Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Drone Hunters — Parallax Forums

Drone Hunters

ercoerco Posts: 20,256
edited 2015-02-04 13:18 in General Discussion
There's a reality show in here somewhere. Some great videos, watch the guy grab the drone at the concert.

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/why-do-americans-love-taking-down-drones-109392460239.html

Comments

  • CuriousOneCuriousOne Posts: 931
    edited 2015-01-28 10:40
    Unless there will be serious advancement in battery capacity increase department, the lifting force of drones, or flying range won't go high enough, to carry something serious. But as it will happen, there of course will be some "genius" which will mount sniper rifle, heat seeker missile, or simply, large enough firework, to cause major disaster...
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2015-01-28 10:59
    I'm not worried about batteries. I worried about the bad guys getting hold of a:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-1_Predator

    or replicating the ones they have shot down.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2015-01-28 12:29
    That Predator is as big as my Cessna! Did not know that, I usually see aerial photos without size reference. WRT bad guys getting hold of one, surely they have a self-destruct feature as all good robots do. From that Wikipedia article: "a second was deliberately destroyed on 14 August after suffering an engine failure over Bosnia"

    1280px-RQ-1_Predator_in_Iraq_2006-05-04_F-0000R-004.jpg
  • NWCCTVNWCCTV Posts: 3,629
    edited 2015-01-28 18:37
    Except for the one Iran ended up with!!!
  • CuriousOneCuriousOne Posts: 931
    edited 2015-01-29 00:34
    As I have read in the news about 5 years ago, or even before, a Columbian drug dealers recruited former Russian military aircraft designers, and they already have at hands an UAV, which delivers up to 50kg of "payload" for distances up to 100 miles - operating completely autonomously. So the big bad guys won't be using Parrot AR drone or anything similar for their bad things. These UAVs, besides being heavy in terms of funding, require huge support infrastructure and skilled personnel - not everyone can afford, nor keep such activities in secret. Contrary to them, quad copters are much more easier to handle, service and operate, so poorer, but equally bad minded people will gain access. Of course, current battery capacities won't allow anything serious, but who knows....

    For anyone interested in military grade UAVs, check this website:

    http://www.iai.co.il/2013/18892-en/BusinessAreas_UnmannedAirSystems.aspx

    I've seen some of their items in action at fair, and they were quite impressive - much silent operation, much more rigid body design and so on.
  • LoopyBytelooseLoopyByteloose Posts: 12,537
    edited 2015-01-29 13:54
    As mentioned above...
    In 2011, Iran managed to capture a U.S. drone that supposedly was operating in neighboring Afghanistan.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93U.S._RQ-170_incident

    And it has been mentioned that Amazon's proposed deliveries by quadcopter just might not be a good idea in and around Oakland, California. Chances are the quadcopter would be absconded and cannibalized for resale.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2015-01-29 18:28
    A swift software "upgrade" to limit flying in DC from DJI, who made the Phantom drone which landed at the White House. I wonder if Hubsan will follow suit for their tiny H104. :)

    http://news.yahoo.com/chinese-company-limits-us-drone-white-house-crash-215654764--finance.html
  • LoopyBytelooseLoopyByteloose Posts: 12,537
    edited 2015-01-31 09:27
    So this implies that the industry may shift to having firmware certified with an on-board database of restricted flight areas. It does nothing for drones that have no GPS control or navigation.

    Of course China would want this. This is simply market reserch before they release the same product within their own territory. After all, they have lots of restricted zones too.

    It is also a very clever publicity coup.
  • CuriousOneCuriousOne Posts: 931
    edited 2015-02-01 07:19
    And I already see that database extracted and overlaid on google maps or similar with text "areas where government is not happy to see us" :D
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2015-02-01 08:56
    Stupid quad copters. If you want to do damage on a budget you need one of these: The DIY Cruise Missile http://www.interestingprojects.com/cruisemissile/
  • GadgetmanGadgetman Posts: 2,436
    edited 2015-02-01 10:17
    Never seen that site...

