Look Out Below. Drones Are Dropping Out Of The Sky (a brilliant future prospect)

[Hands0n]

In a very long list of utterly stupid ideas ... this has to be very near the top ...

Three British companies have created a device to deter drones from entering sensitive areas by freezing them in mid-flight.

The Anti-UAV Defense System (Auds) works by covertly jamming a drone';s signal, making it unresponsive.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-34475158

[ckiffkool]

I would have to agree ...but i expect its for use on military ops only ....unless they fit one to all royal palaces , GCHQ etc

[Digit]

if it jams the radio link, what if you have RTH?

[JeremyE]

if it jams the radio link, what if you have RTH?

You still have to have the failsafe set. Then it would just return to home. If no failsafe, it will merrily fly wherever until it hits something. I';d imagine it would be jamming 2.4Ghz and 5.8Ghz.

What would happen to a UAV flying waypoints though, does it finish the mission or activate failsafe at loss of signal?

[Hands0n]

That also depends on your fail safe capability during a mission. Does loss of signal with the TX or GCS invoke RTL? Some do, many don';t. And all the Naze32 and similar can expect a fly away with resulting crash.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

[Digit]

Yes of course, I thought it was implied that you';d have a naza or any other one with RTH and it would be all set up properly.

[Soler]

more worrying is the link to the Boeing systems that burns them out of the sky!! 

[DarkButterfly]

more worrying is the link to the Boeing systems that burns them out of the sky!! 

The problem with lasers, is that once it';s burned through the drone, it';ll start burning anything else in its path, also how does it know if its a drone or a bird, esp if that bird is carrying a camera, (it has been done)

[kilby]

The problem with lasers, is that once it';s burned through the drone, it';ll start burning anything else in its path, also how does it know if its a drone or a bird, esp if that bird is carrying a camera, (it has been done)

The wattage that would be required to take even a small quad down (they don';t stay still, moisture in the air causes a large power loss and keeping the beam tight enough)

Tracking anything is considerably more difficult than the 30°+ that antenna trackers only require.

Then ensuring that nothing untoward gets hit with the beam.

May as well suggest particle beams

[rsmith21]

They do target our frequencies !!!
http://www.enterprisecontrol.co.uk/product_detail.php/anti-uav-defence-system-auds

Reading their data sheet, its intended for sensitive sites, I don';t think our recreational use is in any danger, just don';t try delivering anything to a prison or daft thing like that and you should be fine :)

[DarkButterfly]

They do target our frequencies !!!
http://www.enterprisecontrol.co.uk/product_detail.php/anti-uav-defence-system-auds

Reading their data sheet, its intended for sensitive sites, I don';t think our recreational use is in any danger, just don';t try delivering anything to a prison or daft thing like that and you should be fine :)

They assume everyone is using modern radios... the "get around" to this is 35MHz crystal based sets.

[shawdreamer]

the millions they keep spending on these things is a joke.

why would they want to force and uncontrolled crash with a over priced gizmo that tbf probably doesnt work half as well as they claim and their just hoping the claims will act as enough of a deter-ant that no one will try their luck.

even to the boffs that think this crap up the solution should be glowingly obvious, the only sure fire way to take down something as small, fast and maneuverable as a multirotor efficiently is to hit it with another multirotor, its like how data companies dont prosecute the best hackers that attack them, they bloody hire them to stop the rest 

economically too........ reasonably decent 250 setup (built to be sacrificed in a ramming move) at most 300 notes........stupidly over complicated gizmo...... 3000000 notes, GIVE ME MY FECKIN TAX MONEY BACK YOU IDJUTS!!!

better still (cheaper too), just set up some racing gates around the perimeter of the "sensative area" and stretch some cling film across ever fifth, guaranteed a true multirotor pilot wont be able to resist the urge to fly through some conveniently placed race gates 

[Cheredanine]

Would be surprised if someone isn';t looking at EMP to take out UAV, answer is simple, don';t fly in restricted air space.

I don';t care if they use SAMs and AA guns, I am not gonna be flying where i shouldn';t.

[nate80]

Like R.Smith says, I think this tech is more for use in highly sensitive areas like prisons, certain military camps, some royal properties and the odd high risk event - like the recent visit to London by the Pope etc.

I don';t think it will be widely used (due to costs for a start) and I';d guess it can quite easily be modified to work on any frequency. If it stops drugs being flown into prisons, or an extremist attack on a British (or any other) Embassy I';m all for it.

[guest325]

There are some new systems coming in that use nets which I think is much safer.
One is a gun (for want of a better description) that fires a sabot loaded with the net, looks like it would work well but doesn';t have much range.
The other is fired from an attack multirotor piloted by an enforcement officer with fpv assistance, looks to work very well.
http://youtu.be/X27-2WDIZR0

[shawdreamer]

Ive seen that youtube video.........

you sit through it thinking, these are just all sci-fi fairytales......then they get to the eagle bit and your literally rolling on the floor in fits.

[Cheredanine]

I don';t live far from gchq, I wander if they would pay me to stick some sort of cannon on one of my drones and intercept other drones?

[Fletch]

Shame Dougals on holiday ... I';m sure he';d have something to say

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk

[nate80]

There are some new systems coming in that use nets which I think is much safer.
One is a gun (for want of a better description) that fires a sabot loaded with the net, looks like it would work well but doesn';t have much range.
The other is fired from an attack multirotor piloted by an enforcement officer with fpv assistance, looks to work very well.
http://youtu.be/X27-2WDIZR0

Entertaining video. 

My mate works for the internal engineering branch of the MET and has been in talks with companies that develop drones for security, including auto response uav';s that can potentially incapacitate and capture other drones. Some of these prototypes and their software are worth over a hundred thousand pounds. I';m told that realistically they';re still years away from investing in a system that could be used to take down threatening uav';s. They';ve been talking with the guys who train the Eagles too. That';s definitely not happening in any civilised countries with a legal system any time soon. lol.

A jammer of sorts that can stop drones from entering a particular airspace without anyone having to have spotted it first, or be responsible for taking it down in person, is the way forward. It';s the only technology that is being taken very seriously by most UK security services right now.