Since everyone can see them anyway, what harm is there in the government (if the ones responsible) giving people an inkling of what they are doing? No serious classified information needs to be revealed.

If I lived in NJ, I’d be flying my drone right now to see if I could take pictures or video of some of these mystery drones like I did with these Iranian helicopters flying over Lake Huron this past summer:


I wonder how many drone owners in NJ are doing night flights now because of all the excitement?

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
Since everyone can see them anyway, what harm is there in the government (if the ones responsible) giving people an inkling of what they are doing? No serious classified information needs to be revealed.

At some point you have to ask: "Who works for who?"

I realize that EVERY government employee HATES it whenever someone says this, but at some point the question has to be asked.

quote:

Originally posted by steve495:

quote:

Originally posted by bronicabill:
Can you give an understandable definition of what this "zero-foot box" is? I've tried to research it to no avail. Thanks!

You bet. If you head over to the FAA UAS Facility Map, you can zoom into your area, and you'll see a grid around your local big airport. For example...

It shows the maximum altitudes around airports where the FAA may authorize part 107 (or recreational) UAS operations without an FAA waiver. You'll see a grid that has numbers inside. That is the maximum altitude at which you can fly your drone with LAANC (FAA) approval. LAANC approval is ordinarily immediate and done through an app.<<snip>>

Got it. I just didn't zoom in far enough to see there was a grid with numbers! Apparently I'm in a 200' box where I live, but with all the surrounding trees I wouldn't fly here anyway. The spot I normally fly my small electric airplanes is just outside of the zone so no preapprovals required. Naturally being this close to a major airport I would limit my ceiling to 400' (I rarely fly above 150' feet or so) anyway, so no issues there...

Thanks for the info!

^^^ Iran has Blackhawks?

^^^ Maybe they got them from Afghanistan. (Assuming they really are Iranian.)

From Detroit and the government just let’s them fly over the place without doing anything about it.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
Hey, Steve495: I looked at the UAS map for K.I. Sawyer Airport and on its Northeast side was a box that said "Marquette Class E4". What does that mean?

I'm not a manned pilot, and Class E4 airspace is related to manned aircraft. That area is lined up with the approach arrival path for the airport.

This provides more info: https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa....erate_in_Class_E.pdf

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:

Hey, Steve495: I looked at the UAS map for K.I. Sawyer Airport and on its Northeast side was a box that said "Marquette Class E4". What does that mean?

Airspace in the continental U.S. falls into one of six classes: A through E, and G (no F in the U.S.). I don't remember for sure when the U.S. adopted these classifications, I think it was around 1990. Prior to that, we had sort of similar classes, with different names and somewhat different operating rules. There's an interesting history of how the current Air Traffic Control system evolved, initiated during the Eisenhower administration, partly in response to the 1956 mid-air collision between a TWA Super Constellation and a United Airlines DC-7 over Grand Canyon.

There are operating rules associated with each class of airspace. Class G airspace is not controlled by ATC. Class E is controlled airspace that is not covered by A through D. In broad strokes, A is all airspace that is both above 18,000' MSL, and more than 1,200' AGL.

Class B is airspace around high traffic airports like O'Hare, Logan, the NYC cluster (LaGuardia, Kennedy, Newar,), Hartsfield, etc.

Class C is for busy airports that are not as busy as Class B -- Daytona FL is an example of this type.

Class D is any airport with an operating control tower that is neither Class B nor Class C. Leesburg, Ocala, and Gainseville are examples in central Florida.

Class E is all controlled airspace other than the above. In general, this includes airspace that is more than 1,200' AGL. For non-towered airports that have published instrument approaches, Class E airspace generally has a floor of either 700' AGL, or in some cases, it comes right down to the ground.

The above is loaded with generalizations; there are all sorts of exceptions, all of which are documented on standard navigation charts.

---

Definitions of acronyms used above:

AGL: Above Ground Level
ATC: Air Traffic Control
MSL: Mean Sea Level (height above sea level)

In reading about these UAV’s and people loosing their minds I can’t but wonder that if this was happening in a free state someone should have shot at least one of these down by now and we would have found out that it was some kids pranking everyone.

The military has hand held weapons (that look like a shogun) that are capable of bringing drones down…so I have to ask why they haven’t deployed any of these around the areas in question??

This message has been edited. Last edited by: smlsig,

^^the answer is
A.the .mil &.gov is inept…or
B. The drones belong to the US

quote:

A.the .mil &.gov is inept…or
B. The drones belong to the US

Both can be true at the same time.

Based on the photos and videos I’ve seen:

1. Some of the mystery drones are just ordinary drones being flown legally.

2. One video of a purported car size drone is clearly a small helicopter. You can see the landing skids, main body, and tail. In other words, false sightings.

3. Some of them are our government’s, particularly the ones being seen over military bases.

4. Some of them are our companies’ development programs. The purported 6’ diameter ones are not Joe Schmoe and the drone he bought off Amazon. Could be the Amazon drone that did the delivery.

Why lights? Because they are being flown legally.
Why not shoot down? Because they are being flown legally.
Why government saying they are not a threat? Because they are being flown legally.

I’m not saying every single one, but we are reaching the point of hysteria over the issue. People are reporting anything they see. People are reading about different sightings and mashing the facts together. The reporting is, as usual, being done by people that haven’t a clue what they are talking about and the rereporting, or parroting, is distorted. Maybe the first report says a drone was spotted near a military base and the next says it was over a military base.

