5 ms·

Would this apply if your drone was used to fight fires? I wonder if some drone system that flies swarms of drones and drops nitrogen pellets that suck out oxyg

Would this apply if your drone was used to fight fires? I wonder if some drone system that flies swarms of drones and drops nitrogen pellets that suck out oxygen could fight fires.

jbob2000 8y ago
If you manage to develop a drone swarm system that drops things, the last thing it will be used for is fighting fires. I'm waiting for someone to develop drones that swarm like starlings (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eakKfY5aHmY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eakKfY5aHmY). You could take down an entire battlegroup with a couple thousand suicide drones.
mschuster91 8y ago
> I wonder if some drone system that flies swarms of drones and drops nitrogen pellets that suck out oxygen could fight fires. You'd need way too much nitrogen for this. Basically it would heat up and change into gas form seconds after the pellet is anywhere near the fire. Fires, especially large ones, create massive amounts of hot air.
kej 8y ago
It's a question of authorization. If the fire department clears you to bring in your nitrogen swarm you'd be fine, but they want unauthorized drones out of the area so they don't interfere with other emergency operations.
BenjiWiebe 8y ago
I am a volunteer firefighter. Our county uses a drone to watch fires, and let the firefighters know where the fire is spreading to and how fast.
- dreamcompiler 8y ago
  I'm sure your drone is coordinated with Incident Command, which makes it not a threat to the aerial tankers.
  - BenjiWiebe 8y ago
    It is coordinated, plus we very rarely/never have any other aerial support.
s73v3r_ 8y ago
I would imagine drones being flown by the fire department would be exempted. However, that should not be taken to mean that a random person who modifies their drone should feel free to fly over the fire under the guise of "helping".
- mkempe 8y ago
  In recent years, during wildfires in Colorado many homes have been saved by private firefighters because the owners had paid premiums to certain private insurance companies, which are determined to actively save assets not just pay for damages. Without these private efforts those houses would have been destroyed (we know this because the neighbors lost their homes and all their belongings when government officials told them to evacuate and they had no personal or private solution in place). Do you recommend that the State stop homeowners from saving their houses or hiring people to save their houses if their actions involve the use of drones? The government always resorts to banning or controlling new things. As a general rule, they're wrong; and their motivation is not the protection of your life, liberty, or property.
  - oh_sigh 8y ago
    > Do you recommend that the State stop homeowners from saving their houses or hiring people to save their houses if their actions involve the use of drones? Yes. You don't get to hold up containment efforts for potentially thousands of homes because you believe that your home is more important. Private firefighters are fine, but they can't impede real emergency personnel.
    - mkempe 8y ago
      Nice insult: "real". The thousands of people who lost their homes during Colorado fires while some of their neighbors did not -- these victims wished they had had the right private fire insurance instead of only your "real" personnel. Using drones to observe specific fire activity around one's private property is entirely legitimate and can save both lives and assets. The State should remain neutral -- or encourage their useful uses; neither limit nor ban them. [added] If you're downvoting this you obviously have not lived through a Colorado wildfire and do not personally know victims of those fires. Even the public firefighters have expressed appreciation for the private firefighters' work. And saving a home from the flames does not somehow disrupt containment! Do you know anything about fighting wildfires?

Would this apply if your drone was used to fight fires? I wonder if some drone system that flies swarms of drones and drops nitrogen pellets that suck out oxygen could fight fires.

jbob2000 8y ago

If you manage to develop a drone swarm system that drops things, the last thing it will be used for is fighting fires. I'm waiting for someone to develop drones that swarm like starlings (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eakKfY5aHmY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eakKfY5aHmY). You could take down an entire battlegroup with a couple thousand suicide drones.

mschuster91 8y ago

> I wonder if some drone system that flies swarms of drones and drops nitrogen pellets that suck out oxygen could fight fires. You'd need way too much nitrogen for this. Basically it would heat up and change into gas form seconds after the pellet is anywhere near the fire. Fires, especially large ones, create massive amounts of hot air.

kej 8y ago

It's a question of authorization. If the fire department clears you to bring in your nitrogen swarm you'd be fine, but they want unauthorized drones out of the area so they don't interfere with other emergency operations.

BenjiWiebe 8y ago

I am a volunteer firefighter. Our county uses a drone to watch fires, and let the firefighters know where the fire is spreading to and how fast.

dreamcompiler 8y ago
I'm sure your drone is coordinated with Incident Command, which makes it not a threat to the aerial tankers.
- BenjiWiebe 8y ago
  It is coordinated, plus we very rarely/never have any other aerial support.

s73v3r_ 8y ago

I would imagine drones being flown by the fire department would be exempted. However, that should not be taken to mean that a random person who modifies their drone should feel free to fly over the fire under the guise of "helping".

mkempe 8y ago
In recent years, during wildfires in Colorado many homes have been saved by private firefighters because the owners had paid premiums to certain private insurance companies, which are determined to actively save assets not just pay for damages. Without these private efforts those houses would have been destroyed (we know this because the neighbors lost their homes and all their belongings when government officials told them to evacuate and they had no personal or private solution in place). Do you recommend that the State stop homeowners from saving their houses or hiring people to save their houses if their actions involve the use of drones? The government always resorts to banning or controlling new things. As a general rule, they're wrong; and their motivation is not the protection of your life, liberty, or property.
- oh_sigh 8y ago
  > Do you recommend that the State stop homeowners from saving their houses or hiring people to save their houses if their actions involve the use of drones? Yes. You don't get to hold up containment efforts for potentially thousands of homes because you believe that your home is more important. Private firefighters are fine, but they can't impede real emergency personnel.
  - mkempe 8y ago
    Nice insult: "real". The thousands of people who lost their homes during Colorado fires while some of their neighbors did not -- these victims wished they had had the right private fire insurance instead of only your "real" personnel. Using drones to observe specific fire activity around one's private property is entirely legitimate and can save both lives and assets. The State should remain neutral -- or encourage their useful uses; neither limit nor ban them. [added] If you're downvoting this you obviously have not lived through a Colorado wildfire and do not personally know victims of those fires. Even the public firefighters have expressed appreciation for the private firefighters' work. And saving a home from the flames does not somehow disrupt containment! Do you know anything about fighting wildfires?