Dahua Drone

Interesting. I'm a 107 drone operator. I"m sure that has multiple configurations depending on which features you need but that'll be some HUGE bucks for that- if it actually delivers as promised...and regulations loosen up more to fly it. Not easy flying commercially out here by any means.
 
All this time I've been saying da-who-a, and now I find out it's da-wa. I wonder how many ways there are to say Hikvision?
 
Not sure what you are trying to say, but I see hikvision has a drone as well with 30x optical zoom.
 
So I live in a high brush fire area. And assholes flying drones have caused water dropping helicopters and aircraft dropping retardant (Phos-chek) to stop flying. Drones are real problem and can cause real aircraft in emergency situations to stand down.

Tell me how this is good?
 
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns
It's not good if you're an asshole hobbyist flying like that- very not good and if you're caught doing that you're in big trouble. If you're the FD doing it and possibly search and rescue as well, or have the proper 107 and authorizations to do so and work in coordination with the AHJ, it's a different story.
 
Well that is just plain bull shit. If you're "caught" it's too fucking late! You have already halted aircraft operations in an emergency flight zone for water dropping aircraft!!! There are many ass holes with drones who do just that. My house and many others were almost over run by fire last year. If not for the grace of God, and a wind shift, we would have been. Fire fighting aircraft were grounded due do drones.

Respectfully, Fuck You and 107 what ever that is with your toys that can cause severe mayhem.
 
OK . I feel remorse for my emotional posting. But it was pretty frustrating to see the tankers and heli tankers grounded while looking at flames.

Certainly drones are wonderful technological devices that will do great things and already have. Especially as you point out in rescue situations.

Unregulated drones are a real problem. Because fire fighting aircraft will stop flying at the first sighting of one. And there are lots of dipshits out there with drones.

apology submitted.
 
I get the safety concerns and agree regulations are needed...........but I bet it's almost impossible to bring down an aircraft with a hobby drone. Those inclined to do harm would be dropping aircraft daily if it were that easy.
 
NoloC said:
OK . I feel remorse for my emotional posting. But it was pretty frustrating to see the tankers and heli tankers grounded while looking at flames.

Certainly drones are wonderful technological devices that will do great things and already have. Especially as you point out in rescue situations.

Unregulated drones are a real problem. Because fire fighting aircraft will stop flying at the first sighting of one. And there are lots of dipshits out there with drones.

apology submitted.
Click to expand...
Accepted. Please understand that we 107 operators went through a lot to fly commercially, always fly responsibly, and are as upset as you are about irresponsible people zipping their drones around. Even when I fly recreationally I do so responsibly. Drone manufacturers software is making strides to catch up with real time no fly zones. The faa is severely understaffed but will investigate all reported incidents. Responsible pilots out here are trying hard to educate on a daily basis. There is also a large measure of drone hysteria fostered by the media too, so it's an 'uphill' battle too. Just don't lump us all into one category, just as we who install cameras don't wish to be labeled peeping Tom's or privacy invaders. Most of us are out here for good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns and NoloC
Idiots with drones, idiots with cars, idiots in bars. There's a common thread here. Idiots are a problem. Drones are just another way for idiots to be a problem. I wish idiocy were illegal and curable. Education helps a bit, but some folks are unfortunately immune to that particular vaccination against idiocy.

As far as the DaWa drones go, I enjoy technology in all forms. The more competition the better. I wonder how their smaller ones stack up against DJI's long range drones like the Mavic. They're quite impressive for long range FPV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OldBobcat, looney2ns, NoloC and 2 others
I too am curious about how small hobbyist drones could bring down a large, manned airplane or helicopter. Seems to me that a "crash" with one would result in the drone being blown to shit and a million pieces of plastic raining down on the drone operator's head. Seems it can't be any more harmful than birds flying around, which is a daily encounter for pilots.

