6 ms·

Predatory birds attack by dive-bombing. You won't see it coming even if you have an extra camera on the drome pointed upward. They also know how to dive out of

Predatory birds attack by dive-bombing. You won't see it coming even if you have an extra camera on the drome pointed upward. They also know how to dive out of the sun which means that they are invisible in the camera view. And their bones are irrelevant because the damage is done by their mass plus acceleration. Likely they are going to be flying with some kind of netting material that will tangle the blades as well. And birds, even trained ones, might be considered expendable. Not to mention that using birds does not mean that they will attack the drones. They might just find the drone and point out its position for a ground based missile or laser. And people fighting against terrorist whose goal is to kill and maim people might be willing to sacrifice a few trained birds to stop the terrorist acts from succeeding.

owenversteeg 10y ago
Missile? Laser? That's insane. As someone who's worked on UAVs quite a bit, the only thing I'd consider taking them out with - in a situation which necessitated it, like a terrorist attack - is guns. Laser systems would be completely unrealistic for this situation, and using missiles would be absolutely overkill. A predatory bird dive bombing a drone would also not be something I'd bet on. Sure, I have confidence they could evade traditional cameras. But once they hit the UAV, what happens? The bird would almost certainly be killed or maimed by the propellers, and the drone would fly fine. If the creators of the drone spent just $100 extra or so on decent propellers, the drone would easily survive the attack. Using birds with no extra weapons against drones would only work in case of extremely stupid drone creators, and would probably result in at least one seriously injured or killed bird per drone.
- bayesian_horse 10y ago
  Apparently it works quite well, though.
- seszett 10y ago
  An eagle like in this case is orders of magnitude more powerful than the kind of drone being talked about, though. Not armed military drones, obviously, but these are not the target. A mass of 4 kilograms or so diving at several hundred km/h will do a lot of damage, keep in mind these birds kill adult deers. They're also used to avoiding the dangerous parts of the animals they attack and fast bird vision gives them a better view of rotors than the indistinct blur humans see. At 10000 rpm or so, birds of prey should actually be able to follow the movement of blades. They also have more lifting power than most drones, which means they are absolutely able to wrestle them to the ground if the initial impact doesn't knock them off (especially since they will have a far better understanding of what's going on than the drone's operator). I am as tempted as anyone to think that I am smarter than professionals I read about in the news, but I'm pretty sure these guys have thought their experiment through.
  - owenversteeg 10y ago
    Ehh. Orders of magnitude, plural? Several hundred km/h? That's a stretch. These are golden eagles, my favorite kind of bird. Their diving speed is around 220-250 km/hr, and their horizontal speed is around 40 km/hr. They will speed up horizontally to catch prey, but this is typically only up to about 90 km/hr. I've seen UAVs kill birds before though, and it's always a horrifying scene, reminiscent of the plucky character in a dystopian sci-fi movie meeting the all-powerful violent crusher of doom. Moderately powerful UAVs can easily resist birds. Even an off the shelf DJI Phantom 4 can - with stock everything - go 72 km/hr horizontally. I'd bet the eagle could catch up to it, however: the problem comes when the bird meets drone. Every bird-drone incident I've seen is usually an instant kill (or comes close) for the drone, simply because most of the surface area of the drone is covered by four spinning propellers. The tips of these blades are going several hundred miles per hour, and the area of the top not covered by blades is only a few square centimeters covered in smooth, hard to grip plastic. Now you're telling me that a huge bird (that has a wingspan longer than most humans are tall) can grab onto this tiny place without becoming mincemeat? If the blades are carbon fiber, there's a good chance they won't break upon cutting the bird in half. I've worked with drones enough to know what will and won't stop them. A bird won't: it'll brush the blades and fall to the ground in a bloody mess. A bullet will. Bullets are tried and true technology, we know how to use them, they're not ridiculously expensive, and they will certainly take down any drone of reasonable size. This is PR, plain and simple. There's no other explanation for it, unless France's air force is hilariously incompetent, which I would doubt.
