|
|
Post by ironhold on May 7, 2018 2:38:57 GMT
This is actually something I was toying with for a series I'm plotting.
When a character was a teen, he was the target of local bullies. When one of the bullies dared fly a camera drone over his house, he retaliated by whipping out a potato cannon and knocking it from the sky.
But now I'm wondering... could a potato cannon actually take out a drone, let alone do it with a single spud?
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 7, 2018 2:52:22 GMT
Probably. If you could hit it.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 7, 2018 3:15:28 GMT
hitting it is the challenge.
|
|
|
|
Post by ponytail61 on May 7, 2018 5:49:51 GMT
Cut the potato into wedges and reassemble to send multiple projectiles at it. You could also use frozen grapes or milk duds to increase the projectile count. Or maybe use a couple dozen paintballs, they'd be a little more aerodynamic.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 7, 2018 7:51:46 GMT
Cut the potato into wedges.... French fries , to go? |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on May 7, 2018 8:21:29 GMT
I soooo want this to work.....
Pony has the best idea so far, "Grape-shot", multiple pieces. better chance of one of them hitting?.
But lets get creative here.
What can I add to that so far?.. do you think this may work?.
Connect all those pieces with a small net, something like a strawberry net [keeps the birds off?.] lightweight, pack it all in a sabot, to prevent melting, and you have a wide angle shot with propeller tangling threads between.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 7, 2018 13:29:53 GMT
Cut the potato into wedges.... French fries , to go? fast food is bad for your health. |
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 7, 2018 14:02:43 GMT
fast food is bad for your health. Could also be bad for your drone. |
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on May 8, 2018 5:28:33 GMT
Check the local laws. In most areas, shooting someone's drone down can be construed as vandalism or wilful destruction of property. First off what is defined as the airspace above private property is not defined at the federal level. There may be local or state laws, but they will vary wildly, if there are laws at all. If someone is a nuisance or violating privacy, you can ask them to stop, sue them or have law enforcement get them to stop. But actively shooting them down it is now your fault, not theirs, and you can get sued for the damage you cause, regardless of why you were shooting at them.
Basically the same as slashing someone's tires. Even if it is on your property, you do not have the right to damage someone elses' stuff. You must go though legal channels to address it.
In 2014, a New Jersey man was indited for shooting down a neighbor's drone and ended up doing prison time. In an Indiana case, a a man shot down a drone he claimed was spying on him, and even thought he drone owner was able to prove it was not in the area that the shooter claimed it to be, the judge dismissed the owner's suit.
The only thing constant about drone laws is that the laws are a complete mess.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on May 8, 2018 6:50:24 GMT
Check the local laws. In most areas, shooting someone's drone down can be construed as vandalism or wilful destruction of property. First off what is defined as the airspace above private property is not defined at the federal level. There may be local or state laws, but they will vary wildly, if there are laws at all. If someone is a nuisance or violating privacy, you can ask them to stop, sue them or have law enforcement get them to stop. But actively shooting them down it is now your fault, not theirs, and you can get sued for the damage you cause, regardless of why you were shooting at them. Basically the same as slashing someone's tires. Even if it is on your property, you do not have the right to damage someone elses' stuff. You must go though legal channels to address it. In 2014, a New Jersey man was indited for shooting down a neighbor's drone and ended up doing prison time. In an Indiana case, a a man shot down a drone he claimed was spying on him, and even thought he drone owner was able to prove it was not in the area that the shooter claimed it to be, the judge dismissed the owner's suit. The only thing constant about drone laws is that the laws are a complete mess. I would counter that with Invasion of Privacy laws if a drone over-flys my property at low level, and is reasonably suspicious of spying on me, if someone climbed over your fence, that is trespass, you have reasonable grounds to seize any recording device they have on ground of evidence of invasion of privacy. As for shooting down of drone over my own garden, its MY garden, I have the right to launch projectiles on my own land, as long as its within my own boundaries, if that collides with your drone, who's falt is that if you are trespassing my airspace?. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 8, 2018 9:58:16 GMT
Check the local laws. In most areas, shooting someone's drone down can be construed as vandalism or wilful destruction of property. First off what is defined as the airspace above private property is not defined at the federal level. There may be local or state laws, but they will vary wildly, if there are laws at all. If someone is a nuisance or violating privacy, you can ask them to stop, sue them or have law enforcement get them to stop. But actively shooting them down it is now your fault, not theirs, and you can get sued for the damage you cause, regardless of why you were shooting at them. Basically the same as slashing someone's tires. Even if it is on your property, you do not have the right to damage someone elses' stuff. You must go though legal channels to address it. In 2014, a New Jersey man was indited for shooting down a neighbor's drone and ended up doing prison time. In an Indiana case, a a man shot down a drone he claimed was spying on him, and even thought he drone owner was able to prove it was not in the area that the shooter claimed it to be, the judge dismissed the owner's suit. The only thing constant about drone laws is that the laws are a complete mess. I would counter that with Invasion of Privacy laws if a drone over-flys my property at low level, and is reasonably suspicious of spying on me, if someone climbed over your fence, that is trespass, you have reasonable grounds to seize any recording device they have on ground of evidence of invasion of privacy. As for shooting down of drone over my own garden, its MY garden, I have the right to launch projectiles on my own land, as long as its within my own boundaries, if that collides with your drone, who's falt is that if you are trespassing my airspace?. in parts of the US, it is illegal to discharge any sort of projectile weapon inside city limits unless it is a facility specifically licensed for the purpose. which means that a person could get arrested for practicing archery in their back yard. but yes, drone rules are completely haphazard in the US until it gets to drones large enough to be under the jurisdiction of the FAA. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on May 8, 2018 10:34:52 GMT
If Projectile weapons are "Banned" inside city limits, what about self defence?.