The picture I posted above is two military helicopters flying over Lake Huron that I captured using my then new drone. I called them Iranian to illustrate a point. Some people, Gustofer, recocognized that what I said can’t be true. The first clue is there is no way we’d allow Iran to fly military aircraft in our airspace. The second being how would Iran get them there? The third being, Iran doesn’t have Blackhawks. It should have set off most people’s bullshit meter. So should much of this drone stuff we’ve been discussing.

The picture I took is interesting. I was flying my drone, legally, over my 20 acres in MI and I got a warning on the controller’s screen that said other aircraft were nearby. I scanned the horizon until I saw the helicopters and managed to snap a few pictures before they were gone.

The interesting part was getting the warning itself. I have no idea how that happens. The drone doesn’t have radar or anything fancy like that. It has Bluetooth, WiFi, and an internet connection through my cellphone. I’m guessing the aircraft broadcast their positions, those positions are sent to the internet where they can be accessed by anyone. The flight tracking and marine traffic websites are examples of this data be used publicly. The app on my phone must also pull from this data and thus I got the warning. The flip side then is probably true, the ID and position of my drone is being sent to the internet where other people can see it.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: trapper189,

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
Since everyone can see them anyway, what harm is there in the government (if the ones responsible) giving people an inkling of what they are doing? No serious classified information needs to be revealed.

At some point you have to ask: "Who works for who?"

I realize that EVERY government employee HATES it whenever someone says this, but at some point the question has to be asked.

At some point they will actually have to answer because if they can’t they have no business being on the payroll.

Can’t have it both ways.

Assuming they are being flown legally, this would also require the drone to have Remote ID. This is supposed to include the identity and position of the UAS (drone). To be compliant, Remote ID must also provide either the controller's location or the drone's take-off point.

Now, the Remote ID data is not broadcast as ADS-B Out is used by manned aircraft to broadcast their position to the world. (Think websites like FlightAware.) Instead, Remote ID for UAS broadcasts via WiFi or Bluetooth so you need to be in range to pick up the signal.

You can download an app to pick up the information broadcast. These apps are a bit flakey since they need to be able to pick up the signal.

Commercial systems are available that are more powerful and can pick up the data. (Think ShotSpotter for drones.)

But the information is only LIVE, and I don't think anyone is recording the data. I suppose there is a way for the government or someone else to set up a system to collect and store the broadcast flight data from Remote ID.

Note that the small .55 pounds-and-under drones do not need to comply with Remote ID, nor do you need to comply if you are flying in an area recognized by the FAA as a remote control flying club.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
...

The interesting part was getting the warning itself. I have no idea how that happens.

Those aircraft are broadcasting ADS-B Out, so you can see them on apps like FlightAware and your drone app on your phone is notifying you about the aircraft in the area. If they are NOT broadcasting ADS-B Out, you would not get notification.

See my post above, as the drones have Remote ID (WiFi and Bluetooth only) and not ADS-B Out.

This seems to be trending to another ‘Battle of Los Angeles’.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Los_Angeles

This is going to sound unbelievable, but I have the link, and it's not from some crazy Alex Jones website. It's from Politico and the Business Insider.

Satellite imagery shows that an Iranian naval mothership drone carrier left port sometime after November 12. So perhaps Congressman Drew is not so crazy after all. I wouldn't be surprised if Congressman Drew's statement was based on this. He may have received an intelligence briefing from a better source than others. Here is the link:


https://www.politico.com/newsl...-connection-00193903

quote:

Originally posted by Fed161:
https://www.politico.com/newsl...-connection-00193903

Is there more than this?:

quote:

Is New Jersey at the center of an international intrigue between the United States and Iran?

U.S. Rep. Jeff Van Drew is suggesting as much. The congressman has argued that the large, mysterious drones spotted all over New Jersey recently may be from an Iranian “mothership” floating off the coast. Van Drew cited “very high sources, very qualified sources, very responsible sources.”

“Whether it was some crazy hobbyist that we can’t imagine, or whether it was Iran — and I think it very possibly could be — they should be shot down,” Van Drew said on Fox News.

I know that sounds far-fetched at first blush. And Iran — Iran’s so far away. But drone technology has the potential to advance asymmetrical warfare, while Van Drew’s not pulling the drone mothership idea out of thin air. Business Insider reported that satellite images showed an Iranian drone ship had left port sometime after Nov. 12. It’s also worth noting that Van Drew aired the Covid lab leak theory during a debate in 2020, which was widely dismissed at the time but has since gained more credibility.

As beleaguered as Iran has been from the recent weakening of its middle-east proxies and the fall of Bashar Al-Assad in Syria, is it that hard to imagine they could still send drones over United States airspace to — I’m just speculating here — test our reaction?

But Department of Defense spox Sabrina Singh outright dismissed Van Drew’s theory, saying there’s “not any truth” to it and “there is no Iranian ship off the coast of the United States, and there’s no so-called mothership launching drones towards the United States.” What’s more, this report from Nov. 29 said the ship was at sea trials in the Persian Gulf.

To my completely non-expert ears, Van Drew’s theory sounds possible, but that’s mainly because there’s an absence of other plausible theories. And I hope he’s suggesting shooting them down over the water rather than over the most densely populated state in the union.

Meanwhile, Republican state lawmakers who attended a briefing on the drones at State Police Headquarters were not satisfied with what they heard. “No answers. No resolution. They don’t know where the drones are coming from, they don’t know who’s doing it, they don’t know why they’re doing it, but they say there’s no credible threat,” said Assemblymember Brian Bergen, a Republican, told a reporter. “It was annoying to be there.”