    - kriro 10y ago
      Here's a bird vs a slow cruising drone. The attack style seems decent enough to avoid the rotors depending on size. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr-xBtVU4lg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr-xBtVU4lg
      - y4mi 10y ago
        this is a hobbyist drone, not a militarized one. you can see that the blades got damaged because they're cheap plastic, perfectly fine if you just want to shoot some videos from an aerial pov. if you want to use your drone offensively you'd use a) a swarm of drones, b) a significantly stronger one or c) a swarm of hardened drones. as the parent mentioned: the rotors become brutal weapons if you make them from carbon fiber or cheaper but still durable material
- kuschku 10y ago
  > Laser systems would be completely unrealistic for this situation Rheinmetall has sold Laser systems to protect venues at the Olympics, World Cup and other large events for several years now – and their systems are used by several militaries on their bases and in the field for the same purpose.
  - tim333 10y ago
    Here's a vid of a laser taking down a drone. Looks expensive compared to a shot gun though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5qKSKsfUPM&feature=youtu.be&t=12s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5qKSKsfUPM&feature=youtu.be...
    - saalweachter 10y ago
      The advantage of a not-gun is that you can use them around crowds.
    - lstroud 10y ago
      Seems like an air burst scatter shot weapon would be more effective. Something like a shotgun with explosive projectiles. Use the concussive blow to cause damage.
      - knz 10y ago
        Maybe a modern version of a punt gun? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punt_gun https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punt_gun
      - sfifs 10y ago
        What goes up must come down gaining velocity in the process. This is exceedingly dangerous. Google for deaths from guns fired in the air at marriage parties / celebrations.
      - gozur88 10y ago
        So... anti-aircraft artillery, then? Or this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter_Rocket,_Artillery,_and_Mortar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter_Rocket,_Artillery,_and...
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- aanm1988 10y ago
  > Missile? Laser? That's insane. As someone who's worked on UAVs quite a bit, the only thing I'd consider taking them out with - in a situation which necessitated it, like a terrorist attack - is guns. Laser systems would be completely unrealistic for this situation, and using missiles would be absolutely overkill. Flak?
dkersten 10y ago
Predatory birds attack by dive-bombing. You won't see it coming So equip high end drones with other sensors that let the autopilot deal with the falcon attacks (ie don't rely on a human pilot for detecting and reacting to falcon attacks). Also, put some anti-falcon-dive-bomb spikes on top of your drone ;-)
- _coldfire 10y ago
  You don't need any tech to solve this problem. Simply buy two drones. I'd estimate one falcon costing easily $100K annually, compared to a $300 consumer drone. The entire concept is incredibly expensive, doesn't scale and comes with no guarantees, but is certainly loved by the media. Radio signal hijacking and GPS jamming would solve virtually all non-military drone events. But companies pursuing this rarely get a single mention in the news for the actual advances being made in counter drone technology.
  - dkersten 10y ago
    True. When you look at it from a financial point of view, you are absolutely right. Drone is quite a bit cheaper than falcon, so...
  - weberc2 10y ago
    The scenario these address aren't two nation states going to war, one with eagles and the other with drones. The scenario is the once-per-decade terrorist attack, in which case losing an eagle or two to mitigate the attack is worthwhile.
    - dtparr 10y ago
      > The scenario these address aren't two nation states going to war, one with eagles and the other with drones. Was this as weird to type as it was to envision?
    - _coldfire 10y ago
      >solve virtually all non-military drone events That's the same scenario I'm talking about. Overpowering the input signals is a proven, scalable defense that can be easily deployed to police forces, stadiums, national monuments across the world and for minimal cost. You simply will not be able to do that with a highly trained eagle.
Sunset 10y ago
I will put a spike on it. Also I might just remotely detonate the drone. I can buy drones, training a falcon takes time.

