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

Drones flying nighttime patterns over NE Colorado leave law enforcement stumped

denverpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 139 posts

Re: Drones flying nighttime patterns over NE Colorado leave law enforcement stumped

#111

Post by godelski »

objclxt wrote: post #82
sathackr wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there is no property being damaged, no law being violated, why does law enforcement need to be involved at all? Law enforcement doesn't have to have an answer or info about every single event. If I'm driving a car down the highway, law enforcement doesn't need to know where I am going or why. I'm not breaking any laws and not infringing on anyone's rights. As a pilot I can go fly my plane at any altitude I wish as…

> As a pilot I can go fly my plane at any altitude I wish as long as I am not entering any controlled airspace. Well, no. That’s not true. Firstly there are rules about the altitude you can fly at when it’s greater than 3000’, and second you are required to file a flight plan any time you are flying IFR.

They specified "controlled airspace". Those rules you are talking about are controlled airspace. The previous comment clearly doesn't explicitly mean class A. It's too complicated to say anything but controlled airspace because that varies all over and can frequently extent up to class A.

And why are you bring up IFR? Most private pilots are flying VFR, even if they are IFR certified. But even in controlled airspace you don't have to file a flight plan. I can take off from a class C, fly through uncontrolled space and am not required to talk to anyone again. I don't have to say anything until I decide to land.

This is pretty common among pilots too. I'm not sure why drone pilots should be held to higher standard. Really they should be held to lower.

Re: Drones flying nighttime patterns over NE Colorado leave law enforcement stumped

#112

Post by tgflynn »

michaelbuckbee wrote: post #108

My thought is that they're nongovernmental groups looking for illegal marijuana growing operations that they'll competitively harvest. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/09/the-s...

If what they're doing is tied to illegal activity, you wouldn't think they'd be flying with collision avoidance lights.

Re: Drones flying nighttime patterns over NE Colorado leave law enforcement stumped

#113

Post by godelski »

sathackr wrote: post #103
ynniv wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but once a law is broken, what recourse does anyone have in the submitted article? The answer can't be to call the Feds... Cars have license plates, planes have N-numbers. If drones are too small to have a visible registration number, they need a transponder. Again, this is only when you're flying high and out of visible range.

Drones over 249g are required to be registered have a registration number affixed. Your point is valid, in that every other motor vehicle that operates on public property has a requirement to be able to be positively identified to a owning entity. But there is no requirement that this be identifiable from great distance. A drone in the air does create a unique challenge that a transponder would help resolve. But just…

I'm not sure why everyone thinks a transponder code is an ultimate solution. A transponder code is easier to fake or hide than a license plate number. If you are doing a ham operated, you just transmit another number. If it's a store bought and you have zero tech savviness, you just don't register it (which is going to happen quite frequently, just because people don't know, will forget, or just not care enough and there's not enough police force or need to crack down on this. Resources needed elsewhere).

Transponder codes aren't just going to be used by lawful citizens, but specifically lawful citizens that are careful and read the instructions (and have bought a drone with proper instructions or they independently looked them up). With how few people read instructions, I don't think this is a good solution.

Re: Drones flying nighttime patterns over NE Colorado leave law enforcement stumped

#114

Post by godelski »

thrill wrote: post #109
ynniv wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is at night, and even if you don't have a transponder you have a visible registration number and a license that will be revoked if you can't behave.

A flight plan is not a requirement for night flight in the US.

A fight plan is not a requirement for most flying in the US.

Additionally, transponders aren't needed for a lot of flying either.

Re: Drones flying nighttime patterns over NE Colorado leave law enforcement stumped

#115

Post by godelski »

If this is such a high concern, why don't they go on a fox hunt? HAM is pretty popular in rural areas and HAMs love fox hunts. With the frequency and length that these things are up, they should be able to close in on the operators fairly quickly.

Re: Drones flying nighttime patterns over NE Colorado leave law enforcement stumped

#116

Post by soulofmischief »

hatsunearu wrote: post #55
cmroanirgo wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He urged people not to try to shoot the drones down, both because their batteries can cause intense fires and also because shooting a drone is a federal crime. Shooting an inanimate object hovering over your property is illegal? ... on the federal level? I suppose it would have to be, but... Edit: Now I know: "Under Title 18 of the United State Code 32, the sabotage of an unmanned aircraft could carry a maximum sen…

I mean, same reason why you can't shoot down an airliner flying 30,000 feet above your house with a homemade Stinger missile or whatever--the airspace is not your property

This law will have to change as more illegally weaponized drones replace traditional drive-bys or other assassinations.

Re: Drones flying nighttime patterns over NE Colorado leave law enforcement stumped

#117

Post by tomc1985 »

trevyn wrote: post #50
mobilefriendly wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They might be using cameras on my home or family. They might be testing some kind of radar or other tech that has a health impact. They might be a competitor assessing my crops. More broadly their very presence is a trespass on my right to live and be left alone on my own property.

Radar at legal power levels does not have a health impact.

Even so a property owner should have a right to decide whether it is used on his property

Re: Drones flying nighttime patterns over NE Colorado leave law enforcement stumped

#118

Post by michaelbuckbee »

tgflynn wrote: post #112
michaelbuckbee wrote: post #108

My thought is that they're nongovernmental groups looking for illegal marijuana growing operations that they'll competitively harvest. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/09/the-s...

If what they're doing is tied to illegal activity, you wouldn't think they'd be flying with collision avoidance lights.

Plausible deniability - they’re just doing ‘monitoring for deforestation’ or doing ‘speculative land investment’ if anybody does track them down.

Re: Drones flying nighttime patterns over NE Colorado leave law enforcement stumped

#119

Post by frankharv »

tomc1985 wrote: post #117
trevyn wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Radar at legal power levels does not have a health impact.

Even so a property owner should have a right to decide whether it is used on his property

I totally agree. Infact the FAA owes me money if they allowed drones below 400ft. This is a taking of my property. I own up to 400 feet. If these drones want to follow the roads that is fine with me. Don't tread on my private property.
Post reply on HN