Daily Mail on Drones

[Phillip Powell]

Hi Leccyflyer and why not ?

This is a topic that that is both relevant and important to the hobby how we are viewed by those not involved in the sport of model flying is very important it is they who will decide if we can fly or not.

Advances in technology have made possible that which was only dreamt of back in the day electric flight has advanced exponentially in the last 10 years or so to ignore the possible dangers that these advances can bring would be complacent.

I also think if we through the organ of the BMFA do not show that we are willing to try and control the sport that control we do have will be wrested from us.

[Chris Jones 7]

Posted by Dave Hopkin on 13/12/2014 17:22:33:

The symbolic value of any attack should not be underestimated, by definition a terrorist wants to create terror, terror that disrupts our normal life, when they start to modify our behavoir they are winning....

Imagine every premiship game being targetted one Saturday afternoon with all the TV camera beaming live round the world....

 

 

They've been able to do this for years. Let's face it, it's not hard to fly a fix wing model (compared to say mastering small force tactics or how to strip and maintain an AK74) nobody has banned our pastime because of it yet.

Edited By Pete B - Moderator on 13/12/2014 19:11:29

[Dave Hopkin]

Posted by Chris Jones 7 on 13/12/2014 18:40:41:

Posted by Dave Hopkin on 13/12/2014 17:22:33:

The symbolic value of any attack should not be underestimated, by definition a terrorist wants to create terror, terror that disrupts our normal life, when they start to modify our behavoir they are winning....

Imagine every premiship game being targetted one Saturday afternoon with all the TV camera beaming live round the world....

 

They've been able to do this for years. Let's face it, it's not hard to fly a fix wing model (compared to say mastering small force tactics or how to strip and maintain an AK74) nobody has banned our pastime because of it yet.

But with the GPS technology and autonomous flight programs it is possible to co-ordinate multiple attacks with absolute precision and still leave the terrorist enough time to get quite a distance from the scene of the crime

 

Edited By Pete B - Moderator on 13/12/2014 19:12:08

[leccyflyer]

Posted by Phillip Powell on 13/12/2014 18:32:31:

Hi Leccyflyer and why not ?

This is a topic that that is both relevant and important to the hobby how we are viewed by those not involved in the sport of model flying is very important it is they who will decide if we can fly or not.

Advances in technology have made possible that which was only dreamt of back in the day electric flight has advanced exponentially in the last 10 years or so to ignore the possible dangers that these advances can bring would be complacent.

I also think if we through the organ of the BMFA do not show that we are willing to try and control the sport that control we do have will be wrested from us.

Discussing the means to enact terrorist plots utilising RC vehicles is not something that should be indulged in - and the fact that the BMFA has been asked to keep an eye out for exactly that sort if query ought to be a major clue that it is not appropriate to discuss that in a public forum. Certainly not in the forum of one of the major publishers to the hobby.

[Dave Hopkin]

Trust me, there is nothing I have said that a) isnt in the public domain and b) is relatively common knowledge

But you are right lets jsut acknowledge the threat is there and is under active consideration by those whose job it is to consider it

[Pete B]

Gents, I'm trying to stay on the fence here, believe me.

I have removed a paragraph from a number of posts as I feel being too specific about devices and functions of equipment, whilst being of no value whatsoever to a terrorist, may just appeal to the curious and set someone off on the path of experimentation.

Unlikely, I know, but we have a broad readership and have to consider that.

Pete

[ChrisB]

Posted by Phillip Powell on 13/12/2014 11:54:06:

Hi I see from the posts about this subject that some wish to as usual bury their heads in the sand while others seem to patronise those who enjoy fuddy duddy aeromodelling whatever that is.

Insulting or what!!

The fact is there are those who will use any excuse to stop the enjoyment of those of us who engage in the activity of model flying.

To pursue the argument of drones staying drones is an interesting one as they are not models at all as a drone is of any size and shape a quick look at Youtube will confirm this, these are not models we are talking about but full size devices!

I have read with interest the report published by the BBC about a near miss and I have doubts about the facts in the case 700 feet yes possible of course in FPV or using computer control.

But this must have been a large drone to have the control authority to be able to stay stable in this most hostile airspace which is the landing approach to a busy airport like Heathrow.

I have lived under the approach to the north runway for some years and I can tell you the disturbance that the aircraft produce is damaging I have seen it snap the tops off large trees and pull the tiles off of houses a 2 foot hole in mine.

A Jumbo jet creates so much air disturbance the gap between it and the following plane is 3 miles

So this drone if it flew within 20 feet of the wing is toast the vortex would see to that.

That having been said to even contemplate the possible tragedy that would have ensued had a passenger plane been brought down is horrifying.

But on a lighter note we can be assured that the powers that be will come up with something that is unsuitable and unusable to control drones such is the intelligence of our elected leaders.

 

I used the words fuddy duddy not in a patronising way, as i've been flying for the last 23 since i was 11 and certainly don't think aeromodellers are fuddy duddy. What I was refering to is the general perception of those who are not involved in the hobby. Most people who have never seen a model aircraft before think of a bunch of old men with pipes and straw hats throwing balsawood sticks into the air. There are those who would perhaps be best remaining of that view.

On a related point I went to two national toys shop chains both of warehouse parks today and whilst I was there I had a look at their RC section. Other than a couple of small (palm size) foam things and some plastic 27mhz helis, there were no 'drones' and both shops were packed with people and the airbourne models were not flying off the shelf.

 

Edited By ChrisB on 13/12/2014 19:30:25

[ChrisB]

Posted by Pete B - Moderator on 13/12/2014 19:18:28:

Gents, I'm trying to stay on the fence here, believe me.

I have removed a paragraph from a number of posts as I feel being too specific about devices and functions of equipment, whilst being of no value whatsoever to a terrorist, may just appeal to the curious and set someone off on the path of experimentation.

Unlikely, I know, but we have a broad readership and have to consider that.

Pete

Pete, on balance I think that is probably not a bad idea.

Chris

[Phillip Powell]

It is a very nice idea to think that the BMFA will watch over us and save us from those that would use the a flying radio controlled device for a criminal activity but the fact is they can't.

It is the members of the BMFA that have the ability to see what is going on in their area and report any suspicions to the authorities first .

As far giving people ideas they only have to look on the internet to find a host of information for that

To not discuss and talk about it so that as many people are aware and educated to watch out for such things as possible improper use of remotely controlled flying devices the better.

But to get back to the start the question as far as I am concerned is did the reported incident allegedly involving a passenger plane and a remote controlled device of some sort actually take place?

[Dave Hopkin]

I am not sure what difference the type or contents of the aircraft was - the RC pilot didnt know or care - but FYI it was a passenger A320 inbound to LHR according to the Air proximity report and they actually classify the model as an "unidentified model helicopter" anyway

**LINK**

[Phillip Powell]

Hi Dave I see you accept that this incident took place I have read the report and can find no evidence of its happening apart from the evidence of the pilot no pictures taken from the cabin by a passenger no radar evidence no proximity device in fact no other evidence at all it seems, although the paper I believe alluded to video evidence but we haven't seen that to my knowledge.

As I pointed out earlier not to long ago this report would have been filed as a UFO but today we have our own UFO's and so the possibility is that this may have been a radio controlled craft is possible so now we have something tangible to blame.

What was it? apparently it was a helicopter that appeared over the wing no directionality is mentioned only that it passed as close as 20 feet over the wing this was observed by a pilot in an aircraft travelling at around 150 mph who I think must have had a hell of a crick in the neck after observing this alleged incident.

Look at a picture of an A320 and then a picture of the cockpit and imagine yourself seeing an object pass over the wing at 150 mph (as we have no directionality we can only assume the object was stationary) this would be an object the size of some of the birds you see in the sky around the airport a red kite perhaps.

The report is not clear at all they do not classify the object, only what appeared to be!

Here is another airprox report this has more detail the pilot and co pilot saw it and it was apparently much larger than a remotely controlled device but they couldn't be sure what it was again no radar no other evidence.

I don't remember hearing over reported rubbish about this.

http://www.airproxboard.org.uk/docs/423/2014089.pdf

[Dave Hopkin]

Phillip

I agree for every incident involving a model there are 10's involving full size aircraft, whether it was a true report and whether it was a rc model (in terms of any possible reaction to these incidents) really doesn't matter, the report has been filed as an rc model, the media have said it was an rc model - So Joe Public believes it was an RC model - So it is one (regardless of the veracity and our opinions!)

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Phillip Powell]

Hi Andrew I am sure you are correct given what you describe but I do not see the same degree of detail or time to visualise the object written in the report as you had, my argument is that it is a fact the us humans are fallible we make mistakes even pilots unless of course you believe in UFO's if you can show evidence other than an alleged sighting fine but until then it is only a possibility hat had anything to do with a radio controlled flying device.

I am wiling to accept he saw something just not what it was his statement is not enough there is every reason to believe it didn't take place.

my reference to a proximity device was because TACS is mentioned in the report why I am not sure as isn't relevant as it wasn't able to confirm the presence of an object just confirm that correct procedure had been carried out during the approach.

I fully accept the argument about the chance of catching it on camera but given that nearly everyone is a photographer these days there is always a chance and that every window blind should have been up by now somebody elsemight have seen it ??

[KingKade]

Posted by Pete B - Moderator on 13/12/2014 17:11:27:

Posted by ChrisB on 12/12/2014 21:58:05:

Anyone with an ounce of thought or intelligence will see that a muli-rota couldn't be used for a 'terrorist attack' due to the amount of payload capacity.

I hate to say it, Chris but there's a flaw in your argument.......

Reading this article in the Daily Telegraph - and I'll admit the DT seems to be trying to reach DM levels of reporting these days - Professor David Dunn of the University of Birmingham seems to be thinking rather differently.....

Prof Dunn - the co-author, with Sir David Omand, the former head of GCHQ, of a recent Birmingham University report on drones that called for “urgent” measures to protect British aerospace from attack - said: "Chances are this was a civilian drone that got lost by an operator who lost sight of it.

“But what if that was a terrorist that had bought several drones on the internet? They could surround the aircraft with multiple drones at 200ft after take-off and take out the engines and leave it with nowhere else to go."

“It would be the equivalent of an aerial truck bomb, like a suicide bomb only the terrorist could fly it remotely, with impunity. These drones can be bought anonymously online, piloted anonymously and the attacker would be untraceable because they are completely unlicensed."

This amounted to a "gaping hole" in the country's national defences, Prof Dunn said, despite the fact it is already illegal to fly drones into flight paths.

An unmanned drone attack would have “huge symbolic value” to Al Qaeda because of their use by the US in countries such as Pakistan, Prof Dunn said.

Terrorists might also use drones to fire chemical weapons or flammable liquids on large crowds of people at events such as football matches, the professor said.

Oi! You at the back - stop laughing, this is serious!

I think that when you have apparently-intelligent people making such comments, which IMHO are verging on hysteria or attention-grabbing, then getting something sensible out of this situation this could become an uphill task for aeromodellers.....

Pete

I would suggest that a few more paragraphs are removed...a grid of quods on a take off flight path.... It may be stated on a Birmingham uni report somewhere... But this website is easier research from someones bedroom....

[Phillip Powell]

In reply to King Kade any ref to how a piece of RC equipment might be weaponised is not relevant to the core problem are RC modellers being targeted as possible terrorists if so why??

[Dave Hopkin]

No they are not, the main and immediate problem is the public PERCEPTION of "drones" being a menace to civilisation (if you believe the more lurid media) - In 99% of cases through flouting of the existing laws by (I very much hope) pilots who are not part of the main stream RC Flying Hobby - I would expect any club finding a member taking part in this would expel him immediately (and it has happened at one of the clubs I am a member of)

The main question is "how do we defend and promote safe and legal RC flight" in the face of the "overspill" negative publicity these "drones" are attracting at the moment

[Pete B]

Posted by KingKade on 14/12/2014 18:18:43:

I would suggest that a few more paragraphs are removed...a grid of quods on a take off flight path.... It may be stated on a Birmingham uni report somewhere... But this website is easier research from someones bedroom....

KingKade, if you'd bothered to read my post and follow the link to the Daily Telegraph article, you'll find that I'm quoting from that newspaper. I didn't dig it up from some Birmingham Uni report! I'd also suggest that, august though this forum undoubtedly is, readership numbers are unlikely to match those of the DT....

My post was purely to illustrate what those who are close to the decision-makers are thinking and writing....

Pete

[KingKade]