Paparazzi 'to deploy unmanned drones'

Paparazzi 'to deploy unmanned drones'

www.telegraph.co.uk

So-called "personal drones" mounted with cameras have already been used by police in crime fighting and photographers believe they could also be used to track stars.

Remote controlled flying devices about the size of pizza boxes are being developed by several companies and universities in the US and could be in use by the end of next year.

(visit the link for the full news article)

What lovely people they are! I suppose just like fleas have their place in the ecosystem, paparazzi have their place in society. The excuse for these stains on the underpants of humanity is once you become famous you lose all rights to privacy, as you have chosen to live your life in the spotlight.

Well I refute this notion as there are many talented people providing us with entertainment and bringing joy into our lives. They should be respected just as we respect our neighbours. I suppose some don't even do that anymore.

The media whores who'll do anything to become famous are a different matter altogether, but if you ask me, if there were no paparazzi there would sure as hell be alot less Hollywood prostitutes along with them.

Anyone who has read through my previous posts on the site will know I don't like drones. The use of these by the paparazzi is only the beginning, expect to see the growing use of these in the private sector, in the mean time legislation will struggle to catch up as it always does.

www.telegraph.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

scary

but well..on the other hand...maybe someone can use one to fly over area51 ?

reply to post by Big Raging Loner


There are too many pathetic people with no lives of their own, so they want to follow the lives of their favorite celebrities. If there weren't so many people like this, there would be no paparazi. The "stars" actually helped created the problem IMO, by contributing to the entertainment industry, they reap what they sow I guess.

Now they are just asking to be shot down.

I don't think you'd get many complaints either.

CX.

So far I'm loving the comments on this thread!

Although Angrydog I think it would be better to build a drone to view secret military bases, just so they couldn't trace it back to you. I'm sure they would enjoy waterboarding the fudge out of you for doing it!

reply to post by Big Raging Loner


"Being developed"???????

A kid that worked in my mechanic shop bought a remote control helicopter and mounted a little camera on it and flies it in his neighborhood to spy on the kids he suspected were messing with his stuff. Took him all of $300 and an afternoon of tweaking.

So......to hear that "universities" are working to "develop" such a thing sounds a little exaggerated. No offense to OP.

There are 100's of model airplanes and model helicopters that are the size of a pizza box, and there are very little restrictions on flying them, although there is a lot of liability in doing so. They are pretty powerful, and they can cause severe personal or property damage. Flying one over a busy street or residential area seems pretty risky to me, but I can see why someone would want to do so with those big paparazzi paydays! Imagine a pic of Lady Gaga standing up to take a pea off her deck!! BIG MONEY!!

There is also the issue of airspace. Private property has a claim to a certain amount of airspace, and then the local authorities have space above that, and then the FAA controls space beyond that. It seems trespassing, and invasion of privacy would apply unless the little craft could get some significant altitude, and that type of power and altitude would come with even more restrictions, flying ability, and liability for the size and power of the craft.

Plus, if I were a star, I would make sure to have at least one Jethro with a shotgun around. A good bird gun with a full choke could down their camera pretty quickly!!

reply to post by Big Raging Loner
If you watched 24 you'd think they were already in use, but I think they exaggerate the technology.

One limitation I suspect will be limited flight time, before it needs refueling. When they are available commercially I'll be interested to see how long they can stay airborne.

I happen to have a picture on one, I guess it's a prototype:

Source: isiria.wordpress.com...
Surveillance drones combing urban landscapes
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ae58b6b33abf.jpg[/atsimg]

This one is apparently for police surveillance but I see no reason it couldn't take paparazzi type photos unless the image quality isn't good enough, but that would just involve upgrading the camera which should be easy.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


A small dirigible can stay aloft indefinitely and be almost silent. The limiting factor would be battery power for the camera, however if they wanted 30 sec still shots, then the battery would last for days!

A small airplane or helicopter can stay aloft for about 20 mins. There is minimal cost, and a team of paparazzi could trade off overlapping coverage to be sure they don't miss anything.

That is a coolpick, but it seems like extreme overkill!?!? Why not just the little blimp like they use in stadiums?

reply to post by Big Raging Loner


if its a drone it is unmanned .... its called UAV some have autopilot systems some have only stabilizations systems, other are simply RC planes

reply to post by Big Raging Loner


WTF?

Oh did I mention? WTF?

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
reply to post by Big Raging Loner

 

If you watched 24 you'd think they were already in use, but I think they exaggerate the technology.

One limitation I suspect will be limited flight time, before it needs refueling. When they are available commercially I'll be interested to see how long they can stay airborne.

I happen to have a picture on one, I guess it's a prototype:

Source: isiria.wordpress.com...
Surveillance drones combing urban landscapes
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ae58b6b33abf.jpg[/atsimg]

This one is apparently for police surveillance but I see no reason it couldn't take paparazzi type photos unless the image quality isn't good enough, but that would just involve upgrading the camera which should be easy.

How the hell does that thing fly?

Has it got rotor blades? I can't see any lift apparatus?

reply to post by Wide-Eyes
I don't know how it flies, I guessed there is some kind of ducted fan inside where the air is exhausted out the 4 ports in the bottom, but I really don't know any more about it than what's in the link I provided.

It can't be a single helicoptor type rotor, since there's no anti-rotation device like the helicopter's tail rotor. It could use dual counterrotating blades that we can't see but I doubt it.

my personal favorite.. ardrone.parrot.com...

for $300, I expect these will eventually become rather common to see buzzing around the neighborhood... maybe code enforcement will start using them to patrol?

...cool - free skeet...

...second line...

Originally posted by getreadyalready
A small airplane or helicopter can stay aloft for about 20 mins. There is minimal cost, and a team of paparazzi could trade off overlapping coverage to be sure they don't miss anything.

That is a coolpick, but it seems like extreme overkill!?!? Why not just the little blimp like they use in stadiums?

About 20 minutes would be my guess also.

Regarding the small blimp, my guess is, it's not maneuverable enough, though I don't know the specifics about the ones used at stadiums. All I know is that helicopters can travel a lot faster and maneuver a lot better in all 3 dimensions then a blimp.

The mini-blimp idea may be a good one for some applications, obviously the stadium being one that you mentioned, but can it keep up with a moving target? Perhaps a pedestrian, but probably not someone in a car.

Originally posted by Wide-Eyes

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ae58b6b33abf.jpg[/atsimg]

How the hell does that thing fly?

I found the video on it, it's called the Micro Air Vehicle by Honeywell. At 1:50 in the video when it takes off you can see air shooting out the 4 nozzles in the bottom, but whether it uses 4 separate fans or just one, I don't know. 4 would give you better control so I guess 4 fans.

And it's capable of doing 50 knots, so that would give it a speed advantage over the blimp:

Honeywell Micro Air Vehicle

hmm. i know what id like to fly over the paparazzi, and it sure as hell aint a drone...

Originally posted by CX
Now they are just asking to be shot down.

I don't think you'd get many complaints either.

CX.

You have a good point here. If there were just police drones it would be difficult and not advisable to shoot one. However if everyone start flying drones around I am sure there will be an increase in the purchase of slingshots. In fact the local airspace could become a hunting ground as youngsters test their shooting skills with air rifles.

reply to post by Big Raging Loner


The technology is already present.

Some of the payouts for catching Madonna scratching her ass etc. are ridiculous, but a particular section of society are .....interested.

Sad but true.

Micro-drone