Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

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

Yet another bit of bad press "Phantom Bashing"

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Joel_t, May 26, 2014.

  1. Joel_t

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2014
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    1
    Another case of bad reporting and the media for using a photo of a Phantom as their "drone"

    http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western ... 6932708449

    These morons are going to ruin the hobby for us all. And check out one of the comments:

    Val 2 hours ago
    How ridiculous is that to be able to just buy them online.very dangerous and obviously available to terrorists who could bring other aircraft down.

    Ignorance and media induced fear will destroy the multiroter hobbyists who are doing the right thing. They fail to mention the actual fact that no one actually knows whether it was even a RC aircraft. But lets just put a photo of a Phantom up anyway so all the guys doing the right thing get bothered by ignorant randoms who come and complain when we fly them.
     
  2. Ozzyguy

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2013
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Townsville,Australia.
    Re: Yet another bit of bad press

    Oh yeah these morons doing the wrong things WILL ruin this hobby for us alright.And a phantom really looks cylindrical and grey:-/
     
  3. Joel_t

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2014
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    1
    Re: Yet another bit of bad press

    It is a case of very poor journalism. The fact that without any evidence at all that the object was even a RC aircraft these idiots have put up a photo of a Phantom and haven't even stated that it was a stock photo is pathetic. Doesn't even match the description. The Phantoms are already getting enough of a bashing without this bullshit being spread across media to people who believe everything they read.
     
  4. Phantom_Menace66

    Joined:
    May 8, 2014
    Messages:
    469
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    Re: Yet another bit of bad press

    BOLLOCKS!
    Below is a picture of a DeHavilland DHC8... There's no way a pilot of this thing, no matter how good his eyesight is, travelling in excess of 250 Knots at 3800ft, would see something the size of a Phantom or Drone, whatever it was, let alone a strobe light in broad daylight!
    Absolute horse ****....
     

    Attached Files:

  5. Ozzyguy

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2013
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Townsville,Australia.
    The description and reported height makes it sound more like a rocket.
     
  6. doug86

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2014
    Messages:
    290
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Bi-Polar

    Yes... well. ... A friend of mine always says "What's your contribution to the problem?"

    While I agree with your sentiments about the media, their ignorance, and their hysteria, perhaps we hobbiests aren't "doing the right thing." It all to easy to search this forum and find examples of guys bragging about going up to 2000', 4000'.... 6000' AGL. There is no way that a Phantom pilot at that altitude can "see and avoid" other aircraft. You would be hard pressed to see a Cessna 172 up there from the ground, much less your Phantom. FPV doesn't provide the 360 deg view you need. Far too many threads about testing the limits of how far away you can fly from where you are standing. Since when is testing the limits of technology over people and schools an example of doing the right thing? Is flying at night acting responsibly?

    Lots and lots of videos of Phantoms flying low over congestions of people in parks, at beaches, cities and main streets, etc. Those people didn't agree to participate in the testing phase of this machine. Then those pilots go on line and brag about their "rights" and how the FAA can't tell them what to do. Just because something is legal doesn't make it reasonable or sensible. Ask yourself this: Would you trust the flight computer of your Phantom to drive your pickup truck remotely down a winding road past schools and churches at 40 miles per hour? If not, why not?

    Until we as 'hobbiests' stop providing the media grist for their mills, I think we bear some responsibility for the bad press.

    We can embrace voluntary guidelines (like the AMA has) and force ourselves and our fellow flyers to stay within the limits, or someone else will come up with regulations for us. We probably won't like their version.
     
    Basil Johnson likes this.
  7. Peter Evans

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2014
    Messages:
    456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lot-et-Garonne, France
    +1

    Rarely do I criticise others, "each to his own" is my motto. However, whilst I know that the first rule of journalism is, "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story," I am often amazed at some of the things I read on this forum.

    Yesterday, I read of a guy who flew to 1.6km altitude and lost his Phantom, camera, gimbal and iOSD - the whole nine yards - because his battery ran flat. Whilst I thought, "Ouch!" regarding his financial loss, sympathy was harder to find. I thought, "what the hell was the point of doing that? Jeez, 1.6 kms high? What if the ten million to one chance had happened?" We need to remember that huge lottery prizes are won on a regular basis.
     
  8. Ozzyguy

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2013
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Townsville,Australia.
  9. steveeds

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2014
    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    74
    Reading that it does sound a lot like a Phantom.
    Strobe lights, apart from a UFO I can't think of to many other things and that may help catch the pilots "eye" as he said he saw it.

    It does seem breaking height, distance and speed records are common place here. The thing can go a mile high + and I know you can't see it from 1/4 that height and if you turn your head your lucky to catch it back again.

