Hot Topics | |
---|---|
Coligny wrote:But Saigon...
Coligny wrote:Samurai_Jerk wrote:Coligny wrote:They deserve to die shitting blood with every other country laughing and pointing at them.
Does that also apply to us since we choose to ride along in this clown car?
Depend, you came because you fully agree and support their energy policies. Or because the pussy is cheap, plentifull and downright expandable ?
Personally everytime i consider taking my settlement pay and bugging out I remember that I'm at the crossroads of the best natural disasters this planet have to offer (german invasion aside).
But Saigon... If only we kept that colony... (Then there would be oo much french and the place would sux...)
This is the City of Toyohashi. A tornado advisory has been issued in Aichi Prefecture. There is a risk of tornadoes in Aichi Prefecture. Tornadoes are caused by cumulonimbus clouds. If you notice signs that cumulonimbus clouds are approaching, such as lightning or quick, sudden changes in wind,
please take shelter inside a sturdy building immediately. Please monitor the latest weather updates from the Japan Meterological gency.
Sources told the Japan Times that Tokyo’s Metropolitan Police Department is even intending to set up a special anti-drone unit for identifying and taking down suspicious-looking UAVs spotted in the capital. The report said the unit would use “a large drone” with a net to capture UAVs caught flying in areas like airports, a comically crude solution for a country brimming with tech know-how. If the story is indeed true, many will wonder why the authorities aren’t going for a high-tech solution like this, or this, instead.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:Japanese police want to fight illegal drones with bigger dronesSources told the Japan Times that Tokyo’s Metropolitan Police Department is even intending to set up a special anti-drone unit for identifying and taking down suspicious-looking UAVs spotted in the capital. The report said the unit would use “a large drone” with a net to capture UAVs caught flying in areas like airports, a comically crude solution for a country brimming with tech know-how. If the story is indeed true, many will wonder why the authorities aren’t going for a high-tech solution like this, or this, instead.
The report said the unit would use “a large drone” with a net to capture UAVs caught flying in areas like airports, a comically crude solution for a country brimming with tech know-how.
matsuki wrote:The report said the unit would use “a large drone” with a net to capture UAVs caught flying in areas like airports, a comically crude solution for a country brimming with tech know-how.
Wage Slave wrote:Well yes, you could do it that way but what about comedy and sport?
Coligny wrote:Dear chimps with uniforms...
Drones fly with a 2.4ghz control link and a 5.8ghz video link.
Jam those frequencies and you take down the drone.
(Sometimes even just a few too busy Wifi airspace is enough to make them fall from the sky...)
(Morons in charges bringing solution against a -non- problem they barely understand anyway)
Yokohammer wrote:I wonder how they'll deal with this drone:
Samurai_Jerk wrote:Coligny wrote:Dear chimps with uniforms...
Drones fly with a 2.4ghz control link and a 5.8ghz video link.
Jam those frequencies and you take down the drone.
I'm not saying the net is a good idea but I don't know that making them drop from the sky over a crowded urban area is either.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:Coligny wrote:Dear chimps with uniforms...
Drones fly with a 2.4ghz control link and a 5.8ghz video link.
Jam those frequencies and you take down the drone.
(Sometimes even just a few too busy Wifi airspace is enough to make them fall from the sky...)
(Morons in charges bringing solution against a -non- problem they barely understand anyway)
I'm not saying the net is a good idea but I don't know that making them drop from the sky over a crowded urban area is either.
Most drone owners will have to register their devices starting next week under rules aimed at controlling the sharp increase of unmanned aircraft in U.S. skies that officials fear threaten public safety.
The rules, unveiled on Monday, apply to drones heavier than a half-pound—which covers virtually all consumer devices other than palm-size toys. The rules require drone owners to register on a government website to receive a unique user number that they then must attach or write on any drones they own.
Users who purchased a drone before Dec. 21, when the rules take effect, will have until Feb. 19 to register. Drones purchased after Dec. 21 must be registered before their first flight. Registration costs $5 but regulators are waiving that fee for the first 30 days.
[...]
Some recreational drone users criticized the rule as a regulatory overreach. The Academy of Model Aeronautics, a decades-old model-aircraft group, said the requirement violates a 2012 law that largely prohibits the Federal Aviation Administration from regulating recreational drones. The group said the rules are “counter to Congress’s intent” and create “an unnecessary burden” for drone owners.
The FAA said it can require registration under existing aircraft-registration laws, meaning failure to register a drone technically carries the same penalties as failing to register a commercial aircraft, including fines of as much as $250,000 and a prison sentence of three years.
Those penalties would only be used in “egregious situations,” said Deputy FAA Administrator Michael Whitaker. The agency plans to enlist local law enforcement to help enforce registration, though it said it would push any unregistered users to comply rather than punish them.
Coligny wrote:If only we could also establish a registration process for firearms. It would certainly reduce the number of crime comitted. Or even better make a law to criminalyze the killing of people (unless they are muslims of course)..
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 115 guests