Idea of civilians ('police, farmers & others') using drone aircraft may soon fly with FAA

[kpete]

Source: los Angeles Times

Idea of civilians using drone aircraft may soon fly with FAA
The Federal Aviation Administration plans to propose new rules for the use of small drones in January, a first step toward clearing the way for police departments, farmers and others to employ the technology.

Drone aircraft, best known for their role in hunting and destroying terrorist hide-outs in Afghanistan, may soon be coming to the skies near you.

Police agencies want drones for air support to spot runaway criminals. Utility companies believe they can help monitor oil, gas and water pipelines. Farmers think drones could aid in spraying their crops with pesticides.

"It's going to happen," said Dan Elwell, vice president of civil aviation at the Aerospace Industries Assn. "Now it's about figuring out how to safely assimilate the technology into national airspace."



Read more: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-drones-for-profit-20111127,0,6584711.story

[DreamSmoker]

1. Imagine what Police will do with this

Imagine your local Police Flying this over everyone's homes 24/7/365 days a year..
Yes you could say it does not bother you as you are not doing anything wrong...
The Reality is though that a bit more of you r privacy has been lost..
Now you will have to move out to Timbuck 2 to have privacy and no one spying on you...

This Plane will be used to find crimes that don't exist..
Fact..
This also allows Police to find crime off of front street and go in your back yard..

I do believe this is to go after Cannabis Patients and their Back Yard gardens..

[LanternWaste]

22. Sounds almost as bad as what civilians would do with it.

Sounds almost as bad as what civilians would do with it.

Animal Farm-1984-ish melodrama aside, the use of cameras and video by civilians for use on unsuspecting civilians seems a much more pressing problem.

You write "Timbuck 2 to have privacy and no one spying on you..." yet indeed, we're already there-- one misstep in public and you're a viral video on Youtube, and a morning coffee-giggle on Facebook. If we are indeed living the dytsopian fantasy of our lives observed, 24/7, that observance comes for the most part from your own neighbors, from the tracking of your habits by corporations you supplied the info to, and the wholly voluntary habit we indulge in of posting this morning's bowel movement on Facebook.

[James48]

2. Home skeet range? PULL! n/t

[zalinda]

3. These drones would be expensive

so the only people who could afford to use them are............those that have the money. Small farmers will not be able to use them, only big mega farmers. And, what if mega farms want the small farmers land, would they destroy the small farmers crops so they could get the land cheaply? It would be easy with drones.

There is WAY TO MUCH potential for trouble and destruction for the FAA to allow this. How about drug gangs? Would they be shooting back at the cops with drones? It could become out and out warfare, with the 99% caught in the middle. And then of course, there is terrorism, both foreign and domestic. All some of these militia groups would have to do is get some of these and they could start a war with anyone who comes on their land.

This really hasn't been thought through. If one side gets it, the other side will get it. Insane for even thinking about it.

zalinda

[cpamomfromtexas]

5. Excellent point. Could they infect crops with gmo stuff?

[bl968]

15. Expensive LOL

A small drone with wireless camera is only $500, and you can even control it from your iphone. Imagine what you can get for $5,000-10,000... Which no police agency would have problems affording with homeland security giving out grants like candy...

http://ardrone.parrot.com/parrot-ar-drone/usa/

Check out some of the videos on youtube.

For example this isn't the same drone but it gives you an idea of how far something like this can go...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9cSxEqKQ78

These guys were miles away from their aircraft.

[RexDart]

20. I'll throw this out as well...

Saw this at Maker's Fair last year.

[Xithras]

23. You're wrong on the farms.

Living in California farm country, and being a bit of a tech nerd, this is a subject near and dear to my heart. Plus, one of the ag UAV companies pushing this was founded by a doctor only a few miles from my house, and I've seen the thing buzzing around. It's pretty cool :)

FWIW, they're looking at a model similar to that used by cropdusters. Individual farmers won't own these, but small companies will buy the UAV's and rent their services out to farmers on an as-needed basis. I don't know many farmers who own aircraft, but I know a LOT of farmers who have their lands sprayed with pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers by air. In fact, one of the driving ideals behind ag UAV technology is the idea that they can be operated cheaper than manned aircraft, which will bring the prices down even lower and make the spraying tech available to more farmers. It will also reduce overspray and improve the health of others around the farms by allowing the plants to be sprayed at lower altitudes around hazards, where it would be unsafe to spray close to the ground with a human pilot (if you've ever watched a field be dusted, you'll notice that they spray around power lines and trees at a greater height for pilot safety).

I don't see a big conspiracy in allowing the farmers to use them. If anything, it's probably an improvement over the current model.

