121–130 of 176 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the geofencing has the same value as a door lock; it keeps the honest people honest.
So we'll only really have to worry about dishonest terrorists and or plastic bags
Earlier quoted context omitted.
DJI products quite effectively indicate and restrict access to no fly zones. My controller starts to beep if I get within a few hundred feet of a border to a no fly zone. I haven't tested it, but I think it is supposed to come home and land if you somehow get into a no fly zone. That said, 1,700ft is so high, no fly zones don't really mean much anymore.
Drones are already forbidden by law from flying higher than 400ft.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the geofencing has the same value as a door lock; it keeps the honest people honest.
So we'll only really have to worry about dishonest terrorists and or plastic bags
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess that's how most startups get started AFAIK?
Unfortunately yes, which is why you get founders awkwardly trying to answer questions like.. "How does your product compare to X and Y that are dominating the space right now?" when they've never heard of X or Y.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He warned that any moves to enforce geo-fencing rules would be vulnerable to being hacked by "somebody who could get round that software". Indeed very impressive that an elected official understands this. Someone with a little reverse engineering talent can patch something like that without much work for near-free (think bypassing those FCC regulations turning up TX power in your router firmware). Someone with a li…
I think the geofencing has the same value as a door lock; it keeps the honest people honest.
Hitting a commercial jetliner with an off the shelf drone is impossible--especially at that altitude. With $8K it becomes feasible, but I'd put the level of difficulty at about the same as driving a Bugatti Veyron at 70mph in reverse and executing a j-turn (think Hollywood 180 spin) into a tight spot between two SUV's at the grocery store--3 times in a row.
As rare as plastic bags are at 1700 feet, if it was a sunny day in London in an area with a lot of jet traffic, then it was in all likelihood a bag that was kicked up by a car, caught a massive thermal and managed to get blown around by jet traffic.
(1) Fly fixed wing RC in excess of 180mph weekly and have flown quads for 3 years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Waze seems like insanely dangerous software in the first place. The whole idea of a "social" driving application that constantly pops up little alerts that the driver is supposed to respond to seems to be inviting distracted, dangerous driving.
"Supposed to respond to?" Yes, by driving. The alerts take the form of "Traffic ahead". "Police ahead", etc. There is no interaction required, or even expected unless you really want to poke the thumbs up "yes, this alert is still valid" button. (And if you can't do that safely, given the size and consistent location of the button, you probably shouldn't have a license anyways)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Realistically speaking, what it means is that this particular minister somehow managed to employ a "technical expert" who actually is just that. Oh, and that this technical expert is both a) competent, and b) has managed to gain the trust of the minister. The combination is probably easier said than done, so props to whoever that person is :).
I don't really care whether my `competent politician' is actually a single human, or a bunch of people working together. (Just like people usually attribute speeches to a mythical, composite `Obama' person, even though the roles of performer and speechwriter are done by different people.)
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…
> He warned that any moves to enforce geo-fencing rules would be vulnerable to being hacked by "somebody who could get round that software". Indeed very impressive that an elected official understands this. Someone with a little reverse engineering talent can patch something like that without much work for near-free (think bypassing those FCC regulations turning up TX power in your router firmware). Someone with a li…
Geofencing only works if people stick to the rules. Criminals normaly don't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
http://www.hoverapp.io/ Not sure of UK coverage though.
But note that no-fly zones are pretty onerous: all the best parks in $town are occluded by the huge zone for an out-of-town airport.
Likewise a local beauty spot that occasionally activates for military training is marked without any timely activation data. Is it hot or not? The zone is larger than the current NOTAM, which suggests they're being completionist, which is maximum ass-covering and minimally useful.
This sort of blunt zoning mostly doesn't make sense, and will likely get ignored.
(in fact, if that same zoning applies to geofences, all the $town flyers own bricks)
Real pilot info is semi-useful: http://notaminfo.com/ukmap ; the legal 400ft limit is 120m, which is an invisible speck in the sky. Useful for setting ceilings for waypoint flight, etc.