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

91–100 of 202 posts

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

#91

Post by mbrumlow »

reaperducer wrote: post #71
bigmattystyles wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 tim…

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

I think the poster was referring to active constituents.

But I think you are wrong. I don't know of anybody who wants a loud car or bike trekking by their house. But yet it still happens over and over.

It is unclear if enough "active constituents" are not complaining or they are ignored.

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

#92

Post by mikeash »

toufiqbarhamov wrote: post #85
mikeash wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Oh sure, but the glider is moving through the air at a stately pace (generally between 50-95mph), shedding vortices without anything coming behind them to crash into them. A prop operates at much higher speeds, typically between 450-720mph!

Really? I arbitrarily looked up the DJI Phantom 3 and found a max RPM of about 8000 with a prop diameter of 9 inches, which gives a tip speed of about 200 MPH at the most.

That’s still pretty fast, of course. That points to using bigger props as a potential way to cut noise.

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

#93

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

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

#94

Post by cronix »

asynchronous13 wrote: post #86
cronix wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

In the early tests in Australia there's already a lot of complaints about noise. Making the flights quieter is already becoming a higher priority. https://www.engadget.com/2018/12/27/alphabet-quiet-wing-deli... Privacy is also important, but it's a separate issue. Is there anything that can be done via drone that can't be done with a cell phone or a go pro? It doesn't make sense to outlaw hammers just because they ca…

> Is there anything that can be done via drone that can't be done with a cell phone or a go pro?

Not necessarily if you're talking about just one, but there is when you have tens of thousands of them compiling the data. Remember, these are companies like amazon, who are deploying Rekognition face recognition systems to law enforcement in cities (as well as Ring doorbell cameras). This will additionally give them that capability from the air now, on a movable platform.

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

#95

Post by asynchronous13 »

reaperducer wrote: post #78
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 mon…

Actually, you do have the right to fly over someone else's property. It's well established law that Delta airlines does not need to ask permission from every land owner that they overfly.

A long time ago, property rights were 'Cuius est solum, eius est usque ad coelum et ad inferos' -- from hell below to heaven above. (now referred to as the 'ad coelum doctrine') But that law was changed a long time ago. Just because you own the land, doesn't mean you own all of the airspace above it.

It has been tested in court that a property owner owns some height above the surface of their land. 300ft over the tallest structure is definitely in the public domain. However, the minimum altitude that one is allowed to fly over private land without permission has not been established in court.

A drone at 10ft could definitely be pursued for trespassing. A drone at 400ft definitely could not be pursued for trespassing. A drone at 150ft? That still needs to be tested in court. Then general rule is that a property owner is entitled to the enjoyment of their property.

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

#96

Post by jstplanecurious »

codedokode wrote: post #69

First thing they should do is to cover propellers so that they don't hurt anyone. Most of the drones I've seen have no protection. The manufacturers and owners don't care about the safety at all. Also, what if the drone flies into someone's window or a car? How do you identify the owner?

>First thing they should do is to cover propellers so that they don't hurt anyone.

Does anyone know why this isn't standard?

I Googled this question: "why don't quadcopters have safety cages" https://www.google.com/search?q=why+don't+quadcopters+have+s... ...

... and even saw cages that go around the whole quadcopter (not just the propellers as I was expecting). If those were a bit squishy they could seriously reduce any chance of concussion/property damage if landing on someone or something!

The YouTube video below is pretty amazing, it shows someone demonstrating such a cage.

"Spherical Cage Incased Quadcopter" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B3X6EvZ2XM

I've submitted it as a separate submission. (It's only 2 minutes.) He says it flies great, and he even seems to purposefully drop it several times from as high as the height of a building.

Also for anyone who hasn't been around drones much, in the middle of the video you can hear the annoying whirring noise people mention throughout this thread.

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

#97

Post by jstplanecurious »

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…

>They're going to be constantly landing and taking off to deliver the package, right near you.

For delivery, would using a (possibly guided) parachute be an option sometimes? For example if there is a landing target left in someone's yard.

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

#98

Post by asynchronous13 »

jstplanecurious wrote: post #96
codedokode wrote: post #69

First thing they should do is to cover propellers so that they don't hurt anyone. Most of the drones I've seen have no protection. The manufacturers and owners don't care about the safety at all. Also, what if the drone flies into someone's window or a car? How do you identify the owner?

>First thing they should do is to cover propellers so that they don't hurt anyone. Does anyone know why this isn't standard? I Googled this question: "why don't quadcopters have safety cages" https://www.google.com/search?q=why+don't+quadcopters+have+s... ... ... and even saw cages that go around the whole quadcopter (not just the propellers as I was expecting). If those were a bit squishy they could seriously reduce…

> Does anyone know why this isn't standard?

Because cages weigh more. Minimizing weight is critical for anything that flies. If it weighs more, then it takes more energy to make it fly. If it weighs more, then that's less payload that it can carry.

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

#99

Post by clay_the_ripper »

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…

Yes! My biggest single complaint about drones is the noise. I also own and fly a drone (for professional photography and video work) but I am LOATHE to fly that thing when anyone else is around. It’s just so dang annoying.

As a drone owner, it drives me bananas when I see people just flying them all over the place with no account for how irritating the noise is.

If drones could be made substantially quieter, everyone’s quality of life would go up and we could be saved from inconsiderate people with no regard for others.

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

#100

Post by diydsp »

gpm wrote: post #28
simplify wrote: post #27

Should I be worried about thief drones? If a drone can deliver a package, surely another drone can steal it too?

Less than you should worry about thief delivery trucks. Drone's being more noticeable, and requiring more skill to obtain and operate (at least for now).

yes but drones can get away much faster making it completely worthwhile.

drones can also record entry passcodes, snap pictures of keys and license plates, spoof gps, carry guns, spray toxic gas, drill through buildings and sniff EM fields to see who is where and when. perfect legal data to resell to unsavories.

this would be a security nightmare.

Post reply on HN