FAA investacation.

[DOG]

Has anyone seen the video that shows a drone firing a semi-automatic pistol on you tube. Not good! Another black eye for the drones. FAA wants to investigate to see if whom ever made this video and drone to see If they violated any rules.

[Stambo]

You mean this one?
What an absolute moron.
And the professor that helped him is just as bad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_kfUVZdTkU

[DOG]

That's the one! They are asking for trouble. Better them then me.

[Tony]

Bloody hell, what will idiots do next with there drones... It needs to be removed from YT ASAP...

[pvolcko]

Because I'm feeling feisty today... to me, it matters where they were doing this and what safety measures were taken.

I haven't watched the video, but if they did this out in the middle of no where, with only people who understand the risks around, they've made best efforts to maintain positive, failsafe control of that trigger at all times, and flew in such a way that the gun was never pointed at any person or in an unsafe direction, then let the darwinian shuffle happen and enjoy the view.

What do I mean by positive, failsafe control of the trigger? Trigger pulling mechanism hard mounted to the gun itself (it should take nothing short of it being hit by large sledge hammer to move the mechanism relative to the gun). Electro mechanical interlock that keeps triggering mechanism well away of the trigger such that it cannot be actuated back to the trigger at all. One channel of Rx to disengage that interlock and free up the triggering mechanism. A second channel used for actually depressing the trigger. A transmitter and mechanical setup such that each press of the trigger will automatically reset the trigger and interlock, and thus requires reset of both control channels and reactuating them in sequence, and such that any TH or self-leveling/panic switch will automatically put the safety and trigger pull channels into safe mode, overriding any control switches for the mechanism.

Sorry, had to let my inner libertarian out for a walk on the keyboard.

[pvolcko]

No, I've watched the video.

On the positive:
1) Location looks good. Remote. Firing into a back stop. Lots of trees around to minimize chances of runaway quad syndrome (though I'd recommend secondary transmitter and rx system with a power cutoff failsafe for this kind of experimentation).

2) Number of people present looks to be one or two. Pilot and cameraman. The camera may have been head mounted on the pilot or maybe not.

Big mistakes:
1) While the flight "path" was very simple and never "flown around", the fact that the camera man (maybe pilot) was forward of the barrel at any time, much less during several rounds being fired, is a gigantic no-no. Camera man is also way too close to the quad while doing live fire. Flight plan should have had the pilot, cameraman, and any spectators well behind the rig.

2) Triggering mechanism looks like it has basically zero attention to failsafe, particularly in the event of crash or collision. I don't hear much switch flipping so I'm assuming too that the triggering sequence had no logical safety switch independent of the triggering switch, either, much less electro mechanical interlock.


This can be done relatively safely, but this was not at all an example of it.

[Graham Lawrie]

Saw this last week there are more out there:) The military drones do a lot more.........i would like to tell you about it......but then i would have to kill you:)

[Tony]

Yes but Paul don't you think that video could be giving the WRONG people ideas.... I don't think it should have gone on YT for that very reason

[Stambo]

Yes but Paul don't you think that video could be giving the WRONG people ideas.... I don't think it should have gone on YT for that very reason

You don't think those "wrong people" haven't already thought of strapping some C4 to one of these things and flying it who knows where.
They probably think that strapping it to some dumb schmuck and getting them to walk it in is cheaper.

[pvolcko]

Ehhh. Maybe, Tony. I'm loath to censor much of anything. Stupid people do stupid things. The fact it's on YT or FB doesn't really bother me, so long as comments are left on and people that know better can tell people how mind blowingly stupid this was from a safety perspective. And if people think it's good or cool or whatver, then I want them posting too, so we have a public comment trail on them when they do something stupid themselves and actually hurt someone, so we can convict their ass and throw them in prison.

[Lee]

Yes but Paul don't you think that video could be giving the WRONG people ideas.... I don't think it should have gone on YT for that very reason

You don't think those "wrong people" haven't already thought of strapping some C4 to one of these things and flying it who knows where.
They probably think that strapping it to some dumb schmuck and getting them to walk it in is cheaper.

Already been attempted here in Spain a few years ago.
I guy was planning on flying an RC plane into a shopping mall with explosives on it.
Luckily he was caught before.

[Graham Lawrie]

Was this the Spanish conflicts Lee:)

[pvolcko]

NEfarious types don't need youtube vids for these ideas.

My biggest issue so far with this thing is that apparently this was done in CT and the person building and firing it was a teenager. AS far as I know CT has pretty strict handgun laws. There's no way a teen is allowed legally allowed to possess and fire a handgun, even on private property, unsupervised. So either an adult owner of that gun was aware of this and present during the flight, or the kid did something illegal regardless of the multi-rotor being involved. Yet they're still searching for some law to apply against this. Supposedly.

And before you guys over the pond get your "It's America, you love your guns, of course this was legal" thing going ... the US is a pretty big place. There are a myriad of gun laws between federal, state, and local law. Connecticut is not hugely friendly to gun rights, especially after the Sandy Hook school shooting a few years back. Their attorney general is rabidly anti-gun as is their Governor. I'm finding it very hard to believe the story as I'm hearing it, because if it were true, they would have grounds to go after him or his parents on this, again, regardless of the quad being involved.

[Graham Lawrie]

That sound about right Paul:) Unless you know all the facts its hard to get a handle on it:) I think there must be an adult somewhere in the know, unless the kid "borrowed" the gun when parents were out?

[Tony]

Heard on the radio today that some guy was using his quad to peep on some young girls in the garden.... Now he should have his arms cut off... God, that is sick...