DJI Phantom 2 Vision Plus

[Jarhead0331]

There already are significant efforts aimed at banning or regulating these kinds of commercially available drones, but almost all of the efforts so far are based on grounds of privacy concerns. I don't see these drones as being any more dangerous (they actually seem less dangerous) then model RC planes and helicopters that have been commercially available for decades.  The only difference is that quadcopters equipped with wireless and GPS capabilities are much more accessible because they are easier to pilot.

There will always be idiots who use and abuse, but I see no reason to regulate or ban with the current technology available on these aircraft. Of course, common sense almost never prevails where legislation is concerned.

I think you have nailed the key point versus RC which is the level of skill and commitment required to successfully pilot these types of planes.  With the new drones paired with streaming HD video literally anyone with enough cash can point these and go.  I suspect that as we see many more people playing with drones the number of idiots abusing them will likewise rise.

Con

No doubt.  I'll keep hoping nothing too crazy happens. 

[Con]

Well its not the first scenario I envisioned and the article headline is blowing it up to be a bigger thing than it was in actuality (if you bother to read through it all) but so it begins

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2708851/Drone-blocks-California-firefighting-planes-fires-rage.html

Con

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

How's the drone holding up? 

I'm on the verge of buying one but I'm a bit leery as the two local DJI approved dealers both seem to have pretty poor reviews when it comes to customer support.

I'm looking at the pro pack with a hard top case, 3 batteries, rotor guards, and a few other bits that I can't recall right now.  Are 3 batteries overkill?  What kind of flight time are you getting per battery?

[Jarhead0331]

3 batteries is definitely overkill. 2 is just right. I get about 20 minutes flight time on average per battery. I haven't flown it in awhile due to time and other distractions, but my opinion remains the same...its a remarkable piece of technology worth every penny.

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

Thanks.  Ordering mine now.

[jejo68]

Cool stuff.   Sounds like we need a bigger fly swatter :)

What's the noise level on its motor/engine btw?

I wouldn't describe it as loud, but the damn thing definitely does not incorporate noise dampening and stealth technology. It can be heard.  However, at 200 feet, it was pretty quiet. I would imagine that at altitude of up to 400 feet, it would be practically silent on the ground.

Just out of curiosity. If you hover over my house and I shoot the damn thing Down, what would be the legal consequense ?

[LongBlade]

Cool stuff.   Sounds like we need a bigger fly swatter :)

What's the noise level on its motor/engine btw?

I wouldn't describe it as loud, but the damn thing definitely does not incorporate noise dampening and stealth technology. It can be heard.  However, at 200 feet, it was pretty quiet. I would imagine that at altitude of up to 400 feet, it would be practically silent on the ground.

Just out of curiosity. If you hover over my house and I shoot the damn thing Down, what would be the legal consequense ?

Probably nothing good would come of it: http://mashable.com/2014/10/05/drone-beat-man-shoots-down-drone-police-search-missing-student/

[Jarhead0331]

Cool stuff.   Sounds like we need a bigger fly swatter :)

What's the noise level on its motor/engine btw?

I wouldn't describe it as loud, but the damn thing definitely does not incorporate noise dampening and stealth technology. It can be heard.  However, at 200 feet, it was pretty quiet. I would imagine that at altitude of up to 400 feet, it would be practically silent on the ground.

Just out of curiosity. If you hover over my house and I shoot the damn thing Down, what would be the legal consequense ?

You'd probably go to jail for unlawfully discharging a firearm and then get sued for destroying property. You do not own the air above your house. If it was my drone, there would be a few other consequences too.  >:D

[jejo68]

Cool stuff.   Sounds like we need a bigger fly swatter :)

What's the noise level on its motor/engine btw?

I wouldn't describe it as loud, but the damn thing definitely does not incorporate noise dampening and stealth technology. It can be heard.  However, at 200 feet, it was pretty quiet. I would imagine that at altitude of up to 400 feet, it would be practically silent on the ground.

Just out of curiosity. If you hover over my house and I shoot the damn thing Down, what would be the legal consequense ?

You'd probably go to jail for unlawfully discharging a firearm and then get sued for destroying property. You do not own the air above your house. If it was my drone, there would be a few other consequences too.  >:D

So in effect you can fly around filming other peoples property without any chance of them interfering on you

[LongBlade]

So in effect you can fly around filming other peoples property without any chance of them interfering on you

I'll defer to Jarhead for a real legal opinion.

However, it's my understanding that, at least with regard to walking around outside - you're allowed to see whatever is in the yard, but you're not allowed to take binoculars and peer inside the windows. The same probably applies to drones.

Why we don't own the air rights over our property, however, seems odd. I can see how, at 10,000 feet I might not, but at 100'? One would think that's within the realm of a tree's growth and be within my property.

[Jarhead0331]

The airspace above your home is generally considered to be public airspace and American courts have generally permitted surveillance of private property from public airspace.  As privacy law stands today, you don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy while out in public, nor almost anywhere visible from a public vantage.

The rapid expansion of the commercial drone market has raised several privacy concerns that the law has been slow to address. I believe as more incidents occur involving private drones, the law will adapt. 

I am aware of one incident in Pennsylvania involving an animal rights group who flew their $4,000 drone over land owned by a private hunters' group in an effort to record illegal animal abuse.  The hunters shot down the drone.  While I do not believe criminal charges were filed, there is an ongoing civil law suit.

So the short of it is, be very careful in what actions you take to preserve your perceived privacy concerns. You may subject yourself to criminal or civil liability...at least until the law becomes more developed on the issue.

[Con]

I think the solution is simple,and brilliant. You need to bring back falconry as a sport and hunt those pesky drones out of the sky. You can't be sued if it was a natural animal act!

This untrained hawk took about 20seconds from acquisition to kill. Imagine what a falcon could do

[Jarhead0331]

Hmmmm...if you train a pit bull to attack a person or their property, don't you think that person will be open to criminal or civil prosecution? The question is rhetorical, of course. The answer is, yes. Your theory is humorous, but if not said in jest, its bad advice. lol

[Con]

Hmmmm...if you train a pit bull to attack a person or their property, don't you think that person will be open to criminal or civil prosecution? The question is rhetorical, of course. The answer is, yes. Your theory is humorous, but if not said in jest, its bad advice. lol

All right then encourage falcons to nest on your property. If a photographer gets out of the jeep on safari promptly to get eaten and later pooped out of the alimentary tract of a large lion is it the safari park that gets sued?  ( probably yes but Darwinism should hopefully rule in the parks favor)

If you want to be sneaky fly drones covered in pigeon parts around to "encourage" the natural hawkish behavior.

Come on JH I sense a great business opportunity here and I might be looking for a legal partner to get in the ground floor of anti drone papparazi. Just need to think of a name. Der Falconizer?

Con

[Jarhead0331]

Hmmmm...if you train a pit bull to attack a person or their property, don't you think that person will be open to criminal or civil prosecution? The question is rhetorical, of course. The answer is, yes. Your theory is humorous, but if not said in jest, its bad advice. lol

All right then encourage falcons to nest on your property. If a photographer gets out of the jeep on safari promptly to get eaten and later pooped out of the alimentary tract of a large lion is it the safari park that gets sued?  ( probably yes but Darwinism should hopefully rule in the parks favor)

If you want to be sneaky fly drones covered in pigeon parts around to "encourage" the natural hawkish behavior.

Come on JH I sense a great business opportunity here and I might be looking for a legal partner to get in the ground floor of anti drone papparazi. Just need to think of a name. Der Falconizer?

Con

I'll be more than happy to assist you in your endeavor. However, keep in mind that I do bill by the hour and I'm not cheap!