3 ms·

I'd like to call out the problem with these things. From the transcript: > ATTEMPTED TO CAPTURE CAMERA FOOTAGE BUT UNABLE I assume it's slightly harder than d

I'd like to call out the problem with these things. From the transcript: > ATTEMPTED TO CAPTURE CAMERA FOOTAGE BUT UNABLE I assume it's slightly harder than duct-taping a smartphone to a helicopter, but I'm still confused at how the military does not, by now, have high-fidelity panoramic video recordings figured out. They've had fifty years of UFOs nonsense and they still can't film the airspace around them in panoramic HD on command? (Also, to whoever was torturing helicopter pilots by hovering above their rotors, that's just mean. Be nice. Yes, you're superior, but don't put their lives at risk to show it.) EDIT: I read the article and somehow took away military, which is wrong. They're not military, so I can be a little more forgiving. But not much. Hit button to start recording video 60 seconds ago should be standard aviation equipment in the time of drones.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
hoppyhoppy2 5y ago
These were CBP and Tucson PD helicopters, not military ones. For all we know the military might have their own separate footage, or perhaps it was even a US military drone.
- floatingatoll 5y ago
  Ah. Thanks, I'll read the article again.
jcrawfordor 5y ago
The capabilities of cameras are remarkably poor compared to human vision. Building a camera that covers a large area with the ability to resolve a small object at a mile distance is an expensive proposition, and I don't think the military has tried it. And, in general, aviation is averse to new technology and the military is averse to new technology. Combine the two and you get the present situation where most military aircraft have only limited imaging. The police helicopters have very nice stabilized cameras but they're on the bottom (can't look upward more than a small amount) and hard to aim at things moving in the air. It seems like the drone was intentionally maneuvering to be difficult to track with a camera... the pilots both report it hovering around 1k feet directly above them, which is pretty much the place that it's least likely the helicopter would be able to image it.
- floatingatoll 5y ago
  Hmm. That’s good reasoning, thank you.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

hoppyhoppy2 5y ago

These were CBP and Tucson PD helicopters, not military ones. For all we know the military might have their own separate footage, or perhaps it was even a US military drone.

floatingatoll 5y ago
Ah. Thanks, I'll read the article again.

jcrawfordor 5y ago

The capabilities of cameras are remarkably poor compared to human vision. Building a camera that covers a large area with the ability to resolve a small object at a mile distance is an expensive proposition, and I don't think the military has tried it. And, in general, aviation is averse to new technology and the military is averse to new technology. Combine the two and you get the present situation where most military aircraft have only limited imaging. The police helicopters have very nice stabilized cameras but they're on the bottom (can't look upward more than a small amount) and hard to aim at things moving in the air. It seems like the drone was intentionally maneuvering to be difficult to track with a camera... the pilots both report it hovering around 1k feet directly above them, which is pretty much the place that it's least likely the helicopter would be able to image it.

floatingatoll 5y ago
Hmm. That’s good reasoning, thank you.