Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

Fox News at 3:53PM EST just featured a 2+

Discussion in 'Phantom 2 Vision + Discussion' started by Channel70Productions, Jul 8, 2014.

  1. Channel70Productions

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2014
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    1
    The operators of the Phantom got released from jail on bond for 'public endangerment' for flying too close to a NYPD helo. The helo followed the Phantom back to its launch point. Shep Smith showed the DJI Manual saying owners should not fly higher than 400 ft.
     
  2. Hovtech

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2014
    Messages:
    502
    Likes Received:
    151
    Got what he deserved. How stupid is that, to taunt the police.
     
  3. Channel70Productions

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2014
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    1
    Remy Castro, 23 and Wilkins Mendoza, 34 were charged in Manhattan Criminal Court with felony reckless endangerment.
    But a friend of the pair, Jonathan Reyes, 27, said Castro told him they have flown them as high as 5,000 feet.
    “When they first got them, everyone was going crazy and saying, ‘That’s some alien stuff!’ ” Reyes recalled.
    Reyes said Castro bought a drone two weeks ago and that Mendoza followed suit. They spent $500 to $700 apiece.
    They have been having a wild time ever since, flying the drones around the neighborhood each night and posting video of the outings on Instagram.
    “They’re fun. They’re a cool pair,” Reyes said of the men. “Everybody who sees [the drones] goes crazy!” -Forbes and NY Post
     
  4. phantomguy

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2014
    Messages:
    349
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'm sure the 5000 feet is an accurate number.
     
  5. Garysam

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2013
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Prior Lake Minnesota
    I'm convinced that one day we will only have designated fly parks to which we may fly in. How boring this will be. Even the hobbyist that's been doing this for years and years they will probably pay a price as well.

    I ask to those who are much smarter than I, what kind of positive impact/power do we really have to divert this. I'm typically a positive person but I don't believe there's a positive outcome for this... Please advise.
     
  6. D_Tshudy

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2014
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Philly
    All we can do is fly safe, set good examples and talk people through their fear of them. Idiots will be idiots. But really? A FELONY? That seems pretty heavy-handed.
     
  7. dezunka

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    I will have to follow this "case dismissal". That seems pretty creative to charge them with a felony when even the FAA doesn't have any teeth in their "rules". Does NY have a "no fly zone" for aircraft and model aircraft after 9/11? Maybe there is more to this story than is being reported?
     
  8. kymedic121

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2014
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Arlington, Ky.
    I am a Deputy Sheriff in Kentucky and I can understand the Charge of Reckless Endangerment (In Ky its called Wanton Endangerment) Legal Definition: Circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, wantonly engages in conduct which creates a substantial danger of death or serious physical injury to another. Layman's terms: (A willful act that could result in serious injury or death to another.) Basically the prosecutor is charging that flying that close to helicopter could have acted as foreign object that could have struck the helicopter which possibly could have caused the helicopter to crash seriously injuring or killing those on board and those on the ground below. Yes, I know it seems a little harsh to charge them with a felony for such a bonehead and childish move but yes this could have occurred. But, with all this being said and my experience in many courtrooms on many cases I can tell you that unless they get a really hard nosed prosecutor and judge it will probably be plead down to a misdemeanor with a heavy fine, probation, community service and likely loose the right to fly their drones for a number of years. Now, if the media runs with this and the FAA catch wind of it which I am sure they have they may use these two as an example and through the proverbial book at them. Not to mention what this is going to do to public perception of these aircraft and how the law abiding hobbyist and professional photographers are going to suffer because of stupid people like these seeing how high they can get and then to antagonize the police. Yep, this is probably going to end bad. The National Transportation Safety Board sided with Drone (Quad) pilots and ruled against the FAA and prevented them implementing shoot from the hip policies and laws to govern our quads by saying that the FAA does not have the jurisdictional authority to restrict Radio Controlled Operation. This decision was also upheld by a Superior Court Judge. Now, if this kind of crap keeps happening you can rest assured the FAA will be all over this by directive from the President or Congress. Not to mention if Homeland Security decides they are bored and want something else to do they will be ready to enforce or restrict the use of these aircraft. I personally like FPV and I love its uses. But I personally see no point in flying higher than 400', furthermore I can understand flying past LOS sparingly but not several thousand feet away. What is the point? Yes, the aircraft will do it especially the Phantom versions, some will go well beyond those distances with all the mods to the antennas that can be done rather cheaply. But to launch your quad thousands of feet has no practical purpose as far as I am concerned and is no more than a "Hold my beer and watch this" moment. Several more instances like this and we will be confined to fly parks, with mandatory regulated flight training, licensing fees, ownership registration and limits of liability insurance and/or collision insurance. Its a crying shame that because of few juvenile people and there actions our country may have the most strict guidelines and restrictions on quads. Land of The Free, I think not. More like the "Land of The Legislated" Ok, I am sorry I will now climb down from my soapbox and end this rant. Please understand that the views I have expressed are solely mine and mine alone. I mean no disrespect nor am I trying to incite chaos here on the forum. Strictly one mans view........
     
