4 ms·

I find parts of this comment to be unnecessarily paranoid. One of the major challenges for getting UAVs into the national airspace system is to integrate them w

by jsight 14y ago

I find parts of this comment to be unnecessarily paranoid. One of the major challenges for getting UAVs into the national airspace system is to integrate them with existing air traffic rules and systems. Beyond that, I don't see them physically being treated much differently from traditional police helicopters. I don't really see any evidence that police are disconnecting the transponders on those either. OTOH, I do have some concerns about the massive increase in numbers that these may bring, due to the decreased cost. It seems to open up some avenues for abuse.

cynoclast 14y ago
Think of the drones as Big Brother's eyes. Still unnecessarily paranoid? We already have Orwell's floating fortresses. The United States already has EIGHT. With three more under construction: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_of_the_United_States_Navy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_of_th... The cost of construction is $4,500,000,000. And that does not include their mandatory support fleet, nor how much it costs per day to keep operating. But people are talking about cutting NASA and PBS instead of the military budget. How about now? And neither of the political candidates from the dominant parties are even considering scaling back the War Department, excuse me, the "Department of Defense". Holy doublethink, Batman! 1984 has already happened because people were insufficiently paranoid. The only reason people think it could never happen here, to us, to the United States, is because it already has.
jsymolon 14y ago
Another item is that the drones are very cheap to operate for long periods. Where a helicopter needs re-fueling and maintenance after x number of hours of flight, drones can fly for days(?).
- _djo_ 14y ago
  The maintenance needs of drones are the same or higher than comparable manned aircraft, so they're subject to the same restrictions. What they have is long endurance, which is really measured in hours not days for the size of drones that police want to operate, but then that's little different to the endurance of police fixed-wing aircraft. In fact, in most cases drones are actually more expensive to buy and operate than fixed-wing surveillance aircraft, because their control systems are more sophisticated and require more maintenance, they need expensive ground stations which themselves require constant maintenance, they need dedicated comms links which also need maintenance and they can't fly in bad weather. In the short to medium term I fully expect the police fascination with drones to recede dramatically once they realise just how expensive they really are. Sticking a pilot and observer in a helicopter or fixed-wing plane with an electro-optical turret is often a lot cheaper.

by jsight 14y ago

cynoclast 14y ago

Think of the drones as Big Brother's eyes. Still unnecessarily paranoid? We already have Orwell's floating fortresses. The United States already has EIGHT. With three more under construction: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_of_the_United_States_Navy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_of_th... The cost of construction is $4,500,000,000. And that does not include their mandatory support fleet, nor how much it costs per day to keep operating. But people are talking about cutting NASA and PBS instead of the military budget. How about now? And neither of the political candidates from the dominant parties are even considering scaling back the War Department, excuse me, the "Department of Defense". Holy doublethink, Batman! 1984 has already happened because people were insufficiently paranoid. The only reason people think it could never happen here, to us, to the United States, is because it already has.

jsymolon 14y ago

Another item is that the drones are very cheap to operate for long periods. Where a helicopter needs re-fueling and maintenance after x number of hours of flight, drones can fly for days(?).

_djo_ 14y ago
The maintenance needs of drones are the same or higher than comparable manned aircraft, so they're subject to the same restrictions. What they have is long endurance, which is really measured in hours not days for the size of drones that police want to operate, but then that's little different to the endurance of police fixed-wing aircraft. In fact, in most cases drones are actually more expensive to buy and operate than fixed-wing surveillance aircraft, because their control systems are more sophisticated and require more maintenance, they need expensive ground stations which themselves require constant maintenance, they need dedicated comms links which also need maintenance and they can't fly in bad weather. In the short to medium term I fully expect the police fascination with drones to recede dramatically once they realise just how expensive they really are. Sticking a pilot and observer in a helicopter or fixed-wing plane with an electro-optical turret is often a lot cheaper.