Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

telegraph.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 176 posts

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#11

Post by Zigurd »

cpncrunch wrote: post #7
HorizonXP wrote: post #2

What a level headed response by the transport minister. I love that he acknowledges that geofencing rules will easily be circumvented. That said, I still think it's a good idea to implement. It will make it easier for casuals like me to quickly be warned when I'm venturing into forbidden areas. Sure, I could ignore it or hack around it, but at least it's an easy to implement safeguard that will keep most people away.

>That said, I still think it's a good idea to implement. It will make it easier for casuals like me to quickly be warned when I'm venturing into forbidden areas. Sure, I could ignore it or hack around it, but at least it's an easy to implement safeguard that will keep most people away. Yes, it's definitely a good idea that will stop casual drone users from being somewhere they shouldn't be flying. Here is a good exam…

As soon as drones are required to have geofencing, you will find they become useless for monitoring the police, factory farms, pollution, "black" sites, etc. Humans die because of those things, while no practical benefit to aviation safety has been proven. And yeah, controlled airspace has been used to prevent monitoring of police, in Ferguson, for example.

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#12

Post by kawsper »

cpncrunch wrote: post #7
HorizonXP wrote: post #2

What a level headed response by the transport minister. I love that he acknowledges that geofencing rules will easily be circumvented. That said, I still think it's a good idea to implement. It will make it easier for casuals like me to quickly be warned when I'm venturing into forbidden areas. Sure, I could ignore it or hack around it, but at least it's an easy to implement safeguard that will keep most people away.

>That said, I still think it's a good idea to implement. It will make it easier for casuals like me to quickly be warned when I'm venturing into forbidden areas. Sure, I could ignore it or hack around it, but at least it's an easy to implement safeguard that will keep most people away. Yes, it's definitely a good idea that will stop casual drone users from being somewhere they shouldn't be flying. Here is a good exam…

I fly my quadcopter in the UK. It would be nice to have an app that told me about the airspace I was in based on my current position.

However, right now I am not flying higher than 10 meters from the ground.

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#13

Post by nitrogen »

cpncrunch wrote: post #10
Zigurd wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Geofencing has a downside, too. While you might think it enhances aviation safety, it may not do so at all. Planes spend so little time within flying/control range of commonplace drones that, when you read about a "possible drone strike" always bet against it. Instead it will enable mission creep as more places get banned because embarrassing things, like protesters getting beaten, happen there.

>Planes spend so little time within flying/control range of commonplace drones that It depends where you're talking about. Close to airports is the major issue. 2nm from the runway planes will be at 600ft, which is well within the range of drones. >Instead it will enable mission creep as more places get banned because embarrassing things, like protesters getting beaten, happen there. We're talking about voluntary geo…

We're talking about voluntary geofencing here, by the companies themselves.

Much as I like the idea of keeping drones away from planes, just look at how governments have abused other "voluntary" restriction systems. For example, ISPs install filters for ostensibly noble causes, then governments commandeer them for more questionable uses.

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#15

Post by sosborn »

Zigurd wrote: post #11
cpncrunch wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That said, I still think it's a good idea to implement. It will make it easier for casuals like me to quickly be warned when I'm venturing into forbidden areas. Sure, I could ignore it or hack around it, but at least it's an easy to implement safeguard that will keep most people away. Yes, it's definitely a good idea that will stop casual drone users from being somewhere they shouldn't be flying. Here is a good exam…

As soon as drones are required to have geofencing, you will find they become useless for monitoring the police, factory farms, pollution, "black" sites, etc. Humans die because of those things, while no practical benefit to aviation safety has been proven. And yeah, controlled airspace has been used to prevent monitoring of police, in Ferguson, for example.

If we argue that regulations don't stop criminals (DRM etc) then doesn't it also hold true that regulations wouldn't stop do-gooders? (sorry, not the best word).

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#16

Post by 6stringmerc »

kawsper wrote: post #12
cpncrunch wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That said, I still think it's a good idea to implement. It will make it easier for casuals like me to quickly be warned when I'm venturing into forbidden areas. Sure, I could ignore it or hack around it, but at least it's an easy to implement safeguard that will keep most people away. Yes, it's definitely a good idea that will stop casual drone users from being somewhere they shouldn't be flying. Here is a good exam…

I fly my quadcopter in the UK. It would be nice to have an app that told me about the airspace I was in based on my current position. However, right now I am not flying higher than 10 meters from the ground.

Round up a team and put it in the ApplyHN sector - that could be a really useful, pay-for-app & updates type service. Definitely has value. The target market should be able to see the cost-benefit I presume. Good thinking!

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#17

Post by [deleted] »

Zigurd wrote: post #11
cpncrunch wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That said, I still think it's a good idea to implement. It will make it easier for casuals like me to quickly be warned when I'm venturing into forbidden areas. Sure, I could ignore it or hack around it, but at least it's an easy to implement safeguard that will keep most people away. Yes, it's definitely a good idea that will stop casual drone users from being somewhere they shouldn't be flying. Here is a good exam…

As soon as drones are required to have geofencing, you will find they become useless for monitoring the police, factory farms, pollution, "black" sites, etc. Humans die because of those things, while no practical benefit to aviation safety has been proven. And yeah, controlled airspace has been used to prevent monitoring of police, in Ferguson, for example.

[deleted]

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#18

Post by nathancahill »

kawsper wrote: post #12
cpncrunch wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That said, I still think it's a good idea to implement. It will make it easier for casuals like me to quickly be warned when I'm venturing into forbidden areas. Sure, I could ignore it or hack around it, but at least it's an easy to implement safeguard that will keep most people away. Yes, it's definitely a good idea that will stop casual drone users from being somewhere they shouldn't be flying. Here is a good exam…

I fly my quadcopter in the UK. It would be nice to have an app that told me about the airspace I was in based on my current position. However, right now I am not flying higher than 10 meters from the ground.

https://skyvector.com/

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#19

Post by mrchucklepants »

kawsper wrote: post #12
cpncrunch wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That said, I still think it's a good idea to implement. It will make it easier for casuals like me to quickly be warned when I'm venturing into forbidden areas. Sure, I could ignore it or hack around it, but at least it's an easy to implement safeguard that will keep most people away. Yes, it's definitely a good idea that will stop casual drone users from being somewhere they shouldn't be flying. Here is a good exam…

I fly my quadcopter in the UK. It would be nice to have an app that told me about the airspace I was in based on my current position. However, right now I am not flying higher than 10 meters from the ground.

Foreflight[1] does something similar already but they are focused on traditional flight. This is an interesting idea.

[1] https://www.foreflight.com/

Re: Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

#20

Post by iamnothere »

sosborn wrote: post #15
Zigurd wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as drones are required to have geofencing, you will find they become useless for monitoring the police, factory farms, pollution, "black" sites, etc. Humans die because of those things, while no practical benefit to aviation safety has been proven. And yeah, controlled airspace has been used to prevent monitoring of police, in Ferguson, for example.

If we argue that regulations don't stop criminals (DRM etc) then doesn't it also hold true that regulations wouldn't stop do-gooders? (sorry, not the best word).

It wouldn't stop activists from filming "restricted" areas, no, but it could give authorities a way to tack on additional charges ("terroristic disabling of an aviation safety device" or the like) when they inevitably find the person who leaked the video.
Post reply on HN