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

131–140 of 176 posts

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

#131

Post by andygates »

k-mcgrady wrote: post #93
chipperyman573 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would return the GPS coordinates of your phone, not the drone. It would not help unless you started in an airport.

I'm nto sure exactly how these things work but would it not be possible to get the phone GPS and then determine the position of the drone relative to that using whatever wireless tech it's using to communicate? Probably not 100% accurate but it might be good enough to say 'this drone is within 100m of a no-fly zone, stop it.'

It's a reasonable technical solution, yes.

More useful would be a lower ceiling in no-fly zones, tbh; no-fly is appropriate for real aircraft, but for toys there is value in considering "no-fly" and "low-fly".

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

#132

Post by andygates »

TillE wrote: post #25

"there was no actual damage to the plane and there's indeed some speculation that it may have even been a plastic bag or something." This is an amazingly flimsy basis for a headline.

This is a moral panic! Flimsy is rock-solid compared to satanic abuse rings and penis thieves.

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

#133

Post by danieltiIlett »

petra wrote: post #115
philovivero wrote: post #104

Ah. It's a drone discussion. Is there any advance in drone tech to make it quieter? Any time I've been near a drone in operation, the loud buzzing hits a particular psychological frequency (probably the "it's a large flying insect!") that stresses me out. I don't think I'm alone in this. Other animals seem to dislike drones. I think most of us animals would mind them less if they were more pleasant-sounding, or close…

There's a way to spin each propeller at 180 degree phase so they would cancel/reduce each others noise.

How difficult is it to do while adjusting each propeller's speed for steering etc?

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

#134

Post by madaxe_again »

gregmac wrote: post #39

Wow, this is an elected official? > Transport minister Robert Goodwill admitted authorities had not yet confirmed whether what struck the Airbus A320 > Mr Goodwill also dismissed calls for tighter rules on drone use to protect against terror threats insisting current rules governing drone use were strong enough. He said it would be much easier for terrorists to attack airports on the ground with rucksacks or car bomb…

Yeah, the hysterical response has come from the public this time. I fly drones, perfectly legally, and this week have had people variously tell me that I'm either a terrorist or I'm "helping the terrorists" or I'm am idiot or "Isn't that dangerous for my children" - even stood in a field, people wander >100m over from the canal towpath to complain at me. Popular opinion in the pub is that they're dangerous and should be banned, didn't you hear 5000 people almost died on Monday when ten drones crashed into twelve aircraft, all almost certainly carrying nuclear weapons that failed to go off because gchq saved us?

a few years ago the response was positive and interested, almost universally - even though I was at that point flying in town due to lack of regulation.

Media has trained them to be scared of drones, like everything else.

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

#135

Post by madaxe_again »

adrusi wrote: post #121
Caprinicus wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we'll only really have to worry about dishonest terrorists and or plastic bags

Right, as opposed to also worrying about a careless teenager flying their drone too close to an airport to get a sick camera angle of a landing plane.

Why worry about something that hasn't happened? Why not worry about a careless teenager wanting to get a sick Camera angle of the inside of your fridge? It's as valid a concern.

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

#137

Post by SixSigma »

matheweis wrote: post #122
SixSigma wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drones are already forbidden by law from flying higher than 400ft.

Where? In the US it is still legal to fly over 400' for hobby purposes when flying under the safety guidelines of a community based organization.

In the UK, where this incident happened.

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

#138

Post by SixSigma »

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #111
SixSigma wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drones are already forbidden by law from flying higher than 400ft.

They aren't, actually, and people parrot this falsehood all the time. If we assume you're referring to the United States, don't conflate proposed rules, rules, guidelines, and law, nor circumstances that require you to seek FAA authorization for the flight (which is different than "forbidden by law," itself inaccurate). You are talking about Advisory Circular 91-57 (Model Aircraft Operating Standards) from June 1981.…

The FAA doesn't have jurisdiction in the UK

The CAA sets the laws here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30387107

Post reply on HN