Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

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

Is there a defense against terrorist drones?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by fastsmiles, Feb 5, 2015.

  1. fastsmiles

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2014
    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    130
    Location:
    Fort Worth, Tx
    Kevin Poulson's article on Wired magazine brings to light the real concerns of the government over the use of consumer UAVs as weapons and how difficult it may be fo defend against them.

    http://www.wired.com/2015/02/white-house-drone/

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Monte55

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2014
    Messages:
    2,198
    Likes Received:
    517
    Location:
    Raymore Missouri
    Yep there is. Use DJI batteries
     
  3. p fandango

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2014
    Messages:
    600
    Likes Received:
    27
    Location:
    Coventry, UK
    why has the issue of airbourne terrorism only just escalated, surely the same payloads could be carried by rc planes/helicopters that have been around for years
     
  4. Mori55

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2014
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    NJ-USA
    Why is this a multi rotor thing ? If I wanted to blow up something I would probaly just use a Rc airplane. It's faster probaly stealthier and it'll fly farther and probaly carry a bigger payload.
     
  5. fastsmiles

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2014
    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    130
    Location:
    Fort Worth, Tx
    Good observation, but how would you defend against it?
    An anti-drone drone would be fun but probably not very effective.
     
  6. dirkclod

    dirkclod Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2014
    Messages:
    10,639
    Likes Received:
    5,698
    Location:
    Amory Mississippi
    That's how by god ;)
     

    Attached Files:

  7. Marlin009

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2014
    Messages:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    515
    Location:
    West Coast of Florida
    Roman Candles.
     
  8. lake_flyer

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2014
    Messages:
    603
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    The Low Lands
    Come on, the western forces EW can attack any radio frequency in the EM spectrum in such a way that it fries the transmitter to a sinter, even setting the operator on fire if they want. Just check Electronic Warfare on Wikipedia or other sources. In a newspaper I recently read that a Dutch University is in the process of testing a newly developed device, that can knock out any flying, driving, running or floating unmanned craft (or robot) safely, on any popular (and less popular) RC frequency within a radius that is adjustable from the size of a football field up to an international airport. Problem is that cel phones would suffer as well. But official radio communication as well as air traffic control wouldn't. In a emergency situation it will be used. The Electronic Warfare weapons would probably be too powerful to use safely in densely populated areas. But ultimately could be used just as well. The world needs a set of firm international rules about free RC frequencies so that the bad guys can't use frequencies that can't be jammed.
     
  9. sdtrojan

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2014
    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Because they have gotten so easy to fly now! Habib can now put them on a target a mile away without even having to control it if they use waypoint/groundstation.
     
  10. lake_flyer

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2014
    Messages:
    603
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    The Low Lands
    Humvee with Active Denial System mounted. A 'light' energy direction weapon. Destroys anything from cell phones to lightly armoured vehicles with a directed EM beam. This can also be mounted on helicopters, planes and ships.



    couple of these around the perimeter and no consumer drone can do anything, especially the P2V+ with the cell phone app :lol:
     

    Attached Files:

  11. Meta4

    Meta4 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    Messages:
    7,731
    Likes Received:
    3,450
    Is there a defense against terrorist drones?
    A more appropriate question would be: Is there really a threat of terrorist drones?

    Terrorist drones would make a sexy Hollywood plot line that would require Bruce Willis, Chuck Norris and Steven Segal to defeat the threat to humanity but what's happening in the real world?

    Officials from the US military, the Department of Homeland Security, and the FAA gathered for a DHS “summit” on a danger that had been consuming them privately for years: the potential use of hobbyist drones as weapons of terror or assassination.

    That's where this starts. It's because the US government themselves use drones as weapons of terror or assassination. They have become so used to dealing death that they think that's the way everyone else would behave. This is compounded with an incredible ignorance that equates hobby drones with Reapers and Predators.

    The whole Whitehouse Phantom incident is nonsense. It embarrassed security nuts by demonstrating that there is no scifi shield around the building. Stray baseballs and frisbees could just as easily get onto the Whitehouse lawn - and they are only slightly less dangerous than a Phantom.

    If what was reported in the article was true, the conference was organised by people who are either stupidly ignorant or outright deceptive and intending to create fear and justify further ridiculous "security" measures. Either way they should not be trusted.

    Sounds like a popular Youtube hoax video - these guys are taking it seriously.
    Launching attacks with consumer-grade drones??? They can't carry a payload.
    Isis used two Phantoms for some amateur grade reconnaissance.
    That sounds highly improbable.
    Three pounds is what the Phantom itself weighs. A phantom can't take off with 3 pounds of anything attached.
    [​IMG]
    This shows how fake this threat is. This tricked up Phantom wouldn't be able to fly!

