Man, 26, charged in model airplane plot to bomb Pentagon

I was not sure about posting this, because it flirts with topics which I do not believe are appropriate. However, I was encouraged to post it anyways, so long as I keep to the site policies. Here, then, is my initial reaction to this discussion:

DIYDrones has some pretty clear policies about this; but bear in mind this is largely about promoting the truth, that UAVs offer tremendous benefits for civilian and hobbyist applications, in contrast to the potential (illusionary?) message that they are destructive devices.

Physics may well be the principle "prevention" here. If you look at the math, it just does not make sense. We spend hundreds of hours, and thousands of dollars to put a 100g or less payload in the form of a camera into the air. We talk, in this community, about safety, and it is true that these devices use high current, lipo batteries, and fast spinning blades that can cut your hands. Some of the devices created by this community might even weigh as much as 10 pounds, and might really hurt if they were to crash into you. But it simply does not make sense for these fantastically useful devices to be considered a threat to the public or Pentagon. The main utility of all UAVs is photo and video; the militaries of the world might put weapons on them, also, but they build thirteen ton UAVs to carry the weapons. If you build anything that is thirteen tons, it could be used for destruction, in the air, on the ground, or in the ocean.

Let's hope the public does not get the wrong message. It is unfortunate that the agents involved chose to feed this criminal-minded individual with RC planes. Who knows, maybe they did so because they *knew* how ineffective he would be, if he managed to get out of hand. It would be tragic if the news and public were to buy into the same illusion this idiot seems to have held. The automobile parked outside most people's house is almost certainly hundreds, if not thousands, of times more dangerous both to the individual and to the general public than the devices built and flown here.

Let's hope the media does not try to turn this into a circus; they might find some crazies who will talk up the danger of UAVs, and the simple math that makes it obvious that an RC plane is not a danger is lost on the news, so it is hard to defend against. I think the American public is smarter than that, even if the news does play it up.

Respectfully,

-Mike

Replies

Moderator

Michael Pursifull September 28, 2011 at 7:32pm

I was not sure about posting this, because it flirts with topics which I do not believe are appropriate. However, I was encouraged to post it anyways, so long as I keep to the site policies. Here, then, is my initial reaction to this discussion:

DIYDrones has some pretty clear policies about this; but bear in mind this is largely about promoting the truth, that UAVs offer tremendous benefits for civilian and hobbyist applications, in contrast to the potential (illusionary?) message that they are destructive devices.

Physics may well be the principle "prevention" here. If you look at the math, it just does not make sense. We spend hundreds of hours, and thousands of dollars to put a 100g or less payload in the form of a camera into the air. We talk, in this community, about safety, and it is true that these devices use high current, lipo batteries, and fast spinning blades that can cut your hands. Some of the devices created by this community might even weigh as much as 10 pounds, and might really hurt if they were to crash into you. But it simply does not make sense for these fantastically useful devices to be considered a threat to the public or Pentagon. The main utility of all UAVs is photo and video; the militaries of the world might put weapons on them, also, but they build thirteen ton UAVs to carry the weapons. If you build anything that is thirteen tons, it could be used for destruction, in the air, on the ground, or in the ocean.

Let's hope the public does not get the wrong message. It is unfortunate that the agents involved chose to feed this criminal-minded individual with RC planes. Who knows, maybe they did so because they *knew* how ineffective he would be, if he managed to get out of hand. It would be tragic if the news and public were to buy into the same illusion this idiot seems to have held. The automobile parked outside most people's house is almost certainly hundreds, if not thousands, of times more dangerous both to the individual and to the general public than the devices built and flown here.

Let's hope the media does not try to turn this into a circus; they might find some crazies who will talk up the danger of UAVs, and the simple math that makes it obvious that an RC plane is not a danger is lost on the news, so it is hard to defend against. I think the American public is smarter than that, even if the news does play it up.

Respectfully,

-Mike

This reply was deleted.

Discussions

Man, 26, charged in model airplane plot to bomb Pentagon

Replies

Activity