Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Yeah, that's sound about right (Score 1) 228

You know how much damage my 2 lb "drone" will do if it hits your thousand pound helicopter?

Yes, I do. And, even in the 4,000 pound helicopter I fly, a drone strike will absolutely take it out of the sky. The rotor wash will not move the drone out of the way. This is the second time I've heard this...

On this point, with a small to medium sized heli, BostonPilot is likely right. I know this, because I'm a responsible and experienced UAS operator, and actually did my best to figure out worst case scenarios to see what I absolutely must try to prevent happening.

My Inspire 1 can hit 60mph. The rotor wash wind velocity (in mph) for the Hughes 500 can be up to 46mph. While a Phantom 2 may be pushed out of the way by a copter that size at full wash potential (with no momentum into that direction), that does not account for a myriad of other scenarios where the P2/P3 (or as noted above, the Inspire 1) can push right into the copter or be sucked in.

Comment Re:That's not the answer! (Score 1) 228

Even if the rule was "no aircraft under 300m over private property", the cost of cameras that can capture clear images ...

People are primarily concerned about noise and physical risk. I have no problem with drones that are 1000 ft up. The thing people need to be concerned about is that Amazon puts a delivery route 100 ft above their patio, and that is a real concern: if the FAA rules that use of airspace valid, you have no recourse.

(Nevertheless, taking "clear images" from 300m away from a shaky drone is pretty tricky; image stabilization is not that good.)

And yet the FAA does. 400 feet or below is the requirement.

Comment Re:That's not the answer! (Score 1) 228

So if I'm flying a drone myself up to, say, 400 feet...

I always thought you owned up to the floor for airplanes - sounds like I'm wrong.

The CEILING that the FAA has established for UAS ("drones") is 400 feet, so, as they are now deemed "aircraft", I would suspect that the floor is actually a lot lower for their class of aircraft. It's "(ground) up to 400 feet."

There is no federal law, and only the SCOTUS "determination. There are various state laws, most of which allow overflights.

Comment Re:GPLv3 - the kiss of death (Score 1) 309

You use the reference implementation internally for initial testing, and if you like it you code your own to release in your browser. I expect the Chrome and Firefox guys wouldn't have too much trouble coding their own image decoder module. Or someone can write up their own and release it GPLv2 or BSD or whatever.

Comment Re:Door question (Score 2) 323

The doors use less lateral room than a traditional door. In other words, there can be situations where you can exit via the rear door but not the front door due to being parked so close to the adjacent car.

Comment Re:FCC's trying to break improving router firmware (Score 1) 345

Speed limiters on cars are easy to defeat and can be a little difficult to implement; plus, there are legitimate (though limited) uses for such things (track use, places with no speed limits, etc). A consumer router with unlocked radio firmware that allows you to broadcast on unlicensed frequencies at high power? Not so much.

Speeding is also much easier to police.

"It's like deja vu all over again." -- Yogi Berra