg. I'd consider the possibility of someone doing aerial photography with a DSLR non-commercially, but it is pretty unlikely. The weight of a falling multicopter worries me less than the multiple blades spinning at thousands of RPMs. Multicopters can be equipped with parachutes that deploy if something goes wrong, DJI recently released their own parachute system. Up until recently multicopters have always been considered to fall under regular radio-controlled aircraft laws, but this rapid expansion of the industry has caused a serious shitstorm in the countries that didn't come up with proper legislation. I try to keep up with what is going on in the US regarding this, but it is very hard and things change on a weekly basis. Other countries have handled this a lot better, UK and Australia have regulated everything very well. Eastern Europe, where I worked professionally, is completely non-regulated, which is both great until someone decides to do something very very bad. Privacy has personally never really bothered me, because I frankly just don't care. However, it is completely possible to look inside your window from a drone that you would never hear: http://youtu.be/sAoP-mAM2xQ?t=6m55s One of my biggest fears was the idea that each individual drone would have to go through extensive testing in order to be licensed for flight. This is a horrible idea, because all proper drones are custom-built, just like all proper computers are custom built. Just imagine if you could only get "all-in-one" PCs. What a horrible thought. Out of curiosity, where do you live, if you dont mind my asking? In Europe drones are incredibly common, I see a lot of them.
-
1. There are no multicopters available that have the capability to avoid other aircraft autonomously (aka Sense and Avoid). This is probably the biggest factor that is holding back the commercial use of them. Multicopters rarely ever have even any object avoidance. One of the most popular open-source autopilots offer the ability to manually mark zones in a map where the drone will not enter (as long as the GPS is functioning properly). Developing an international standard for drone intercommunication is crucial for the future of the industry. It is very dangerous to have drones flying over populated areas if anyone with $500 can buy a Phantom and knock a commercial drone out of the sky kamikaze style. Nevermind the crashed $5000 aircraft, but if one of those goes down and hits a person it is going to cause serious damage. To make a Sense and Avoid system you'd have to figure out over what frequencies the transponders would have to operate on. Different countries have different free frequency bands, but in general there are very few legal frequency bands that hobbyists can use. Most hobbyist drone operators operate on illegal bands or illegal transmitting powers already because if the lack of better options. Next you'd have to equip all drones with the necessary AI to actually avoid nearby objects, which is very simple, but still has to be coordinated among all of the manufacturers. 2. It's really more a question regarding AI, not drones as a technology. If we had the AI we could have drone police, surveillance, firefighters, pretty much anything already.
-
Too bad. I apologize.
-
1. I assume you're asking about flying, not building. In regards to flying, it is pretty linear. Practice makes perfect. The important thing to understand here is that a lot of drones seem incredibly easy to fly, which is the reason why so many incidents happen specifically with consumer drones. GPS-assisted flight mode is considered the norm nowadays. When the GPS fails you (and it will eventually) if you can't control it without that assist you'll crash. 2. I suggest that as a first multicopter you get a Hubsan X4. It doesn't have a camera, it fits in your palm, and is good for only one thing: learning. After you are proficient with a Hubsan X4, you can safely fly any multicopter. They don't control much differently depending on size, but you have to learn to actually fly it properly first - without directional, GPS or attitude assist. After you have learned flying and want to get a cheap multicopter for carrying a gopro on a gimbal I would suggest a Blade 350QX. 3. Yes, there are. The Mariner Quadcopter pops into my head first, their main selling point is the ability to float, land on water and ability to recover from an inverted crash into water. The quadcopter sold by "Game of Drones" is waterproof too I think, or at least weatherproofAlso, pssst, the one I'm designing is waterproof.
-
Hello everyone! This is the first time I'm visiting this forum, but I am a long time fan of the WAN show. Drones are certainly a hot-topic in news at the moment, but people are not very well informed about these amazing tools. I bet a lot of you are curious about them, and I can (hopefully) answer all and any questions. For several years I've been a drone enthusiast, and during this time I've been working with drones, both flying them and building them. I worked with aerial videography in Eastern Europe the last summer, but I am currently not involved in any professional flying, as I am currently residing in the UK (studying) and am not properly certified for the UK yet. For the past half year I've been designing a drone for aerial imaging, surveillance and entertainment; if all goes well I will start distributing them this summer. I feel like people are pretty misinformed about drones whenever I see anyone talk about them, so if you have any questions I'll gladly try to answer them.
