Catching drones gone rogue
Bob Lawrence (VE1RLL)
Posts: 1,720
https://www.elektormagazine.com/news/catching-drones-gone-rogue?utm_source=Elektor+International+(English)&utm_campaign=204738bc9a-Elektor_e_zine_158_1_21_2016&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_23bd160f48-204738bc9a-234065433&mc_cid=204738bc9a&mc_eid=b3483591d2
Catching drones gone rogue
Catching drones gone rogue
The proliferation of consumer-grade drones has placed a new tool in the hands of people with mischievous intent. Unmanned aerial vehicles can be used to transport dangerous payloads such as explosives, disrupt air traffic or to invade private spaces. Last week a man in the United States was convicted for attempting to smuggle contraband into a Maryland state prison with the use of a drone.
To be able to defend against drones gone rogue, Dr. Mohammad Rastgaar, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at Michigan Technological University, and his team developed a drone that can catch renegade drones with a net. The idea came to him when he heard snipers were deployed during the FIFA World Cup to shoot down drones should they pose a threat to the public.
“I thought, ‘If the threat is a drone, you really don’t want to shoot it down—it might contain explosives and blow up. What you want to do is catch it and get it out of there’”, Rastgaar told Michigan Tech News.
Rastgaar's Drone-Catcher, which can be operated by a pilot on the ground or function autonomously, chases the intruding drone and shoots out a wide net to ensnare it. “What makes this unique is that the net is attached to our catcher, so you can retrieve the rogue drone or drop it in a designated, secure area,” Rastgaar said. “It’s like robotic falconry.”
Comments
Finally something to make even football interesting. Who is going to be watching football when there is a drone war going on overhead?
No matter what clever stuff you come up with to catch incoming trouble. The incoming trouble can always overload the system cheaper than you can build the system to catch it.
See history of the Second World War etc, etc....
Anti-Virus software?
.
I hope you are right.
The Twin Towers thing demonstrated that you don't need much in the way of resources to cause a lot of grief.
Someone trying to carry out a terrorist attack with drones presents a different sort of problem, and the potential damage from such use justifies not only more drastic countermeasures, but also much larger development expenditures. I know the military has been working on laser weapons for taking out small drones, and no doubt other sorts of weapons we haven't heard about. As we've seen with other sorts of terrorist attacks such as the shootings in San Bernardino, it's probably impossible to stop everything. Incidentally, I was about a km up the street from that attack when it happened. Had I been asked about the likelihood of a terrorist attack in a city like San Bernardino, I think I'd have laughed. Not any more. Your point is well taken.
I do not want to go into politics, but this obsession with terrorist attacks slowly gets on my nerve.
Even if I would employ @erco to help me with a flame thrower on a Parallax Quad, how much damage could I do to a small town, compared to say a Leopard II or a 747?
The main problem with them UAVs is the invasion of privacy. And catching them with a net leaves you with way more usable parts as shooting them down with a shotgun.
just my 2 cents.
Mike
Good for wall of shame, etc...
Obsession? Not really. Just a realization that some technological developments make it easier for small numbers of people to hurt large numbers of people. Because of that, we are forced to consider such things.
Now are we talking rogue drones or rogue jones?
Yes, but to hurt a large number of people you will for sure not use a quad copter with such small payload.
To tell the truth 'drones' are way more dangerous to terrorists then terrorist with quad copter are to me. I do just not like the invasion of privacy them UAVs with cameras are able to do.
One shipping container with some 'simple' thermonuclear device going into a US Harbor on one of them thousands of ships docking in the US each week frightens me way more then some guy with a quad copter. And ships can carry a lot of weight in opposite to private own-able UAVs.
I am not sure about this but I think it is quite possible to remote control a Cessna, for example. Or even a Airbus or Boing Passenger Airplane. Now you have 'some' payload. But a Quad Copter? Does not make sense to me.
So regulating UAVs of quite small size BECAUSE of a terrorist thread is what I would call Obsession.
Regulating the implication of there use for privacy reasons or safety reasons DOES make sense to me.
Just my 2 cents.
Mike
As for how drones might be used to carry out some attack, I don't think it's particularly responsible to be posting ideas, but I can think of a few. However, that wasn't the point of the thread nor the point of my posts. They were only about whether or not the video depicted a method that might be useful in some circumstances for taking down a troublesome drone.