As Kawboy points out, you can't really blame the technology; it's the people that abuse and misuse the technology. If we banned drones because it could hinder emergency efforts, then we must ban cars because they can (and often do) block emergency vehicles; must ban computers because some use them to hack, create viruses and commit other crimes; etc...It's annoying when people misuse technology, but we can't let that prevent advancements. We just have to create fair use regulations and try to prevent as many incidents as possible.
 
wxman said:
I too am curious about how small hobbyist drones could bring down a large, manned airplane or helicopter. Seems to me that a "crash" with one would result in the drone being blown to shit and a million pieces of plastic raining down on the drone operator's head. Seems it can't be any more harmful than birds flying around, which is a daily encounter for pilots.

As Kawboy points out, you can't really blame the technology; it's the people that abuse and misuse the technology. If we banned drones because it could hinder emergency efforts, then we must ban cars because they can (and often do) block emergency vehicles; must ban computers because some use them to hack, create viruses and commit other crimes; etc...It's annoying when people misuse technology, but we can't let that prevent advancements. We just have to create fair use regulations and try to prevent as many incidents as possible.
Click to expand...

Well you have no experience in aviation I would assume. So while an interesting curiosity, as is that attractive image you purvey, the fact is that fire fighting aircraft, both fixed wing and rotor craft will be grounded at a drone sighting. Sure I like technology too, but aren't we really talking about fucking toys? Toys that can cause a coordinated air assault by the USFS and whatever local fire fighting agencies are involved to leave dodge. And in many areas of the country, the only way you stop a brush fire is aircraft. Mainly retardant lines well coordinated and executed with rotor craft supporting ground efforts. And in many cases saving ground crews lives. That supersedes IMHO an ass hole in a bar. Kudos to Kawboy for that brilliance. Essentialy "idiots are bad". Prolific.

In the particular incident I am citing some 400 plus homes were threatened. It is not an oddity. Unfortunately it is becoming more and more common. And these guys who fly fire fighting aircraft, fly under extreme conditions you could not imagine. And have balls bigger than you can imagine or certainly have seen in a mirror. So if I am to read into your comment that you feel in some way they are being unrealistic about the threats involved, you are even more uninformed than I imagined. And as to your "bird" observation, birds don't tend to fly around an area totally engulfed in flames. They split for survival. Not a factor.

However, @Shockwave199 points out some positive steps to prevent these problems and seems to be a reasonable and standup guy.

Again forgive my emotional connection to this.
 
The only thing I would interject is 'more and more common' is not really altogether realistic. The word has gotten out in a huge effort that specifically, flying in an emergency scene or fire emergency is strictly prohibited for the hobbyist. Most all negative press gets reported about reckless drone behavior and it is not more and more common to see that behavior. One time is one time too many but regardless of how personal it got for you and your neighborhood, that kind of stupidity is not common. I'm all for educating and taking reckless hobbyists to task and advancement in software behavior. But I'm not at all on the side of lumping all pilots into assholes or all drones being good for nothing toys. Frankly, even hobbyists should be required to take and pass the 107 exam. You gain a healthy respect for manned aircraft and a greater understanding of airspace. Manned aircraft takes precedence every single time, no question.

Keep in mind that the vast majority of drone sightings by pilots have been debunked and for all of the hysteria, the numbers just don't pan out in relation to how many drones are airborne compared to manned aircraft, in an extremely short period of time for that to happen I might add. How many collisions and downed planes have there been thus far? Zero. Studies about how drones impact aircraft in collision are being carried out as we speak, as well.

To bring it home so it makes sense here, drones for security, law enforcement, search and rescue and yes, open brush fire situations are already becoming a huge asset. Let's hope good piloting behavior paves the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigredfish
NoloC said:
Well you have no experience in aviation I would assume. So while an interesting curiosity, as is that attractive image you purvey, the fact is that fire fighting aircraft, both fixed wing and rotor craft will be grounded at a drone sighting.
Click to expand...

True, I have no aviation experience...but I do have a physics background and having a difficult time imagining how a little, couple ounce piece of plastic would be any match against a several ton aircraft. Maybe if it were sucked into an engine or something?

Sure I like technology too, but aren't we really talking about fucking toys? Toys that can cause a coordinated air assault by the USFS and whatever local fire fighting agencies are involved to leave dodge.
Click to expand...

