I don’t really understand the “privacy” thing. I’m much more worried about surveillance that doesn’t sound like four giant angry bees that get confused if they run into a piece of string.
My first thought when I see a drone over my house is “that idiot shouldn’t be flying over people’s houses” and “if that crashes in my back yard I’m keeping it”… not “wow, he’s seeing my roof”. And I’m a privacy freak!
Sadly, a lot of people are more concerned with external things which they don’t want around them, and not data which may contain stuff they would rather not share just floating around.
Privacy with drones isn’t a big concern, these things are loud and pretty obvious. I have minor concerns about safety with something heavy flying over large groups of people but even then it would be a freak accident that anyone would be injured severely. As for planes, they hit birds every day and only rarely have problems they are built to withstand that so idiots with drones at the airport is not going to be a issue.
Airplane engines are tested by firing frozen turkeys into them using a cannon. (Not quite sure how much like a bird strike this actually is, but so be it.) An engine is required to ingest said projectile without losing vanes into the passenger compartment or otherwise self-destructing and causing mayhem (shutting down is acceptable, tho).
While there are some pretty big drones, the vast majority of them are less massive and a lot more fragile than a frozen turkey. Thus I mostly agree with you that drone vs. larger plane is almost always going to go to the plane.
For smaller planes tho, say single engine props, I guess a drone might do enough damage to cause a serious problem.
For the most part tho, I agree that safety and privacy aren’t the real issues.
@baqui63 I thought the urban legend was that a bullet-train maker puzzled at the destruction the chicken caused, followed by a recommendation by the airlines they had borrowed it from to “use thawed chickens.”
But frozen birds (chickens and turkeys) have been used and all jet engines are required to be able to ingest them (or equivalent) without catastrophic failure (eg. sending high-speed shrapnel through a plane’s fuselage and the frequently human contents therein).
A blade-off test is even worse than a bird test tho… this yt video (which claims to be a bird test) is actually a blade-off test: (the blade is cut 17 seconds in).
If it weren’t for the fact that getting to the airport is a lot more dangerous than flying to the next airport, I might even avoid sitting in rows that align with the engine’s blades…
All of the above?
@baqui63 That would be choice #3.
@awk Yep… and that’s how I voted.
Drones + self-driving cars = Skynet and TERMINATORS. JUDGMENT DAY! WE’RE ALL GOING TO DIEEEEEEEEE!
I don’t really understand the “privacy” thing. I’m much more worried about surveillance that doesn’t sound like four giant angry bees that get confused if they run into a piece of string.
My first thought when I see a drone over my house is “that idiot shouldn’t be flying over people’s houses” and “if that crashes in my back yard I’m keeping it”… not “wow, he’s seeing my roof”. And I’m a privacy freak!
@awk
Sadly, a lot of people are more concerned with external things which they don’t want around them, and not data which may contain stuff they would rather not share just floating around.
@awk Google can see so much more than that silly little drone, and yet we carry it in our pockets.
Privacy with drones isn’t a big concern, these things are loud and pretty obvious. I have minor concerns about safety with something heavy flying over large groups of people but even then it would be a freak accident that anyone would be injured severely. As for planes, they hit birds every day and only rarely have problems they are built to withstand that so idiots with drones at the airport is not going to be a issue.
@Jasonf1984
Airplane engines are tested by firing frozen turkeys into them using a cannon. (Not quite sure how much like a bird strike this actually is, but so be it.) An engine is required to ingest said projectile without losing vanes into the passenger compartment or otherwise self-destructing and causing mayhem (shutting down is acceptable, tho).
While there are some pretty big drones, the vast majority of them are less massive and a lot more fragile than a frozen turkey. Thus I mostly agree with you that drone vs. larger plane is almost always going to go to the plane.
For smaller planes tho, say single engine props, I guess a drone might do enough damage to cause a serious problem.
For the most part tho, I agree that safety and privacy aren’t the real issues.
@baqui63 I thought the urban legend was that a bullet-train maker puzzled at the destruction the chicken caused, followed by a recommendation by the airlines they had borrowed it from to “use thawed chickens.”
@PocketBrain Yep… from snopes.com: http://www.snopes.com/science/cannon.asp
But frozen birds (chickens and turkeys) have been used and all jet engines are required to be able to ingest them (or equivalent) without catastrophic failure (eg. sending high-speed shrapnel through a plane’s fuselage and the frequently human contents therein).
A blade-off test is even worse than a bird test tho… this yt video (which claims to be a bird test) is actually a blade-off test: (the blade is cut 17 seconds in).
If it weren’t for the fact that getting to the airport is a lot more dangerous than flying to the next airport, I might even avoid sitting in rows that align with the engine’s blades…
Missed the obvious “Some other answer you’ll DRONE on about on the forum” opportunity.
I’ll show myself out…