1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Gatwick Drone Theories

Discussion in 'Serious' started by Bungletron, 20 Dec 2018.

  1. lilgoth89

    lilgoth89 Captin Calliope

    Joined:
    12 Mar 2011
    Posts:
    2,861
    Likes Received:
    173
    well in theory the engine cowling ( or case ) is designed to contain any debris, but un-contained engine failures have and do occur, one of the more memorable ones in recent memory was that Qantas A380 where one of the turbines failed and was ejected through the wing, it could have been worse, a nanosecond either way and the debris could of passed right through the outboard engine, or worse, straight through the cabin
     
  2. stuartpb

    stuartpb Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    1,654
    Likes Received:
    76
    DJI announced that Geo fencing is being updated, it’s supposed to further increase protection against controlled and restricted airspace incursions:

    https://techcrunch.com/2019/02/13/d...em-across-europe-after-gatwick-drone-debacle/

    The problem is though that there are quite a few cheap and cheerful flight controllers, such as the APM and Pixhawk controllers, that don’t have airport and restricted airspace Geo fencing functionality out of the box. This is because GPS positioning doesn’t come as standard with these flight controllers. You can buy an optional GPS receiver. If the drone doesn’t have GPS you can still fly the drone but can’t use any of the GPS related flight assists and modes. It also means you can’t ring fence where it can’t fly. These FC’s can be used to build a drone and cause mayhem or be used for illicit purposes, such as smuggling contraband into prisons. Geo fencing needs to be come standard across all off the shelf drones and also all drone flight controllers that have GPS functionality.
     

Share This Page