    One point I don't really understand, though, is that he decided on jet engines for 'high speed, minimum flight times'.
    It's not going to be supersonic, exactly, so I would have tried to go a bit more stealthy with a normal IC engine.
    (The Pulse jet he was basing his design around is kind of... noisy... )

    A video feed is also not all that good of an idea. Sure, it could enable you to steer it out of trouble, assuming it can accept external control overrides...
    Unfortunately, though, he could just as well add an IFF transponder at the same time since that would do the same damage to its stealth capabilities.

    No, you don't really need to aim it at the end of the flight. If you have to do that, you probably picked the wrong target anyway.
    (Not going to list payloads or targets, but trust me, I have a nasty imagination. Lets just say that the fact that the Norks are experimenting with RC kits is making me feel uneasy...)
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2015-02-01 11:14
    The DIY Cruise Missile project was started in 2003. It was before the world was flooded with smart phones, with their gyros and compasses, before we could get 9 axis IMU's and GPS units cheaply, before the Arduino and Maker movement.

    My take away from his project was that he was showing how easily and cheaply a cruise missile like weapon could be built. A decade ago that was quite a shocking idea for most people.

    Was it a sincere demonstration? Was it a publicity stunt?

    The British media dubbed him "A threat to world security" so I guess both those things worked.

    I don't know. The idea that pointing out potential security issues makes you a security threat still plays out today in the computer security arena. Stupid but true.
  • CuriousOneCuriousOne Posts: 931
    edited 2015-02-02 06:06
    Well, I have seen both blueprints and circuit diagrams of FIM-43C "Redeye". Circuitry is nothing hard to be replicated at home by a college student. But getting hands on mechanics and especially - PbS sensor is not that easy. There are too many moving parts and quite high precision involved.
  • GadgetmanGadgetman Posts: 2,436
    edited 2015-02-02 12:12
    The Redeye is old...

    For large cruise missiles and UAVs, I guess that NASAMS would be the best choice today.
    (If it's good enough to protect Washington during Presidentia inaugurations... )

    For smaller drones I'd recommend 12 gauge...
    Either ground-based 'Project Redneck'... or you can get hold of a medium sized RC plane with long-range FPS vision and a shotgun through the fuselage.
    Or even a long line of Mustad Ultrapoint Elite Triple Grips towed from the RC Plane...

    In theory, you could also make a compressed-air gun that fires lead weights with long lines of hooks tied to them. fire off half a dozen of those in one charge, and with a decent spread...

    FISH ON!

    The big problem for all this, though is to actually detect the durn things.

    For FPS-equipped drones, I'd scan for the video transmission frequency.
  • CuriousOneCuriousOne Posts: 931
    edited 2015-02-02 20:22
    It is old, but it is genius piece of engineering. In fact, it "solves" the tasks using analog computing, at speeds that was not reachable for "normal" computers of it's time, maybe except some big mainframes...
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2015-02-04 01:26
    Or get a golfer to take out the drone. http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/yahoo-sportsdash/jason-day-takes-out-drone-during-adidas-commercial-035007527.html
  • GadgetmanGadgetman Posts: 2,436
    edited 2015-02-04 03:52
    I thought this topic was 'on a budget'... Golfing equipment is kind of on the expensive side...
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2015-02-04 07:48
    Gadgetman wrote: »
    I thought this topic was 'on a budget'... Golfing equipment is kind of on the expensive side...

    You don't really need the golfing equipment. Just some golf balls, some pipe, and a CO2 cartridge.
  • GadgetmanGadgetman Posts: 2,436
    edited 2015-02-04 12:40
    Golf balls?

    With enough of a pressure differential, you can even use ping pong balls...
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2015-02-04 13:18
    erco wrote: »
    Or get a golfer to take out the drone. http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/yahoo-sportsdash/jason-day-takes-out-drone-during-adidas-commercial-035007527.html

    Given my ability to hit the green, I have a better chance on hitting a drone. :)
Sign In or Register to comment.