They can be toys, but they also can be scientific instruments, among other useful, professional things. We can't just do a national ban on drones because some assfuck may misuse it during a wild fire. There's a time, place and proper procedure for using any device and there's always going to be someone to misuse it. I would fully support localized bans during emergency situations like a wild fire and those laws need to be heavily enforced...

And in many areas of the country, the only way you stop a brush fire is aircraft. Mainly retardant lines well coordinated and executed with rotor craft supporting ground efforts. And in many cases saving ground crews lives. That supersedes IMHO an ass hole in a bar. Kudos to Kawboy for that brilliance. Essentialy "idiots are bad". Prolific.
Click to expand...

Maybe a different level in the bar room, but if the drunk leaves the bar, gets in his car and drives the wrong way down the highway, that would put lives at risk.

In the particular incident I am citing some 400 plus homes were threatened. It is not an oddity. Unfortunately it is becoming more and more common. And these guys who fly fire fighting aircraft, fly under extreme conditions you could not imagine. And have balls bigger than you can imagine or certainly have seen in a mirror. So if I am to read into your comment that you feel in some way they are being unrealistic about the threats involved, you are even more uninformed than I imagined.
Click to expand...

Like I said, I have no aviation experience, so I can't say for sure that the threat is unrealistic. I'm just saying that it's hard for me to imagine a little drone being a threat to a manned aircraft. Maybe it is and I'm overlooking a physical process that would cause danger....and again, if that's the case, then I fully support temporary, localized bans during certain emergency situations.

And as to your "bird" observation, birds don't tend to fly around an area totally engulfed in flames. They split for survival. Not a factor.
Click to expand...

I wasn't referring specifically to wild fires, rather the risk of bird encounters on daily aviation in general. If birds aren't a big concern for crashing the local news chopper while it monitors traffic each day, then I don't understand why a drone would...and likewise, I don't see how birds (if they were present in a fire) or drones would cause such concern for a chopper dropping water on a fire.

Again forgive my emotional connection to this.
Click to expand...

Understandable! I'm sure if I were in a situation to where my home was threatened over some jerk with a drone, I would probably feel the same way. We all look at things differently based on our experiences. Being in a scientific field, I look at drones and see a world of possibility. Being in a fire zone, you look at drones and see a disaster waiting to happen. The diplomatic key to moving forward is to understand each other's point of view and work toward a reasonable solution that meets each other's needs and concerns. We can't let people misuse drones and put life and property at risk, yet it's also not reasonable to completely ban the technology. There has to be a compromise that allows drones to be used for the right reasons and in their right place, while severe punishment given to anyone who misuses them.
 
Well I agree with both of the preceding commenters statements. I was not refering to all drones being bad or banned. But there needs to be more regulation of the ones I would categorize as "toys". Drones have provided significant benefits in many areas and the Dahua one shown looks quite interesting. Personally I'd rather see Lockheed Martin or Northrop get the contract than Dahua.

The problem is during an emergency, such as a brush fire, resources are pretty stretched and trying to go after violators for enforcement is very difficult. Flying drones is already banned in such situations and as stated the public are becoming more aware due to press. But there needs to be a barrier to entry. Any swingin' dick with a grand or two in his shorts can get one and shooting pictures of a brush fire is pretty tempting. They should be licensed.

I disagree with the idea that they do not pose a physical threat to aircraft in a collision. Engines could be damaged or control surfaces or countless other scenarios. At best after a strike the fire fighting aircraft will have to return to base for inspection and airworthiness assesment. This removes a precious and scarce asset from line duty.

I understand there are two sides to the story and if you are a professional drone pilot, you think sightings are diminshing. Maybe in New York, but not so much out west and specifically SoCal home of the majority of all idiots. I speak regularly to guys who fly fire fighting aircraft and while they may not directly report the sighting, they may be diverted due to some other source of a sighting. Let's hope it is "bunk".

Cool video though!
 
Well, not every drone would be an inconsequential collision.

There's little drones



Medium size drones



and then there's big drones.



 
  • Like
Reactions: bigredfish and NoloC
Drone strike would be equivalent to a large bird strike. *Could* cause a bunch of bad problems (engine going out, hole in fuselage, etc.). Bird strikes happen every day and the only really big one was Sully's US Air flight out of LGA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom