Posted on 06/14/2014 6:16:27 PM PDT by Veggie Todd
I wish those were real...Lucky Gunner would have made a fortune from me.
...which is the concept of what I’ve been saying...the “right” anti-drone device is a a large, thin, nylon net, shot out of a pneumatic tube...$5.00 of nylon to knock out a $50,000 piece of equipment...a good deal. These things are by definition, flmsy and don’t have a lot of power to work with. A little weight or fouled propellers, they will go down like bricks.
To follow up, that particular drone is about $2500 loaded with camera, but the “pro” quality platforms are 10K and up.
It is.
I saw a similar parody on a left-wing site a while back, after the initial hysteria over domestic drone use.
I read on one site where it had received a few thousand inquiries for source info.
And getting an effective hit with any kind of shot gun round at 3200+ feet would be pretty damned good!
Except maybe a sabot slug?
Anyway, thanks for the chuckle.
How long will it be before the powers that be decide it would be a great idea to arm these drones?
Did you see how low he was flying it?
I don’t understand why it was so low. I would assume police drones, assuming it was one, have descent optics to get either widevshots if the crowd or specific areas.
“Where can I get some depleted uranium?”
At one time, it was used as ballast in aircraft. I don’t know if it is still used. Once the good stuff is removed, it isn’t that valuable.
Dang, man, I thought you Photoshopped it - until I looked it up.
The old see-saw begins - shotgun pellets to take out a drone, so they up armor the drone, so they make a more powerful rifle/shotgun load, so they . . .
The taxpayer funded platform is four times as much.
Dang man, redux - it IS fictional. Now I have to cancel that check. :-)
LOL! They got demoted to flying drones ;)
Yes, it looks like a DJI Phontom the RC plane hobbyists are into; as opposed to the LAPD. The LAPD would be using something more substantial and would be trained to fly it out of reach of thrown objects.
“I frying duhlones now.”
Hey Beck, you have your answer!
That such topics would even arise and questions such as yours would be asked.
“I don’t understand why it was so low.”
The pilot or his supervisor obviously thought that the drone would intimidate the crowd. That is what came into mind when I saw the flight path.
Another potentially useful anti-drone device would be an old-fashioned, early 20th century spark-gap transmitter/antenna...the drones are probably designed to hover and circle if they lose contact with the controller. So, they eventually run out of gas/electricity, and drop out of the sky. It is important to recover it reasonably intact, because there are valuable goodies on/in it...for example, the particular drone in this article probably had a GoPro camera, which is very nice (a few hundred bucks at least) and could be “re-purposed”.
As a youngster, I was pretty damned deadly with one.
Not too effective beyond about 30 yards, though.
But as someone postulated in another post...I think the most effective means of bringing down a relatively low flying drone would be a nylon net.
And I could once throw one of those (weighted, of course) about 30 yards or so, fairly accurately.
There are now devices that shoot nets of many configurations out to a 100 yards and beyond.
Still, anyone operating a drone that low is just begging for it to be brought down.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.