Drones Shut Down London Airport in What Authorities Call Deliberate Disruption

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, Brooksie359 said:

I would pick napalm 

personally i preffer 23mm vya cannons

[GoldenLag]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Too bad. I chose 12ga. high brass turkey load.

to bad i loaded 23mm ns cannons

[Brooksie359]

Just now, GoldenLag said:

personally i preffer 23mm vya cannons

Might as well use a thermonuclear ballistic missile. 

[GoldenLag]

1 minute ago, Brooksie359 said:

Might as well use a thermonuclear ballistic missile. 

RBS-123`s are much more effective

[TempestCatto]

We seemed to have gone a bit off topic. As great of a podcast as it is, we should really get back to the issue at hand here.

 

Drones. They can break an airport. Who knew? Maybe what they should do is make it so that you can't alter the particular part of firmware that controls this. Drones are great fun to fly, I'd hate to see them regulated so hard you can't even afford to look at one.

[Luca Rallis]

A few things I want to add after reading some of the responses:

 

In the United States, the FAA requires anyone flying a drone for commercial purposes to have a FAA Part 107 certificates. To get this, you must be 16 years old and pass a test (which you must pay to take). I wouldn't be surprised if the FAA extended this to anyone flying recreationally as well. Personally, I don't think it would be a huge deal. After all, if you can afford to purchase one of the larger, more high-end drones, you should be able to pay the nominal fee.

 

As for the interpretation of the term "industrial drone" used in this article, I wouldn't be surprised if they are referring to high-end drones such as those made by DJI, but they could also mean more military style drones.

 

I also don't understand why they don't just shoot the drones down. There is technology out there that will jam the droned. I got to see the Army's version of this, a gun shaped mechanism with an antenna at the end. It sends out a signal that forces the drone to land. I'd imagine that Britain has similar technology. Also, why aren't signal jammers installed at all airports? Maybe it messes with the plane's systems, I'm not sure. I'm not exactly sure how this technology works, but you can learn more about it here:  https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/11/14/this-army-fires-experiment-covers-detection-jamming-drone-kill-chains-and-new-ways-to-shoot-artillery/.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, TempestCatto said:

We seemed to have gone a bit off topic

Nah, we're just talking about how to fix the issue.

[Fasterthannothing]

19 minutes ago, Luca Rallis said:

I also don't understand why they don't just shoot the drones down. There is technology out there that will jam the droned. I got to see the Army's version of this, a gun shaped mechanism with an antenna at the end. It sends out a signal that forces the drone to land. I'd imagine that Britain has similar technology. Also, why aren't signal jammers installed at all airports? Maybe it messes with the plane's systems, I'm not sure. I'm not exactly sure how this technology works, but you can learn more about it here:  https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2018/11/14/this-army-fires-experiment-covers-detection-jamming-drone-kill-chains-and-new-ways-to-shoot-artillery/.

They said some stupid answer about bullets flying everywhere if they shot it down (probably just afraid their police will be shown to be bad shots in America some guy with a shotgun would have ended this crap 5 min after it started). As for jamming it I talked about this earlier but if done a certain way custom firmware is immune to signal jamming and the only thing to bring it down would be shooting it or using an emp.

[TempestCatto]

Just now, Shorty88jr said:

As for jamming it I talked about this earlier but if done a certain way custom firmware is immune to signal jamming and the only thing to bring it down would be shooting it or using an emp.

I'm all for customization, but I think there should be some part of the firmware that you can't edit or exclude that has that stuff in it in regards to the airport proximity thing (man Im at a loss for words there. sorry). Maybe custom build drones and market drones have to go the way of Apple and start including some kind of chip that controls this, and the whole thing wont work without it.

[Drak3]

Maybe we just get @knightslugger to shoot them down.

[Fasterthannothing]

Just now, TempestCatto said:

I'm all for customization, but I think there should be some part of the firmware that you can't edit or exclude that has that stuff in it in regards to the airport proximity thing (man Im at a loss for words there. sorry). Maybe custom build drones and market drones have to go the way of Apple and start including some kind of chip that controls this, and the whole thing wont work without it.

As someone who built their own drone and worked with a lot of open source firmware I'll tell you it wouldn't matter. Their are schematics of the circuit boards for basically all the stuff on a drone out there. If you know how to make circuit boards you'd be able to circumvent that. Even the esc (motor controller) has open source stuff for it. I personally don't think regulation should be the answer (for the sake of good citizens who like using drones) instead fine them/jail them so hard no one would even think of doing it again.

[dalekphalm]

33 minutes ago, TempestCatto said:

We seemed to have gone a bit off topic. As great of a podcast as it is, we should really get back to the issue at hand here.

 

Drones. They can break an airport. Who knew? Maybe what they should do is make it so that you can't alter the particular part of firmware that controls this. Drones are great fun to fly, I'd hate to see them regulated so hard you can't even afford to look at one.

How would they even police this though? You can create your own flight control software without too much trouble, if you're a competent programmer.

 

Slap that into an FPGA, and you don't need a commercial off-the-shelf controller.

 

Frankly, airports need to look at accurate and safe defence mechanisms. Whether that means precision CIWS or some sort of flak/buckshot type system, etc - something needs to be developed that can reliably shoot down a drone at distance before it can get close enough to pose a risk to the aircraft.

[TempestCatto]

5 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Frankly, airports need to look at accurate and safe defence mechanisms. Whether that means precision CIWS or some sort of flak/buckshot type system, etc - something needs to be developed that can reliably shoot down a drone at distance before it can get close enough to pose a risk to the aircraft.