    Multirotors make fabulous toys or flying cameras but they have a serious weakness. The payload they can lift is very limited and when loaded, they have a very low range. They just aren't capable of carrying a load. This simple fact is why terrorists haven't used them. They just wouldn't do the job. Instead there are lots of viable options that are simple and effective. Timothy McVeigh used a rental truck, some fertiliser and diesel to do more damage than a thousand multirotor drones could achieve. In Boston it was pressure cookers. The bad guys aren't as stupid as some of the fantasy chasers at DHS are. And in a country with 300 million guns on the ground, the threat from multirotors doesn't even register.

    While they are so focused on the fantasy threat of multirotors, they risk completely ignoring very real security risks. If they still want to dream of radio control toys, something with wings can carry more, travel further and faster. Even though radio control planes have been around for 50 years but I'm not aware of terrorists having used them.

    There are real threats out there but by wasting resources on this fantasy distraction, that's taking away from real security measures that might achieve something. They may as well set up a unit to protect us from aliens from Mars.
     
  12. varmint

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    390
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Hillsboro, OR
    Yeah, so as long as the threat is actually detected, and you have one of those stationed at every possible target in the country (e.g. tens of thousands), we should be fine. They also look highly directional. So based on the range and speed of a typical UAS, you'd have mere minutes or seconds to get it spotted, targeted and dispatched. Not to mention that fact that you'd be blowing out every piece of RF equipment in its path, which would probably cause more damage to infrastructure than the pound or two of home-brewed explosive could even come close to achieving.

    Unfortunately it's just a matter of time before something is used for an aerial attack, and whether or not it can do any real damage is irrelevant. The government(s) will respond like they always do (knee-jerk style), and there's nothing we can do but enjoy our hobby while it lasts.

    Shoe bomb = take off your shoes for the TSA.
    Phantom-bomb = no more GPS-equipped MRs (best case), no more MRs period (worst case).
     
  13. Clipper707

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2014
    Messages:
    887
    Likes Received:
    327
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    While I don't claim to be an expert, I have taken a few formal courses in terrorism and received some counter-terror training, most of which raised more questions than they answered. Terrorists are fighting a guerrilla war and the smart ones have shown remarkable adaptability and creativity.

    The fact ISIS used Phantoms for amateur reconnaissance shows they're thinking about how to use them. Should we ignore that just because Phantoms can't carry much of a payload today? What about tomorrow's drones?

    Sometimes the goal of terrorism isn't to inflict maximum damage, but to draw maximum headlines. A good example of this is the continuous beheadings by ISIS. I don't think the real goal is to rid the world of infidels one person at a time. My guess is to decapitate a single American aid worker or Japanese journalist, is to do it for headlines. Why? Ultimately for recruitment.

    And as for a Phantom's inability to carry a payload, an M67 fragmentation grenade, weighing less than a pound, has a casualty radius of 20 meters and kill radius of 5 meters. In 2013 a drone landed within 2 meters of German chancellor Angela Merkel.

    Drones by themselves draw headlines. Imagine the headlines if a drone succeeded in killing a VIP. Imagine a swarm of a few hundred drones, each carrying a grenade, autonomously flying into a Super Bowl or World Cup stadium.

    Sometimes headlines are the goal. Governments would be foolish not to consider this threat.
     
  14. HailStorm

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2014
    Messages:
    154
    Likes Received:
    2

    It seems naïve to think that there won't be some dumbass somewhere who will strap explosives on a drone and try to do harm.
    I don't think there is a threat from Terrorist Phantoms - but drones in general - sure, someone will try it.
    I have a buddy with a commercial size drone that carries 20 lbs - and can be flown via waypoints on an Android device with no pilot input after launching. An RC plane or heli takes skill and training to fly, and lacks the accuracy a multi-rotor has. And anyone can fly most drones with only a few hours practice - program the flight and be far away heading in the opposite direction when the target is reached.
    I didn't think a U-Haul filled with fertilizer would be a threat, Timothy McVeigh thought about it.
    I didn't think a pressure cooker could be filled with nails and used to wreak death and mayhem.
     
  15. fastsmiles

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2014
    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    130
    Location:
    Fort Worth, Tx
    After JFK was shot, VIP motorcades in convertibles became a thing of the past, with the threat of killer drones-will outside appearances by VIPs also become a thing of the past?
     
  16. varmint

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    390
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Hillsboro, OR
    One can only hope:)
     
  17. who

    who

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2014
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    9
    They have this type is system in chicago. I use to delivery to stadium and museum, and everybody cell phone, gps, anything that has signal would just be dead for the duration of the delivery.
     
  18. Clipper707

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2014
    Messages:
    887
    Likes Received:
    327
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    Someday, we may see a terrorist drone being chased by a police drone, with video footage from a news drone. It's going to be awesome.
     
  19. unclebob

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2015
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    6
    I hate Android cell phones. I hope someone creates a Android cell phone bomb so they can bann the stupid laggy OS.