PDA

View Full Version : Spy-in-the-sky drone sets sights on Miami


real6
26-03-2008, 02:39 PM
ILL FUCKING BREAK THAT IF I EVER SEE IT OVER MY HEAD!!!

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN1929797920080326

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v517/REAL6/Misc/wwwreuterscom.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v517/REAL6/Misc/wwwreuterscomdrone.jpg


MIAMI (Reuters) - Miami police could soon be the first in the United States to use cutting-edge, spy-in-the-sky technology to beef up their fight against crime.

A small pilotless drone manufactured by Honeywell International, capable of hovering and "staring" using electro-optic or infrared sensors, is expected to make its debut soon in the skies over the Florida Everglades.

If use of the drone wins Federal Aviation Administration approval after tests, the Miami-Dade Police Department will start flying the 14-pound (6.3 kg) drone over urban areas with an eye toward full-fledged employment in crime fighting.

"Our intentions are to use it only in tactical situations as an extra set of eyes," said police department spokesman Juan Villalba.

"We intend to use this to benefit us in carrying out our mission," he added, saying the wingless Honeywell aircraft, which fits into a backpack and is capable of vertical takeoff and landing, seems ideally suited for use by SWAT teams in hostage situations or dealing with "barricaded subjects."

Miami-Dade police are not alone, however.

Taking their lead from the U.S. military, which has used drones in Iraq and Afghanistan for years, law enforcement agencies across the country have voiced a growing interest in using drones for domestic crime-fighting missions.

Known in the aerospace industry as UAVs, for unmanned aerial vehicles, drones have been under development for decades in the United States.



The CIA acknowledges that it developed a dragonfly-sized UAV known as the "Insectohopter" for laser-guided spy operations as long ago as the 1970s.

And other advanced work on robotic flyers has clearly been under way for quite some time.

"The FBI is experimenting with a variety of unmanned aerial vehicles," said Marcus Thomas, an assistant director of the bureau's Operational Technology Division.

"At this point they have been used mainly for search and rescue missions," he added. "It certainly is an up-and-coming technology and the FBI is researching additional uses for UAVs."

SAFETY, PRIVACY CONCERNS

U.S. Customs and Border Protection has been flying drones over the Arizona desert and southwest border with Mexico since 2006 and will soon deploy one in North Dakota to patrol the Canadian border as well.

This month, Customs and Border Protection spokesman Juan Munoz Torres said the agency would also begin test flights of a modified version of its large Predator B drones, built by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, over the Gulf of Mexico.

Citing numerous safety concerns, the FAA -- the government agency responsible for regulating civil aviation -- has been slow in developing procedures for the use of UAVs by police departments.

"You don't want one of these coming down on grandma's windshield when she's on her way to the grocery store," said Doug Davis, the FAA's program manager for unmanned aerial systems.


He acknowledged strong interest from law enforcement agencies in getting UAVs up and running, however, and said the smaller aircraft particularly were likely to have a "huge economic impact" over the next 10 years.

Getting clearance for police and other civilian agencies to fly can't come soon enough for Billy Robinson, chief executive of Cyber Defense Systems Inc, a small start-up company in St. Petersburg, Florida. His company makes an 8-pound (3.6 kg) kite-sized UAV that was flown for a time by police in Palm Bay, Florida, and in other towns, before the FAA stepped in.

"We've had interest from dozens of law enforcement agencies," said Robinson. "They (the FAA) are preventing a bunch of small companies such as ours from becoming profitable," he said.

Some privacy advocates, however, say rules and ordinances need to be drafted to protect civil liberties during surveillance operations.

"There's been controversies all around about putting up surveillance cameras in public areas," said Howard Simon, Florida director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

"Technological developments can be used by law enforcement in a way that enhances public safety," he said. "But every enhanced technology also contains a threat of further erosion of privacy."

cycles of time
26-03-2008, 06:04 PM
and that right there is a UFO

gordonfreeman
26-03-2008, 08:23 PM
If that drone is near my apartment. I will shoot it down with my rocket launcher.

rynath
26-03-2008, 09:22 PM
and that right there is a UFO

I was thinking the same thing...unless you're close enough to notice the stickers and man made looking parts. If it's higher up it would be tough to tell. They're just asking for these things to get shot at...even a kid with a pellet gun could give it a go.

real6
10-10-2008, 11:37 PM
bump

ownedtbh
11-10-2008, 12:27 AM
reminds me of the scan drones that used to fly around pissing ya off taking pictures of you from half life 2

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v216/MoThUg/halflife2_scanner2.png

jesus that game is starting to look like real life

tom bombadil
11-10-2008, 12:43 AM
Try looking at what they are looking at before you bring it down with a ball bearing and elastic.

http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=29816

You can listen in too.