I don't honestly think shooting them down would be a good idea. By that I mean with actual ammunition, something could hit someone. A low power emp (as other have mentioned) seem to be the best bet, provided of course the drone doesn't fall on someone's head or car. But at that point, what was it worth? A broken windscreen of a parked car or a few hundred lives? I'm all for the emp thing.

[CarlBar]

3 minutes ago, TempestCatto said:

I don't honestly think shooting them down would be a good idea. By that I mean with actual ammunition, something could hit someone. A low power emp (as other have mentioned) seem to be the best bet, provided of course the drone doesn't fall on someone's head or car. But at that point, what was it worth? A broken windscreen of a parked car or a few hundred lives? I'm all for the emp thing.

 

EMP by it's nature isn't very directional. Besides the drone falling on someone would be just as dangerous as shot flying around. Given the size of most of them a big bird net on a pole and a helicopter should be more than sufficient.

[dalekphalm]

9 minutes ago, TempestCatto said:

I don't honestly think shooting them down would be a good idea. By that I mean with actual ammunition, something could hit someone. A low power emp (as other have mentioned) seem to be the best bet, provided of course the drone doesn't fall on someone's head or car. But at that point, what was it worth? A broken windscreen of a parked car or a few hundred lives? I'm all for the emp thing.

How would you accurately deploy the EMP? How do you prevent the EMP from going beyond the range required? That might work, and I wouldn't rule it out as a possibility, but there are challenges there too.

 

The drone falling is frankly going to be an issue no matter what. And most airports have a decent safe range around it from other property/vehicles/people.

 

Bullets/projectiles can certainly be a safety issue, but again - if the risk was one person getting hurt, vs an Airbus A350 or A380 going down? I wouldn't even hesitate.

 

And here's the main issue - are these EMP weapons ready to use right now? Because you could deploy a CIWS type system with custom targeting profiles for drones, and deploy that within a few weeks or months. I'd even suggest just using smaller calibre ammo to limit the risk to property and people. With a drone you don't need high velocity or large ammo, you just need accurate and/or high firing speed.

[dalekphalm]

9 minutes ago, CarlBar said:

 

EMP by it's nature isn't very directional. Besides the drone falling on someone would be just as dangerous as shot flying around. Given the size of most of them a big bird net on a pole and a helicopter should be more than sufficient.

The problem with a net is that it has extremely limited range. Ideally, you'd want to take out the drone long before it actually poses a real risk to anyone on a flight.

[CarlBar]

4 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

The problem with a net is that it has extremely limited range. Ideally, you'd want to take out the drone long before it actually poses a real risk to anyone on a flight.

 

Any exclusion zone for drones should be more than large enough to have sufficient buffer. If it doesn't your going to have issues no matter what.

[dalekphalm]

7 minutes ago, CarlBar said:

 

Any exclusion zone for drones should be more than large enough to have sufficient buffer. If it doesn't your going to have issues no matter what.

Sure, but smaller tolerances mean more risk. With a net, you probably realistically need to be within a few dozen meters to snag the thing with any accuracy. Sure you could make the system portable and slap it on a helicopter, but if there's multiple drones coming from different directions, that's going to be very unwieldy.

 

I'd suggest that a drone net launch system could be a "worst case scenario" backup system though - multiple layered defences.

[An angry badger]

The military has been called in to help deal with the situation

Quote

Gatwick Airport: Army called in amid drone chaos

src: BBC News

[Brooksie359]

2 hours ago, TempestCatto said:

We seemed to have gone a bit off topic. As great of a podcast as it is, we should really get back to the issue at hand here.

 

Drones. They can break an airport. Who knew? Maybe what they should do is make it so that you can't alter the particular part of firmware that controls this. Drones are great fun to fly, I'd hate to see them regulated so hard you can't even afford to look at one.

I would love them being regulated. It's a good thing for a device that is easily used in harmful ways like spying and disrupting airport traffic. 

[Brooksie359]

1 hour ago, Shorty88jr said:

As someone who built their own drone and worked with a lot of open source firmware I'll tell you it wouldn't matter. Their are schematics of the circuit boards for basically all the stuff on a drone out there. If you know how to make circuit boards you'd be able to circumvent that. Even the esc (motor controller) has open source stuff for it. I personally don't think regulation should be the answer (for the sake of good citizens who like using drones) instead fine them/jail them so hard no one would even think of doing it again.

The only way to beat a bad guy with a drone is with a good guy with a drone. Time to make a combat drone for the airport. 

[Mihle]

I think the two best choices for anti drone defence on airports is either Lazers, or more likely, anti drone drones.

[Dabombinable]

Honestly, without special permission drones should be restricted to RC airfields, like any other flying RC toy.

[dalekphalm]

11 minutes ago, Mihle said:

I think the two best choices for anti drone defence on airports is either Lazers, or more likely, anti drone drones.

Lasers could well be a good method, assuming we can manufacture ones that are suitable in both accuracy and power, without posing a risk to actual aircraft.

10 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

Honestly, without special permission drones should be restricted to RC airfields, like any other flying RC toy.

Rules for RC aircraft highly depend on which country you live in. Many countries do not have the restrictions that you specify - though I do believe that the UK does have those restrictions.

[Dabombinable]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

Lasers could well be a good method, assuming we can manufacture ones that are suitable in both accuracy and power, without posing a risk to actual aircraft.

Rules for RC aircraft highly depend on which country you live in. Many countries do not have the restrictions that you specify - though I do believe that the UK does have those restrictions.

We have these restrictions in Australia, and it straight up makes things safer for everyone. And it means that those with older craft with FM transmitters can still fly them as well.