[bananas]

25. This is how skynet will control our food supply. jk nt

[hack89]

26. Tuna fishermen have been using them for years - cost about $70,000

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4000889/ns/business-small_business/t/little-guy-flies-big-boys/

[Plucketeer]

4. The BOTTOM LINE is...

...Do WE really NEED more surveillance??? WE are going to be paying for these things. Don't WE get to choose whether or not they're implemented???

I would like to think I could sit naked on my property if I wanted to, and not have to worry about some observer far away calling his co-workers over from their stations to chuckle at the old fat fucker in the buff. And THEN to find out later that said footage has mysteriously found it's way to YouTube!

[happyslug]

6. Could lead to the repeal of most Trespassing laws in the US.

While Drones can operate several thousand feet above the surface, for most police work would have to drop down to below 600 feet. Tracking cars or crops can be done over 600 feet, but tracking a person on foot in wooden terrain would require the drone operating below 600 feet.

I bring up 600 feet for since the 1920s Congress has opened the skys above your home at 600 feet i.e. if someone flys over your property without your permission, and that person is under 600 feet that person is TRESPASSING, but if person is above 600 feet they are not.

Now the Common Law rule on Trespassing is NOT affected, under the common law, except for "Close of your home" (i.e. your house and the yard around the house) and any other locked building (Or fenced in field), if a person came your property he was trespassing, but was NOT liable for anything unless you can proved he or she did actual damage to your property (I.e. crossing someone's field was NOT a crime, but if you damaged the crop you would have to reimburse the owner of the field).

Starting in the 1890s (and then as an Anti-union organizer act) state legislatures passed what we call Criminal Trespassing acts. This made it a crime to entered any property when the owner of the property just "Posted" "No Trespassing" Signs on the property. The main thrust was to make it a Crime for Mother Jones to enter the mining towns when she tried to organize me miners. She was known for it and other efforts to keep her out of town (i.e. armed guards) were found not be effective (She found other ways to enter the town AND given she was liable under the Common Law only for actual damages the mine owners could prove, thus the mine owners could only escorted out of the town for she did nothing she could be jailed for, which meant she could re-enter the town at any time).

Thus the trespassing acts, as passed by the state legislatures, were intended to being able to fine and JAIL labor organizers, like Mother Jones, not to protect property. It seems to be the main reason such laws stay on the books (It is rare for Police to arrest anyone for just "Trespassing" unless other criminal acts are involved, thus such "No Trespassing" laws are still most effective at keeping Union Organizers out of businesses they are trying to organize.

I bring this all up for the Police want to these Drones, but if the police want to use them below 600 feet, the law as to trespassing would have to be changed. i.e. either by Congress dropping the footage lower OR by the State Legislatures in re-defining trespassing (Police already have an implied right to Trespass if they are in hot pursuit and investigation of an actual crime, but what about such drones "on patrol"?

I see most state legislatures caught between two pushes, one by business who want to keep people out (Labor organizers, Ecologists etc) AND the police wanting to have these drones go everywhere to look for illegal activities (i.e. drugs). If an exception is made for Police how does the "Equal Protection of the laws" guarantee of the 15th amendment be meet? i.e. if it is legal for Police, why can I not fly my drone over my neighbor's property to see if he or she is following the law? i.e. he or she is NOT dumping pollution in such a way that I and my my family are harmed? If police can fly over to see criminal activities, why can't a union organizer do the same with a "Join the Union" banner attached to a drone? OR why can't an ecologist send over a Drone to take picture of how a piece of property is being mined to make sure it is being mined according to the law?

I see both Congress and the State Legislature avoiding the whole issue, the "cost" incurred by business do to the fact third parties could fly over their mines and factories would exceed any "gain" by the Police.

I suspect the rule adopted by the FAA will be similar to the Ultra-lights rules. Ultra lights can NOT operate above 600 feet and then only with permission of the land owner of the land they are flying over. I suspect the FAA will permit that any Drone flights over 600 feet must file a flight plan as any normal aircraft flight. Below 600 feet, no flight plans needed, but you need permission of the land owner. This avoids the above problems of trespassing but make such drones hard to use by Police do to the need for flight plans OR permission of land owners. Business will like it for it restricts who can fly over their factories and mines.

The same rules would give the impression that the FAA is in favor of Drone use by anyone, but make it hard to justify the use in most cases.

[kooljerk666]

7. this is a bad bad idea........

imagine these things following you around 24 hours a day.

Cops will have trunkloads of these things, little machines to see your monitor from outside.

24/7 surveillence, cheap and hard to spot.

Even if you lived in the sticks these thing could follow you & even if you had a jammer they
would probably switch to a GPS mode & go home.