    If it looks like a duck...etc,

    remember the helicopter post
     
  10. gunslinger

    gunslinger Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    Messages:
    2,722
    Likes Received:
    497
    Location:
    Least Coast...
    I agree that we have way too many people flying too high and too far to possibly be safe... But...

    "The pilot reported that the object was cylindrical in shape and grey in colour." :shock:

    And they show a picture of a Phantom at the head of the article? That's just plain reprehensible. Some reporters should be taken to task for their outrageous stereotyping in an effort to have their article read. Drones are a big news item right now. NOT model rocketry... :roll:

    -slinger
     
  11. Peter Evans

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2014
    Messages:
    456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Lot-et-Garonne, France
    Like I said, "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story" is the maxim for all but the most honest and dedicated journalists, and they're about as common as hen's teeth. And even if they start out that way, the subs and editors soon kick it out of them.

    "OK, Dave, good story, I'll tart it up a bit and we'll run it in the next edition. Get a pic of a drone to go with it."
    "I've looked but I can't find a drone that looks like the pilot's description."
    "I don't give a flying f*ck what it LOOKS like, find a picture of any f*cking drone and use that."
    "Oh, OK, what stock agency do we use?"
    "Stock agency? You don't BUY the f*cking thing for Christ's sake! What's the matter with you? Just go on the net and grab one. And make sure it looks punchy."
     
  12. Happyflyer

    Joined:
    May 5, 2014
    Messages:
    1,805
    Likes Received:
    98
    Location:
    Cold, Cold, Michigan
    You got that right. IF they think they may get sued for something they print, they think "will we make more money on the story than what a law suit will cost us?" If yes, print the story.
     
  13. CarlJ

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2014
    Messages:
    782
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Peru, Indiana
    Honestly I think we're crazy if we don't organize to mitigate some of the damage that's being done, but I can't really see how you'd do that without getting into bed with the RC Industry as a whole. We're talking about a lot of money for a national or international hobby lobby. :roll:

    As to the narcissistic behavior I think we need a measured response which is; it's not recommended one fly at X height or near objects, people, what have you, but you can't really expect them to listen, just distance ourselves.
     
  14. gunslinger

    gunslinger Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    Messages:
    2,722
    Likes Received:
    497
    Location:
    Least Coast...
    :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
     
  15. Gary567

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2014
    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    2
    Peter,

    I totally agree with you. I wish you would post your reply in the thread "Lost My Whole New Setup".
     
  16. Joel_t

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2014
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    1
    Don't get me wrong I completely agree with the fact that there a few people who's lack of common sense and responsibility are definitely giving a bad name to the rest of us. The example of a member here taking his Phantom 1.6km into the sky is a perfect example and I do not excuse his behaviour at all.

    What I don't agree with is the fact that the media (in the story I posted originally) have used a photo of a Phantom, with still no proof that it was a drone on top of the fact it doesn't even match the pilots description of what he saw, and failed to mention that it was neither confirmed as a multiroter or that the photo of the Phantom was a stock photo and not the aircraft in question. I understand there is the saying "don't let the truth get in the way of a good story" but that doesn't make it right.

    After all the efforts DJI have gone to recently to make sure that the Phantoms are unable to fly into the airspace around airports it is completely unfair to just use their product in a negative light to inflict fear into the public. It is defamation plain and simple.

    If it was proved that the object was a Phantom and the person controlling it was found then absolutely post that story how it is and while your at it throw the book at the person responsible because actions like that should never be tolerated but with the complete lack of evidence it's ridiculous that the story is allowed to be posted how it is.
     
  17. Ozzyguy

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2013
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Townsville,Australia.
    The reason is that the pantom is one of the more photogenic options to choose. Unfortunately.
    In the interests of fairness it should be captioned stating that its just a pic of any old drone and not proven to be the one involved.
    But as someone said the news is more about selling a product not the truth.
    Stop consuming news articles and the problem will slowly go away.
     
  18. Joel_t

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2014
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    1
    Agreed.

    But look at the article now. People who defended the fact the Phantom was used have now succeeded in having that photo removed from the story.

    If we had of just ignored it the more ignorant people who read the article would have just assumed that was the aircraft responsible.

    If we just all help in educating people instead of just sitting back I think we will all see long and happy returns with our investments.
     
  19. Ozzyguy

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2013
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Townsville,Australia.
    Oh I am by no means saying we should ignore it. Take action to make corrections. Also let them know at the same time you will boycott their publications in future because of their inaccurate reporting
     
  20. Joel_t

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2014
    Messages:
    184
    Likes Received:
    1
    +1. Agree with you 100%