US military gets authority to shoot down citizens' small drones The US Army issued guidance to its formations a few months ago allowing it to shoot down consumer drones buzzing its units, according to reports. It is illegal to fly a consumer-grade drone within 400ft of a US Army base in April, the US Department of Defence stressed this week. Larger drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles, as …
12 gauge Browning, modified choke, goose loads. Then apply the "three Ses" of country living, "Shoot, Shovel, Shutup". Just take 'em out, dispose of them, and don't make a big song and dance about it.
Granted, this combo is only good for 80 or 90 yards ,,, but I rather suspect that that'll be all that's required. Once an airport gets the reputation of "here be where drones go to die" among the local operators, the fucking idiots will keep away in droves.
Note that most airports world-wide are in otherwise unused, flat, low-lying wetlands ("swamps" by any other name), which is where people hunt water foul anyway. Airports also have a fairly wide buffer zone around them.There should be zero collateral damage.
"flat, low-lying wetlands ("swamps" by any other name),"
Marshes. Swamps are full of trees or other woody plants. (In fact, that's the main distinguishing feature of marshes and swamps. Swamps have trees and/or woody bushes, marshes don't.)
Ref: My late wife studied wildlife biology, and she was very specific about this point. They are both wetlands (but so, by at least one definition, is a stretch of ocean), but swamps are, in effect, flooded woodlands, while marshes are flooded grasslands.
See also the Unreliable Source's pages "Swamp" and "Marsh".
Sounds like you don't actually fly drones. There are no-fly zones around almost every airport, and over some key areas. The motors on a drone in those areas won't even start up. So you have nothing to worry about. It's getting so there are so many no-fly zones that it's becoming more and more difficult to simply enjoy getting interesting photography without bumping into some regulation. As long as people fly responsibly, there is rarely a problem.
Strangely in the UK we hear about these things all the time. But having been a long time model aircraft enthusiast, the laws have been in place since radio control was invented to stop the illegal use of RC aircraft. Drones are RC aircraft & thus can NOT be flown anywhere you do NOT have explicit permission to do so. Thus all public places are off limits, as are any open spaces where you do not have the land owners permission etc etc.
Shooting them down suits me, I'll get my shotgun, oh wait a mo maybe not I'd get arrested, but plod do nothing to the idiots with drones !
So before reading me my rights,
plod asks why do you think you can do that [response to flying 8 blade weedeater above me in blind corner of property at height lower than adjacent 1 floor building],
I say "Uhh .... Internet"
Get read rights, then request lawyer present, plod says we need to talk to "victim" first.
No arrest, case disappears from plod incident online files,
My alleged crime - TELLING pendejo if he flies that thing over me again, I will knock it down ... method ... rubber bands!!!
It should take a few milliseconds to destroy them with current laser weapons.
In late 2014, for example, the US Navy showed that a ship-mounted laser-weapon system called LaWS could target small boats, such as those used by terrorists and pirates. That experimental weapon is currently installed on the USS Ponce, an amphibious support ship in the Gulf.
I have been considering doing some drone work. I have a pilot's licence.
We already have the Drone Slayer in Kentucky:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/judge-rules-in-favor-of-drone-slayer-dismisses-lawsuit-filed-by-pilot/
It looks like Russian drones, though, are the preferred military drones:
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/633311/russia-news-ukraine-vladimir-putin-ammo-dump-attack-drone-grenade-explosion-video-sanction
Dave
P.S. Can Skynet be far behind?
From Above link:
Since 2012, the company has shown that ADAM can disable targets such as boats, drones and simulated small-calibre rockets from about 1.5 kilometres away. Although unwilling to disclose the price of ADAM — or whether anybody has bought one — Lockheed Martin says that it is now ready to provide the system to customers.
The real question now is "Why is this in the news?"
I wish the US Forest Service could proactively shoot them down when working forest fires. Some drone operators apparently can't understand that having to wave off a dump plane when it is already in final approach is a tad dangerous for the crew.
I'll leave it to the reader to find suitable videos of slurry dumps by aircraft on their video streaming service of choice.
Not that any of this bothers me in the slightest, as I don't fly near any such areas, but it would be interesting to see if their guns could hit a small, agile fast racing quadcopter, as those things really do move.
I've been building these things well before flight control boards were a thing, started with a gyro controlled tricopter. :-)
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