Also sensors to find secret gardens aready exist, iamgine these thing swarming all over
would make life much more difficult.

[russspeakeasy]

8. This is from the Onion, right ?

[enigmaticang3l]

10. Drones made available to...

Just the thought of LE having these is damning. Until gangstalking and other corruption and brutality are addressed and settled, these drones should never be considered. Also some sheriffs and police chiefs already have military grade weapons and surveillance. I don't believe most should ever be used. The damage these can do far outweigh any good. Please pray for our country. Leave these in the hands of military. Bring military home. Their peaceful missions could include mass fertilization of crops.

[Swede Atlanta]

9. Good grief........

I am philosophically not opposed to the use of drones for purely commercial purposes, e.g. assessing crop damage, land usage, etc. but I fear this could lead to large corporations watching our every move. Further I am totally opposed to providing this technology to police and other domestic authorities including the CIA and FBI over American soil. They already eavesdrop on every telephone call I make, every e-mail and text message I send. When is enough, enough? It would be different if we lived in constant fear of anarchy, etc. but I do not want my local police watching me coming in and out of my home to get their jollies.

[Posteritatis]

11. Radio controlled aircraft have existed for ages. Total FUD story.

And oy at the number of people who seem to think "drone" and "armed Predator" overlap perfectly.

[Xithras]

24. What's the difference between an RC plane and a drone?

Nothing, really. "Drone" just sounds more ominous, so you can sell them for more $$.

[SavWriter]

12. Imagine what Google can do with them

We've seen and heard the outrage about Google Earth's street view. Imagie what they can do with some military grade drones. They can have close up's of your house, peeking in your windows. Then there is the thermal views. All of it posted online.

Now, take it a step further. Stalking is a problem, and so is bullying. Now, add in a convienient and easy to use drone and your teen being bullied goes into the insane zone. Or you women or men who have an obsessed loon targeting you. Imagine your stalker having a drone they can legally fly around your house morning, noon, and night.

He is outside the 1000 foot restraining order, but his tiny drone is circling your house, peeking in windows.

Then there are the cops who have abused every single technology we've ever trusted them with. But this, I'm sure they will respect.

[Proles]

13. I'm not so sure what to make of this yet, but

there are a few things people should keep in mind. For starters, I would imagine these drones are very expensive, and require high expertise to control. So I doubt the average Joe can just buy one at the local hobby shop to spy on his ex wife.

Honestly I think this is just the natural progression of technology. It shouldn't necessarily be feared. Lots of military technology is eventually adopted for civilian use, such as the GPS, and most wouldn't argue that its purpose is malicious for those who use it. The fact of the matter is that pilots are being removed from the cockpit. With the exception of airlines and private aircraft we're likely to see drones used for crops, traffic watch, fire fighting, law enforcement and more.

I'm not saying people shouldn't be cautious, but I doubt these drones will be used to fire a missile into your house. Anything these drones can do can likely already be done by manned aircraft anyways.

[bl968]

17. Not really

$1,900

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9cSxEqKQ78

A T-Hawk military grade drone which the Miami/Dade County just bought $200,000

The gasoline engine powered drone is reported to weigh 8.4 kilograms (20 lb), have an endurance of around 40 minutes, 10,500-foot (3,200 m) ceiling and an operating radius of about 6 nautical miles (11 km). Forward speeds up to 70 knots (130 km/h) have been achieved, but the G-MAV is operationally restricted to 50 knots (93 km/h) by software. VTOL operation is subject to a maximum wind speed of 15 knots (28 km/h). Sensors include one forward and one downward looking daylight or IR cameras.

Once again this is cheap with Homeland Security Grants.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bl968]

18. how is it different

Cost of operation. It is very expensive to keep a helicopter flying. But drones can be kept going for hours or days at a time for just pennies on those dollars.


Helicopter operations for a year

$595,000

Drone operations for a year <$30,000

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bl968]

21. Your slip is showing

So you have no problems with the civil liberties thing at all? I think your slip is showing...

[freshwest]

16. Now all we need is an EMF pulse to kill all the computers and it'll be Dark Angel 2012. Or...

Free Sarah Connor to stop Skynet going online:

Sarah Connor:

Dyson listened while the Terminator laid it all down: Skynet, Judgment Day, the history of things to come. It's not everyday you find out that you're responsible for 3 billion deaths. He took it pretty well.

Miles Dyson: I feel like I'm gonna throw up.

(Uh, cue ominous music here.)

Do you guys think Hollywood was trying to tell us something?

OWS certainly knew what they were doing when the went to protest the celebration of this technology at the NASA Museum.