owenversteeg 10y ago

Missile? Laser? That's insane. As someone who's worked on UAVs quite a bit, the only thing I'd consider taking them out with - in a situation which necessitated it, like a terrorist attack - is guns. Laser systems would be completely unrealistic for this situation, and using missiles would be absolutely overkill. A predatory bird dive bombing a drone would also not be something I'd bet on. Sure, I have confidence they could evade traditional cameras. But once they hit the UAV, what happens? The bird would almost certainly be killed or maimed by the propellers, and the drone would fly fine. If the creators of the drone spent just $100 extra or so on decent propellers, the drone would easily survive the attack. Using birds with no extra weapons against drones would only work in case of extremely stupid drone creators, and would probably result in at least one seriously injured or killed bird per drone.

bayesian_horse 10y ago
Apparently it works quite well, though.
seszett 10y ago
An eagle like in this case is orders of magnitude more powerful than the kind of drone being talked about, though. Not armed military drones, obviously, but these are not the target. A mass of 4 kilograms or so diving at several hundred km/h will do a lot of damage, keep in mind these birds kill adult deers. They're also used to avoiding the dangerous parts of the animals they attack and fast bird vision gives them a better view of rotors than the indistinct blur humans see. At 10000 rpm or so, birds of prey should actually be able to follow the movement of blades. They also have more lifting power than most drones, which means they are absolutely able to wrestle them to the ground if the initial impact doesn't knock them off (especially since they will have a far better understanding of what's going on than the drone's operator). I am as tempted as anyone to think that I am smarter than professionals I read about in the news, but I'm pretty sure these guys have thought their experiment through.
- owenversteeg 10y ago
  Ehh. Orders of magnitude, plural? Several hundred km/h? That's a stretch. These are golden eagles, my favorite kind of bird. Their diving speed is around 220-250 km/hr, and their horizontal speed is around 40 km/hr. They will speed up horizontally to catch prey, but this is typically only up to about 90 km/hr. I've seen UAVs kill birds before though, and it's always a horrifying scene, reminiscent of the plucky character in a dystopian sci-fi movie meeting the all-powerful violent crusher of doom. Moderately powerful UAVs can easily resist birds. Even an off the shelf DJI Phantom 4 can - with stock everything - go 72 km/hr horizontally. I'd bet the eagle could catch up to it, however: the problem comes when the bird meets drone. Every bird-drone incident I've seen is usually an instant kill (or comes close) for the drone, simply because most of the surface area of the drone is covered by four spinning propellers. The tips of these blades are going several hundred miles per hour, and the area of the top not covered by blades is only a few square centimeters covered in smooth, hard to grip plastic. Now you're telling me that a huge bird (that has a wingspan longer than most humans are tall) can grab onto this tiny place without becoming mincemeat? If the blades are carbon fiber, there's a good chance they won't break upon cutting the bird in half. I've worked with drones enough to know what will and won't stop them. A bird won't: it'll brush the blades and fall to the ground in a bloody mess. A bullet will. Bullets are tried and true technology, we know how to use them, they're not ridiculously expensive, and they will certainly take down any drone of reasonable size. This is PR, plain and simple. There's no other explanation for it, unless France's air force is hilariously incompetent, which I would doubt.
  - kriro 10y ago
    Here's a bird vs a slow cruising drone. The attack style seems decent enough to avoid the rotors depending on size. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr-xBtVU4lg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr-xBtVU4lg
    - y4mi 10y ago
      this is a hobbyist drone, not a militarized one. you can see that the blades got damaged because they're cheap plastic, perfectly fine if you just want to shoot some videos from an aerial pov. if you want to use your drone offensively you'd use a) a swarm of drones, b) a significantly stronger one or c) a swarm of hardened drones. as the parent mentioned: the rotors become brutal weapons if you make them from carbon fiber or cheaper but still durable material
kuschku 10y ago
> Laser systems would be completely unrealistic for this situation Rheinmetall has sold Laser systems to protect venues at the Olympics, World Cup and other large events for several years now – and their systems are used by several militaries on their bases and in the field for the same purpose.
- tim333 10y ago
  Here's a vid of a laser taking down a drone. Looks expensive compared to a shot gun though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5qKSKsfUPM&feature=youtu.be&t=12s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5qKSKsfUPM&feature=youtu.be...
  - saalweachter 10y ago
    The advantage of a not-gun is that you can use them around crowds.
  - lstroud 10y ago
    Seems like an air burst scatter shot weapon would be more effective. Something like a shotgun with explosive projectiles. Use the concussive blow to cause damage.
    - knz 10y ago
      Maybe a modern version of a punt gun? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punt_gun https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punt_gun
    - sfifs 10y ago
      What goes up must come down gaining velocity in the process. This is exceedingly dangerous. Google for deaths from guns fired in the air at marriage parties / celebrations.
    - gozur88 10y ago
      So... anti-aircraft artillery, then? Or this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter_Rocket,_Artillery,_and_Mortar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter_Rocket,_Artillery,_and...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
aanm1988 10y ago
> Missile? Laser? That's insane. As someone who's worked on UAVs quite a bit, the only thing I'd consider taking them out with - in a situation which necessitated it, like a terrorist attack - is guns. Laser systems would be completely unrealistic for this situation, and using missiles would be absolutely overkill. Flak?

dkersten 10y ago

Predatory birds attack by dive-bombing. You won't see it coming So equip high end drones with other sensors that let the autopilot deal with the falcon attacks (ie don't rely on a human pilot for detecting and reacting to falcon attacks). Also, put some anti-falcon-dive-bomb spikes on top of your drone ;-)

_coldfire 10y ago
You don't need any tech to solve this problem. Simply buy two drones. I'd estimate one falcon costing easily $100K annually, compared to a $300 consumer drone. The entire concept is incredibly expensive, doesn't scale and comes with no guarantees, but is certainly loved by the media. Radio signal hijacking and GPS jamming would solve virtually all non-military drone events. But companies pursuing this rarely get a single mention in the news for the actual advances being made in counter drone technology.
- dkersten 10y ago
  True. When you look at it from a financial point of view, you are absolutely right. Drone is quite a bit cheaper than falcon, so...
- weberc2 10y ago
  The scenario these address aren't two nation states going to war, one with eagles and the other with drones. The scenario is the once-per-decade terrorist attack, in which case losing an eagle or two to mitigate the attack is worthwhile.
  - dtparr 10y ago
    > The scenario these address aren't two nation states going to war, one with eagles and the other with drones. Was this as weird to type as it was to envision?
  - _coldfire 10y ago
    >solve virtually all non-military drone events That's the same scenario I'm talking about. Overpowering the input signals is a proven, scalable defense that can be easily deployed to police forces, stadiums, national monuments across the world and for minimal cost. You simply will not be able to do that with a highly trained eagle.

Sunset 10y ago

I will put a spike on it. Also I might just remotely detonate the drone. I can buy drones, training a falcon takes time.