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

U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 202 posts

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

#71

Post by reaperducer »

bigmattystyles wrote: post #66
cronix wrote: post #41

One thing the drones really need to do before being deployed en masse (besides safety) is to become relatively silent. They are quite loud. I can hear a single one from about 1/2 mile away. I can't imagine what it will be like if many are flying all over, at all times. It will be like everybody is living next to an airport - something I consciously choose to not live close to due to noise pollution. Quality of life w…

Tangent: I don’t think I’ve ever been more incensed than when I learned Harley Davidsons are quiet out of the factory and people make them loud. And while I can get a ticket for something trivial, I’ve never heard of someone getting a ticket for riding a motorcycle or car that’s obnoxiously loud and can be heard a mile away. My point, I guess, cities, townships, what have you, don’t care about noise.

My point, I guess, cities, townships, what have you, don’t care about noise.

Cities, townships, what have you, will care about whatever their active constituents tell them to.

It took a few years, but a neighborhood organization managed to get a crackdown on motorcycle noise in Chicago. I don't know if it worked because I moved away before it went into effect. But there was a ton of press coverage for a very long time, so there's no way the offending riders could know that people don't like them.

Loud Motorcycles In Alderman's Crosshairs As LSD Noise Monitoring Starts: https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20170824/lincoln-park/loud-m...

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

#72

Post by codedokode »

cronix wrote: post #44
asynchronous13 wrote: post #17

Good. The US government has been restricting commercial operations of drone development for far too long. Many companies that were US-based are moving their operations overseas where the laws are more reasonable (Australia and New Zealand, for example). This is a simple and reasonable step in the right direction. Open up legal operations for the smallest category and begin collecting data. It can help pave the way to…

I'm more than happy to wait to see how those citizens in other countries like the noise, before doing it here. The privacy issues will also be interesting. Do you think these companies won't be attaching cameras to them as well to capture as much data as they possibly can why flying around? Then multiply that times as many drones as will be flying around. It will be great for tracking too, since you can theoretically…

The drones can also intercept GSM equipment identifiers (IMEI), WiFi points identifiers, recognise car plate numbers and their owners' faces and sell all those data. This can even be more profitable than delivery.

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

#73

Post by learc83 »

cronix wrote: post #50
_xerxes_ wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Larger drones tend to be more quiet, or at the very least are perceived to be so due to the lower pitch sound made by larger, more slowly rotating propellers.

Helicopters have lower pitch and larger, slower rotating blades as well. They're not quiet, and they've had a lot longer to perfect the blade tech. My block gets about 15 deliveries per day from UPS/USPS/FedEx/Amazon/etc. Have you been near a drone, of any size, taking off and landing? It's quite loud. They're not just going to drop the package from the sky. They're going to be constantly landing and taking off to de…

On any given day, for most of the year, there's a good chance that someone in earshot of me is running a lawnmower, a string trimmer, or a leaf blower, all of which are louder than a drone. There's also a guy down the road who regularly leaves his loud diesel truck idling, motorcycles going down the road, and occasional jets flying overhead.

All of this annoys the hell out of me, but no one else seems to care. Certainly not enough to ban any of it.

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

#74

Post by reaperducer »

chaostheory wrote: post #48
threeseed wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fans, helicopters etc have been around for decades and are still mostly loud. You can't escape the physics that moving air causes noise.

Energy efficient buildings tend to handle noise pollution better with their extra insulation. Not ideal, but there's always a solution.

Energy efficient buildings tend to handle noise pollution better with their extra insulation. Not ideal, but there's always a solution.

Translation: "You go inside if you want peace and quiet. The outside is only for the self-entitled now."

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

#75

Post by codedokode »

cortesoft wrote: post #21
vokep wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but a box with a 1lb rock in it, and a box with 1lb of feathers are going to fall from the sky to your head about the same.

I mean, the 1lb or feathers will have a much larger box, and a much larger surface area for wind resistance. In addition, it will spread the impact over a larger area.

The box with the feathers could be very tall but narrow so that the air resistance won't be large.

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

#76

Post by reaperducer »

asynchronous13 wrote: post #35
drusepth wrote: post #29

This is one of those things that you assume is going to happen eventually no matter what. Why not just do it now? That's not necessarily meant to be flippant; it's a real question: what unknowns have dissuaded us from doing this until now? Are they resolved now? Would they be resolved in the future given some kind of delay until this (inevitably) happens?

The major unknown that prevented this until now was the average age of the people working at the FAA. For a long time any request for something unusual was met with the simple response, "No". The FAA's mandate is safety, and they could justify disallowing new things for the sake of safety. They've finally realized that this is inevitable, and they can't just say "No" forever. A lot of the old guard is retiring, and t…

the average age of the people working at the FAA

That's ageism, plain and simple. I hope you don't ever have to hire people, or you'll get your company fined.

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

#77

Post by mikeash »

toufiqbarhamov wrote: post #62
mikeash wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes a propellor different from a wing in this respect? Is it just because you have several of them next to each other and interfering with each other?

It’s a combination of factors, one of which is that a prop is just out there, unshielded like the fans inside a jet engine (which still make a ton of noise in the case I’d high bypass models). Then there’s cortex shedding, which is mostly occurring along edges and tips. Airplanes also tend to fly at much higher altitudes except on takeoff and landing, or their noise would be an issue too. Finally you’re right that th…

A plain wing is way less noisy, though. Construct a glider with the same mass as a typical quadcopter and you’ll be hard pressed to hear any noise from it, despite the fact that the wing is unshielded and has edges to shed vortexes from.

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

#78

Post by reaperducer »

stcredzero wrote: post #49

What if someone wanted to operate drones containing scientific instruments over industrial sites? Several years back, the PLOS folks visited my local hackerspace and talked about using balloons to double check chemical emissions of oil refineries near Houston. They had to use balloons, because there were legal problems with using drones. The concerns of overflown companies are quite understandable as well. For things…

What if someone wanted to operate drones containing scientific instruments over industrial sites?

I'm not an expert, but if an company wants to use drones to monitor its industrial site, that's fine. It's private property. Just like construction companies use drones to monitor construction.

But you don't have the right to fly your drone over someone else's property, even if it's for something as seemingly good as monitoring chemical emissions. What happens when there's a malfunction and your machine plummets into a stack, or hits a person?

Again, I'm not an expert on this. I suspect nobody really is since it's all a new realm, and what few laws there are haven't been tested very much.

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

#79

Post by mikeash »

mediaman wrote: post #61
mikeash wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes a propellor different from a wing in this respect? Is it just because you have several of them next to each other and interfering with each other?

Both propellers and wings are fundamentally the same thing: airfoils. However, air passes over a propeller much, much faster than over a wing, and creates shock waves in a way that wings don't.

Does it? The same airfoil needs the same speed to provide a given amount of lift, regardless of whether it’s a wing or a propellor.

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

#80

Post by baroffoos »

TomGullen wrote: post #19
ProfessorLayton wrote: post #6

Lots of safety concerns are brought up, but I'm really curious how drones will play out in conjunction with noise and NIMBYism. Drones are loud, so I can't imagine that commercial drone activity (Especially at night) will happen without heavy pushback from locals. NASA did a study and found that the noise drones make is perceived to be more annoying than those from cars [1]. They acknowledge noise-based pushback as a…

I don't think that's a NIMBY - pretty sure people not into drones will just be against the noise in their backyard or other peoples backyards.

Its such a minor and rare sound though. A car driving past you is so much louder and more annoying as well as being more common. In fact I can think of countless common and accepted sounds that we find acceptable.
Post reply on HN