Tom.

tom bombadil
11-10-2008, 12:49 AM
http://www.dkimages.com/discover/previews/752/192699.JPG

http://www.play.net/images/weapons/bolas.jpg

http://www.play.net/images/weapons/grappling_net.jpg

http://www.wilderness-survival.net/figures/fig12-7.gif


Even better.


Tom.

mikethepunk
11-10-2008, 01:26 AM
This is something totally out of Star Wars and the Empire Strikes Back. Reminds me of those empire droids running around Tatouine(sp?) looking for R2D2 and C3PO, etc.

Interesting Scary Stuff.

disorder2k8
11-10-2008, 01:56 AM
Wait a minute, this looks like the same shape as in the 'flying humanoid' shots, i bet its the same thing

darketernal
11-10-2008, 02:08 AM
I think with a .300 win mag you could easily drop that thing at a good distance away without it getting you on film.

arleen3
11-10-2008, 03:02 AM
reminds me of the scan drones that used to fly around pissing ya off taking pictures of you from half life 2

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v216/MoThUg/halflife2_scanner2.png

jesus that game is starting to look like real life



Lol the same thing I thought too. I keep telling my husband to pay attention to everything that happens on that game because I felt it might have some hidden messages.

dangermouse
11-10-2008, 06:25 AM
wake up and smell the ashes :eek:

poohkits
11-10-2008, 10:19 AM
If you think those things are bad wait till you take a look at these babies !!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-robo-bug_bdsep14,0,7757745.story

freedomnonfighter
11-10-2008, 10:54 AM
I can restrain myself from breaking all the cctv cameras around here on the streets and whatnot; but this .. no. It's game over if I ever catch a glimpse of one of those things.

tom bombadil
11-10-2008, 11:08 AM
I think with a .300 win mag you could easily drop that thing at a good distance away without it getting you on film.

I agree darketernal. But most chaps in the uk dont carry firearms :) This is a shame me thinks, but hey-ho.

I will be making a bolas soon, from Surgical elastic, tied around my waist as a belt. And some ball and chain configuration, found in a 'goth'shop. I can get away with this as a leathal weapon on my way to work.


Tom.

tom bombadil
11-10-2008, 11:17 AM
I can restrain myself from breaking all the cctv cameras around here on the streets and whatnot; but this .. no. It's game over if I ever catch a glimpse of one of those things.

I have just had an idea. Have a paint ball and ammo and fire at the cameras that way. Dont get caught on camera though.

No No, honestly. I retract that last statement :rolleyes: Really guys, this is not an anarchy site for those that want to do something about a particular issue, and I am not telling you to, and I quote "Have a paint ball and ammo and fire at the cameras that way." This would be just reckless. I mean...to "Have a paint ball and ammo and fire at the cameras that way." is not nice on mr PTB, now is it?

No....I might use a marshmallow, soaked in paint (dont forget the desposable gloves guys), and flicked up at the lense that way.....Not!


Hey-ho





Tom....Hmmm, I think that my little sister got to use the keyboard then.

flareplayer
11-10-2008, 11:19 AM
If you think those things are bad wait till you take a look at these babies !!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-robo-bug_bdsep14,0,7757745.story

These would make great toys. Where can I get one? It would take paintballing to another level. Are they available in Argos?

mushroombot
11-10-2008, 11:42 AM
reminds me of the scan drones that used to fly around pissing ya off taking pictures of you from half life 2

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v216/MoThUg/halflife2_scanner2.png

jesus that game is starting to look like real life

Spent many hours playing hl2, I thought pretty much the same as you. The number of those things I took out in game makes me wish I had a decent shot gun. If I spotted any flying outside my window they'd have it! :D

tom bombadil
11-10-2008, 11:49 AM
I would be more inclined to find out what they are doing.

http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=29816

I wonder if this unit can when modified, send out a blocking signal? After you find out what frequency it is on, a more powerfull sender on your belt could do the job, as the tiny unit can only give out a weak signal, and your own will block it out. When it moves out too far for me to effect it, then the image on the units ccd would not be clear enough for a court case.

I dont do bad stuff, but I dont want them to know what I am doing.


Tom.

thegoodnessisgood
11-10-2008, 11:50 AM
Yeah, and star wars, and video games did NOT totally condition us so that we accept these things, as opposed to if we were to just have them put in our faces from one day to the next people would say EFF OFF!

tom bombadil
11-10-2008, 11:51 AM
http://www.discount-blockers.com/index.html

I am on a roll this morning.