  9. Catalina36

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2014
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    San Antonio
    Well said kymedic121.
     
  10. dezunka

    Joined:
    May 27, 2014
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    kymedi121 - I understand what you are saying and where you are coming from but I question the accuracy of this story. If they were flying after midnight at 800 feet then the only way the NYPD chopper would have seen it would be to be flying below 800 feet and see it up above. My gut tells me that the NYPD chopper may have seen the lights flashing and flew towards it to investigate. You would be hard pressed to convince me that these guys intentionally flew towards the NYPD chopper in the dark at 800 feet. There may have been a close call but most likely as a result of the chopper trying to get close to identify the model aircraft. Hardly willful reckless endangerment on the part of the model aircraft pilot in my opinion.

    If you watch their story on YouTube... they were flying over a 5 story building. They are shown flying a Phantom 2 (not a Vision) without a camera so 800 feet sounds incomprehensible. They claim to have video recorded the flight with a camera phone. Of course there are always 3 sides to any story...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kAUw7G2To0
     
  11. srandall25

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    692
    Likes Received:
    4
    playing devil's advocate here... I think it's entirely possible that the helo saw this drone from a distance and was never truly endangered by it, but just the fact that the drone was in 'their airspace' they hunted it down and sought what they felt was 'justice'.. Now I don't condone the actions of the drone operators as it appears they were not very smart and didn't choose to bring the drone home once they spotted the helo; however, we've been seeing folks exaggerate the 'unsafeness' of these drones... i.e. the drone that flew 'through the fireworks'... the editor wrote this as such an 'obviously unsafe maneuver'... I don't personally don't feel it was... no more unsafe than the very fireworks being launched around it. Let's assume the helo was in fact within 800' of the drone... 800 feet is 800 feet.. how unsafe this really is, is a matter of perspective. If the helo operator really felt that threatened by the drone, I doubt they would have followed it back to its launch point. I kind of get the feeling or impression that the helo was never really in any great danger... but they saw an opportunity with the drone in their cross hairs... Was the drone truly above the 400' 'guidelines' by the FAA? Did the drone truly come within a dangerous proximity to the helo or was it merely just visible by the helo operator? Was their a city ordinance banning the flying of RC model aircraft in this vicinity? Was the drone being flown aggressively toward or close to other people or objects that appeared to be unsafe? Were there other witnesses to this event besides the helo pilots? All questions I wish I had the answers to, because in my mind, they make the difference as to whether or not these gentlemen are truly guilty or not. I do agree, flying downtown or within a major city is never a good idea. I would never do it... Again, just playing devi's advocate here...
     
  12. Birdman

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2014
    Messages:
    132
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Eastern Shore, Maryland
    We need to see how this plays out in court. I'm certain there have been exaggerations made on both sides of the story--and by the media. I personally will not fly mine in an urban area. There are too many people and too much risk.
     
