What about tourists with drones?
2 Likes
Instead of calling me a troll how about you back up what you seem to be so concerned about with facts instead of concern trolling?
If itâs so bleeding obvious that they are a problem as you state, surely there would be something to back you up.
1 Like
Theyâre an emergent technology. And Google can find you plenty of drone accidents⌠at least one has been posted on BB - that restaurant one, idiot flying a drone in a restaurant.
You might as well go back to 1901 and laugh at anyone who thinks cars are a hazard. What requires backing up here? Small bladed device operated by anyone flown in public place. Iâm not saying itâs the danger of our times, but how is it not an obvious and avoidable hazard to public safety?
Anyway remotely controlled cameras are the thing that bothers me more, and yes I do think someone needs to think about how best to regulate that, get rid of CCTV while were at it. If I canât engage with the person taking the picture/video then there are issues IMO. Telephoto lens, drone, whatever.
Thatâs more a tourist AS A drone. Shudders.
Looks fun to operate away from te public though 
I think it could be called âhaving a drone in a bonnetâ.
1 Like
If I could I would. The concern driving trollies over cars was amazing. People lost their minds yet here we are, over a century later, and those fears sound like the ravings of lunatics. Iâm guess that in 100 years, the fear of small aerial craft will be looked back on as silliness as well.
When I google for drone accidents, it seems most of the damage is either to the operator or people attempting to interact directly with a drone. So far, they seem to be less dangerous than the local people.
I never could understand that mindset. Itâs your opinion so you are welcome to it. Myself, I canât imagine trying to impose some sort of privacy expectation that would exempt you from being filmed while in public view.
Thereâs not enough energy even in the blades, of the smaller sizes at least, to cause any significant damage. And I say that as somebody who got fingers in the rotor blades a couple times.
That said, I can see rotor guards becoming more common in the future models, or at least somewhat different shapes of the blade tips. But thatâs about all.
How? Telephoto lenses, especially from elevated points, have quite a lot of power. I was tangentially involved in some panorama photography projects, and the gigapixel-level imagery has quite some magic in it.
Then there are the issues of telepresence. By putting limits on the live streaming cameras, you are stopping people, who want to be somewhere but cannot afford to go there for whatever reason, to be there at least virtually. This will be a major application for immersive VR, at least if some killjoys wonât stop it in its infancy.
And there are the wearable camera systems, with large potential when coupled with augmented reality. These can work as cognitive prosthetics, e.g. for people- and emotions-identifying aid when you can not read faces, and for all sorts of memory aids and providing additional data. I am putting quite some hopes into this tech and will be really irked at anyone who gets in the way.
Need an engineer for the ops crew? 
1 Like
Ok now I KNOW youâre driving trollies.
If you keep trying to make this a class issue, the poors wonât know enough to keep to their place. And then how will we enjoy the ancient ruins of Provence? Letting in cameras was bad enough!
(eeek, somebody might be taking a picture of me. IN PUBLICS!)
Sure but those rotor guards wont help much if it comes hurtling at your face at 40mph 
We canât keep comparing these things to cars and planes, not unless you concede that they do in fact need some kind of regulation
I wouldnât even go that far, treat it like a kite - open spaces please.
Heh.
I didnât read any of this properly. I thought it said Providence. I did wonder where the ancient ruins might have been.
2 Likes
Lovecraftâs ancient home?
1 Like
You can get to that speed with a powered-glider style of a drone, with wind in its back. Those are usually made of styrofoam. Good luck with a standard quadcopter, these are more suitable for hovering.
Regulate Everything. I dread the day when Iâll have to fill a methane emission permission paperwork when I want to fart.
The small drones cannot be compared with cars, true. Could be, if the worst to be expected from a collision with a car is a small bruise or a slight laceration.
1 Like
Whatâs the terminal velocity of a drone? Thatâs more what I was thinking tbh 
And I agree on your regulation stance, I hoped I made that clear - manners should be enough here.
Depends on the aerodynamics of the airframe, which in case of multicopters is typically rather poor.
Also we have the weight that plays a major role here, Because what carries the danger is not the collision speed but the energy involved.
So itâs not so much about mph as about joules. May be an issue with the Lily, hardly so with the Nixie.
Which, if done according to some people, is oppressive enough to cripple the tech adoption.
Iâm disappointed in you @shaddack I was hoping for numbers
Really? I canât imagine many people would have any issue with people operating them as you would any other small/model aircraft. Do they need to be operated in busy public spaces for the technology to be adopted?
Are you saying that Betamax deserved better?
Agreed. Lets not support media in their efforts to crush innovation.
My aerodynamics-fu is too weak to calculate well enough.
But we can fudge a bit. Wikipedia says that the Nixie microdrone is 45 grams of mass. At 40 mph speed, 17.9 m/s, your figure, it yields 14.6 joules.
If the end purpose is to fly the vehicle, yes.
Not so much if flying the vehicle is a means for some other end, e.g. getting a recording of yourself, an event, or a panorama image or image from uncommon perspective or imaging, measurements or experiments on an aerial platform without having to cope with a heap of paperwork and permits and all that crap.
See, I think the thing is that for advancement you need challenges, experimentation, and money from the market.
Articles for luddites about how some experiment in usage is annoying and therefore worth banning are counter to creative advancement and therefore annoying for people that want to see what the future holds.
The cell phone has been barraged with this sort of attack for the last 20 years. There the market has crushed the concern trolls.
1 Like
