Drone Zapper

[electrotor]

I think this particular piece of kit, or something very similar has already been posted about here. Now the FAA are going ahead with airport trials. Two questions immediately come to mind.

1. Will it be any use against supermarket plastic bags?  ;D
2. Who is then liable if the UAV crashes and causes injury?

The second question presents a legal issue if the UAV was causing a potential, yet not actual problem with other aircraft but was not causing any other problem until control was taken over. How can the AUD operator know that he is forcing a safe landing? Could be over a freeway or congested area. Tough one legally.

http://www.blighter.com/news/press-releases/130-british-counter-uav-technology-auds-selected-by-faa-for-us-airport-trials.html

[iPeel]

I bet Richard Madeley's wondering if they do them in green to blend in with his garden.

[Coyote]

Looks bloody brilliant, military looking helicals do look the biz :)

[Loopdreams]

I think this particular piece of kit, or something very similar has already been posted about here. Now the FAA are going ahead with airport trials. Two questions immediately come to mind.

1. Will it be any use against supermarket plastic bags?  ;D
2. Who is then liable if the UAV crashes and causes injury?

The second question presents a legal issue if the UAV was causing a potential, yet not actual problem with other aircraft but was not causing any other problem until control was taken over. How can the AUD operator know that he is forcing a safe landing? Could be over a freeway or congested area. Tough one legally.

I don't think it would be tough legally at all.  I can't really see any court siding with the drone operator in this scenario.  In the same way they don't when police chase fleeing suspects in cars and an accident happens.  It's deemed to be the fault of the criminal.

[dogzilla]

This crap is no match for my Dragon Link V2. Bring it on :)

[FPVSteve]

So how does this actually work then? Are they saying that they can bind directly to a Rx onboard the aircraft and take it over? Wouldn't FHSS stop this and issue a RTH?

Or - does it jam the GPS and adjust the altitude so that the drone simply falls out of the sky because it thinks its at a higher altitude than it is? What if it isn't flying in GPS mode though?

[FPVSteve]

I bet Richard Madeley's wondering if they do them in green to blend in with his garden.

Of all the people to spy one with a drone, they chose Richard and Judy :laugh: Of all the people to choose to see naked via a drone I can think of barely anyone I'd fly further away from. Barf!

[Brucey]

So how does this actually work then? Are they saying that they can bind directly to a Rx onboard the aircraft and take it over? Wouldn't FHSS stop this and issue a RTH?

Or - does it jam the GPS and adjust the altitude so that the drone simply falls out of the sky because it thinks its at a higher altitude than it is? What if it isn't flying in GPS mode though?

Looking at the aerials it's got I'd say it will jam 2.4, 5.8 and gps. So a phantom will go into lost mode and either just hover or attempt a landing on the spot using its baro.

Of all the people to spy one with a drone, they chose Richard and Judy :laugh: Of all the people to choose to see naked via a drone I can think of barely anyone I'd fly further away from. Barf!

Could of been looking for his daughter

[electrotor]

I don't think it would be tough legally at all.  I can't really see any court siding with the drone operator in this scenario.  In the same way they don't when police chase fleeing suspects in cars and an accident happens.  It's deemed to be the fault of the criminal.

In a car chase the police do not take control of the fleeing vehicle so the driver is still culpable for his actions. However if they did take control and it crashed I think the legal position would be difficult to establish. Certainly the pilot of the UAV could be prosecuted for illegal flying but once he has had control taken over surely he cannot be held responsible for any subsequent damage or harm. At that point he is merely a spectator.

[FPVSteve]

Exactly - If a police officer took over someones transmitter while the aircraft is airborne, then surely the officer is culpable if there's a crash and/or injury?

I don't see how this is any different except for it taking away ALL control as opposed to transferring it to someone else.

Not sure this is a good solution tbh!

[Loopdreams]

No, that would be like a criminal trying to argue that they weren't at all responsible because they ran over a spike strip or they lost control after their car was rammed by the plods in theirs.  I think there's a pretty well established principle here that the authorities can take those sorts of risks free from culpability where it's deemed to be in the public interest.

[FPVSteve]

Being responsible for flying in a bad location surely doesn't equate to you being responsible for your drone subsequently crashing into a pushchair because a copper took away your means of control.


Edit: grammar

[Loopdreams]

It might not appeal to your sense of natural justice but I'm fairly sure that's exactly what would happen in this example of a drone potentially coming into conflict with an airliner.

[electrotor]

No, that would be like a criminal trying to argue that they weren't at all responsible because they ran over a spike strip or they lost control after their car was rammed by the plods in theirs.  I think there's a pretty well established principle here that the authorities can take those sorts of risks free from culpability where it's deemed to be in the public interest.

The police may disable the fleeing vehicle but at no point, spike, ram or whatever, do they take control of it. That's the crucial and fundamental difference between your analogy and this system being trialed. Surely the UAV operator reliquishes further responsibility once control is taken over by another party.
See you in court.  ;D

[BlueFlyer]

the police are extremely careful when and where they deploy spike PRECISELY for this reason... THEY are responsible for whatever damage occurs from the use of that particular tool. They have to undergo rigorous training and pass countless assessments just to be allowed to "make the call" of whether to use spike strips or not.

If the police decide to deploy spike strips on the approach to a school and this then causes the car to lose control killing some children, the police will be responsible for that, not the alleged "criminal".

You see it all the time, the police make a decision to hold back and sometimes stop the pursuit all together if they feel their actions would contribute to even more dangerous driving from the fleeing vehicle.