  13. kymedic121

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2014
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Arlington, Ky.
    dezunka, you are probably absolutely right. But even if this is the case the officers charged them probably due to exceeding the 400' mark. Our agency does not have helo's but I dealt with many pilots in the military and they felt as if they owned the sky. This may be a case of contempt of cop "Yes, it does happen and some don't deserve the badge they wear." Maybe just the fact that they were flying it all, especially at night at altitudes exceeding 400' may have prompted the response from PD. I have a dear friend who is an actual helicopter pilot for Life Flight and he is always ragging and calling one of our other buddies a Wannabe helicopter pilot. Take into consideration he is an avid and talented 25+ year RC Helo pilot who can do some amazing things with his helos. So, I am sure there is more to the story than what we actually know. No matter what the truth is who is the public going to believe two helicopter police officers or a group of guys that were later interviewed by the media and said things like, "We take these things up to 5,000 feet" and "These things are crazy!" No, I do not believe they will walk away with any felonies but I do feel that with this incident and the others to follow will only lead to penalties and restrictions on us law abiding people who fly with some common sense and ethics. The government and some of its leaders are trying to criminalize these aircraft and the people who use them and its all based on the military's use of real UAV's which also carry and deploy ordnance. Unfortunately, the government and media are calling these things drones and when they do this the general public instantly conjure images of the national news footage of a military UAV blowing up a small village in Afghanistan or they recall news footage of the military UAV capturing recon video images from thousands of feet in the air. When the average person hears the word drone they instantly think of an aircraft that can hurt them or spy on them. I never use the word drone when explaining to the public what the Phantom is. I always call it a radio controlled Quadcopter. They then think of it more as a helicopter. Unfortunately, I am sure more stories will surface and some folks will in fact do some bonehead stuff but more often than not it will be the media referring to them as drones to only increase the fear factor and this is when our congress, FAA and Homeland Security will get involved. They have it set in their minds that we are all using these things for intelligence gathering and are all apart of a secret group of US based terrorists who are going to wreek havoc just any second. We have to educate the public and the fastest way to combat this is for everyone to fly with some common sense and STOP referring to them as Drones! Thanks for your comments and please know that I agree with you.
     
  14. Werz

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2014
    Messages:
    143
    Likes Received:
    1
    I agree that these guys will probably get misdemeanors. The real move here is to affect public perception, and thus, to affect regulation and legislation.

    While the concept may be alien to those outside the United States, these are issues quite familiar to the American gun rights movement. And the fact is that those with UAVs who chase police helicopters and fly over crowded sports stadiums are the equivalent of those who carry AR-15s, AK-47s and combat shotguns into private business establishments: it may be not be unlawful, but it doesn't make friends, and the poor public impression will lead to regulation and legislation which screws things up for the rest of us.
     
  15. kymedic121

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2014
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Arlington, Ky.
    I have another newbie question and I apologize. But, do we have a UAV lobbying body or organization to speak on our behalf and to safeguard or rights?
     
  16. Dirty Bird

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2014
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Glen Burnie, MD - USA
    I am just getting in after a long day. From what I read, the guys were flying their Phantom near a bridge. A NYPD helicopter spotted the bird and flew in close for a look. Then, having approached the Phantom, he claims he had to veer off to avoid hitting it. Then the two get charged, etc..

    Is there more to this story? Am I missing something here?
     
  17. sting808

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2014
    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    0
    AMA may be the closest thing to a lobbying group for us.
    http://www.modelaircraft.org/

    If anyone else, I would think the entertainment film industry would want some compromise if liability was addressed. They have the resources. Too many bozos out there thinking I can do whatever I want and I don't care if worst case scenario happens that causes injury. SCCA just banned "drones" at sanctioned events. Unless, you can show proof of FAA license(certificate) and $10 million general liability insurance, no flying.

    http://solomatters.com/dont_drone_me_br ... _at_events

    People commonly cite FAA doesn't have rules and hobby aircrafts are exempt, but State, City, and other local ordinances do apply. Be aware of them. Hawaii has a no billboard, banner, large signage law. A US company got an FAA waiver to fly aerial banners and thought the waiver superceded our local law. The pilot flying the banner got cited and company asked by City to stop. FAA just issued a statement saying their waiver does not supercede local laws.

    http://www.civilbeat.com/2014/07/state- ... d-company/

    In the end, perceived irresponsible UAV flying will incite enough citizens and politicians to create highly restrictive laws. A few more high profile idiotic acts will make it harder to lobby for the responsible flyers. And unlike guns and the ARA, we do not have the right to bear RC aircrafts in any space we choose. Maybe I'll go to Waikiki and buzz some tourists on the beach... I bet it won't take much to make the local news. Then, it'll go national. JK
     
  18. kymedic121

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2014
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Arlington, Ky.
    You can certainly bet if they decide to create federal laws regulating UAVs that it will be under the oversight of Homeland Security. May we should organize and lobbying body for the UAV community.
     
  19. rrhansen

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2014
    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please - do not refer to them as "drones" - they are "APP"s - Aerial Photography Platforms.