Tom.

mushroombot
11-10-2008, 11:57 AM
I would be more inclined to find out what they are doing.

http://www.maplin.co.uk/Module.aspx?ModuleNo=29816

I wonder if this unit can when modified, send out a blocking signal? After you find out what frequency it is on, a more powerfull sender on your belt could do the job, as the tiny unit can only give out a weak signal, and your own will block it out. When it moves out too far for me to effect it, then the image on the units ccd would not be clear enough for a court case.

I dont do bad stuff, but I dont want them to know what I am doing.


Tom.

I had similar thoughts about blocking their signal. I suspect though that more advanced drones will be autonomous, with the facility to upload directives and the drone fulfilling the mission using on board AI assessment systems. I'm thinking along the lines of EMP or sentry guns strategically located. Funds and know-how is a bit of an issue though. High velocity rifle is probably the best way - shoot it before it photos you as DarkEternal says.

tom bombadil
11-10-2008, 12:14 PM
I had similar thoughts about blocking their signal. I suspect though that more advanced drones will be autonomous, with the facility to upload directives and the drone fulfilling the mission using on board AI assessment systems. I'm thinking along the lines of EMP or sentry guns strategically located.

I thought that too, but then realised that the whole idea of them was to observe with an opperator. After all, it is not 'inteligent' (yet) and needs to be directed.

Not teaching anyone to suck eggs here, but when a signal is sent by a sender, even if the sig. is weak, it can be picked-up from quite a distance.

If I were doing this I would have a close receiving unit, or other reciving drone, close by to the observation drone. The veiwing drone would send the weak signal to the reciver unit that sends the signal on a stronger wave, or records it all safely.

We just need to have a stronger signal.

Plus, hitting a unit smaller than a dragonfly with a bullit must be hard.




Tom.

mushroombot
11-10-2008, 12:37 PM
I thought that too, but then realised that the whole idea of them was to observe with an opperator. After all, it is not 'inteligent' (yet) and needs to be directed.

Not teaching anyone to suck eggs here, but when a signal is sent by a sender, even if the sig. is weak, it can be picked-up from quite a distance.

If I were doing this I would have a close receiving unit, or other reciving drone, close by to the observation drone. The veiwing drone would send the weak signal to the reciver unit that sends the signal on a stronger wave, or records it all safely.

We just need to have a stronger signal.

Plus, hitting a unit smaller than a dragonfly with a bullit must be hard.




Tom.

The cell phone network would be more than adequate to stream the necessary amount of data for the drones enabling more or less blanket coverage. Reverse engineering their comms protocols would be a neat trick, I bet they use pretty advanced encryption though (someone always seems to crack it in the end!)

Not too sure about blocking the signal, Unless it was a network of blocking devices covering a large area. If I were building the drones, I would have them autonomous, with the facility to upload missions. If the drone found it's self in a situation where it needed new directives from central command and it was unable to communicate because of a block, I would program it to move out of the area to the next nearest uplink (cell tower) and repeat the process, then continue with its mission. When creating the drone software, I would consider that the least attempts to communicate to base would be the way forward so that if the drone entered a blocked area, the likely hood of it needing to transmit or receive would be low in the first place. Not trying to shoot holes in your blocking theory, just examining the angles.

I'd get out the trusty flame-thrower for the dragonflies (If I had one) :)

helexia
11-10-2008, 12:46 PM
This is really weird...its like all these things are happening so fast! :( I'm not ready to become Gordon Freeman! lol;)

tom bombadil
11-10-2008, 03:47 PM
I know what you mean mushroombot.

You are right. If it were me using the tracker unit, I would cover all angles. Simply having the unit raise untill the main signal is picked up again would do the trick.

I am thinking that the closer it gets to me and my blocker, then the stronger my block is to its signal. But that is in an ideal world. It would just block out close observsion.

For me, the non combatant, type man on the street, then the first thing that I would worry over were the survalance cams on the street corners.

It would mean me being a larger target for the drone to 'hit' me in the first instance. Then what I would do is have a blocker that blocks most signals in my area, army frequencies also, and black out the windows. But this is spy stuff, and the average Jo need not worry. A sling-shot would be fine. The sling shot in the first instance is needed me thinks anyway to find the true army frequencies. Once found, I would put those on the net too.

One could fire a microwave stream at them, like a gun, to pull them down anyway. Just caniblise a microwave. CAUTION THIS IS NOT RECOMENDED FOR THE UNINITIATED.

For me at the moment, I am intrested in what these things are after, and the units mentioned will tell me.


Tom.