Again, test case, low flying drone, your in the garden with your kids, who is to know what its doing, and, if you believe it may be there with intent to harm, sod the local or national restrictions, I am throwing something at that drone before it attacks.
It inside my boundaries, therefore, I suspect trespass, infringement of privacy, aqnd self protection defence, if it came over here, I have a 30ft pole with a fishing net on the end for my pond, you can bet I am goina have a go at catching it and dunking it in the pond.... lets see how well it flies wet with a net on it?.
I am going to suggest that in a court of law, if stated I believed my family was in danger and we may be under attack, the judge may choose to allow self defence plea to be accepted at the cost of the drone operator.
So on to testing this, is it viable, if there is a suggestion of a drone operating in restricted air space, say an airport, would the use of a spud gun with a multi-sliced spud attached to a small net be a viable defence against unauthorized drone attacks?
And on that score, I have heard that somewhere they have trained a sizeable eagle to hunt drone, if it see's on and is told "seek", its having that drone.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on May 8, 2018 11:42:34 GMT
self defense can be used as justification for doing something that is otherwise illegal, but you have to prove that you were in fear for your life and safety. like, say, if the drone was carrying a pack of skittles (candy).
|
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on May 8, 2018 11:59:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on May 8, 2018 14:04:33 GMT
Ignoring the legal issues with attempting to destroy someone else's property, if you just look at the idea of a potato shotgun, how well would it actually work?
First off, what sort of range are we talking about? with a drone, you can easily get up to several hundred feet of altitude. at that range, a single solid projectile is more likely to maintain the momentum needed to reach and strike the target, but tat is going to make hitting very difficult.
If you go with the idea of a potato cut into strips, once it is launched from the barrel of your gun, the air turbulence around the projectile will cause the various fries to spread apart and start to tumble. Julian fries are just not a good design from an aerodynamic perspective. I would think the range would be vary limited and effective attack range even lower.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on May 16, 2018 13:15:07 GMT
The answer would be 'it depends'. The size and design of the drone, the altitude and where you hit it would all come into play.
Being hit with a ballistic potato in flight is not the same as being hit by a bullet. Bullets are dense objects that focus their kinetic energy into a very small area. Potatoes are not dense, and spread their kinetic energy out over a huge area compared to a bullet.
So while a bullet will go through a drone, damaging internal systems, a potato is just going to give it a thump and at best crack a cheap plastic casing or knock a connector out. Worse is that the way the energy is applied allows the drone to bleed off some of the kinetic energy by moving upwards.
Larger drones are likely to shrug off the effects, or at least remain flying, from such impacts unless the impact is at low altitude and the drone is unable to regain its stability before impacting with the ground or a tree/building. Keep in mind that Drones do tend to be designed to survive being flown into the ground by inexperienced users, as are the cameras they are fitted with. Smaller drones may have problems, as the potato is closer to the mass of the drone itself so will have far more effect - Plus the impact testing/design of a drone is based on the weight of the drone itself. And of course there is always the chance of a projectile hitting something important or knocking something important loose.
Cutting a potato up into smaller chunks would not help. Sure, the odds of hitting are greater. But the mass of each chunk is smaller so its effect is lowered, and the energy is further spread out allowing the drone to better deal with the effects.
Weighted nets would work as well on drones as they do on birds; Great at low level, next to useless at altitude due to range limitations.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on May 16, 2018 13:38:03 GMT
Interesting story on Mike Rowe's encounter with a wayward drone. |
|
