“Drug Cartel Now Assassinates Its Enemies With Bomb-Toting Drones”

For most of us, drones are fun flying and a fun aerial camera for amazing video. But for others, toys and tools become weapons.

Using mid to high end consumer drones with attached explosives:

The tactic has become widespread on battlefields overseas and now appears to be proliferating to organized crime.

Source: Drug Cartel Now Assassinates Its Enemies With Bomb-Toting Drones – The Drive

We know what government will do, of course – an eventual ban all consumer radio controlled aircraft. Guns and vehicles, also used in their cartel terror campaigns, however, will not be banned.

The FAA has formerly proposed the eventual ban on home construction of all DIY model aircraft – and allow only commercially built, certified model aircraft that transmit their location in real time, via cellular networks, to government databases. The FAA also proposes to ban the indoor flight of quadcopters, even inside your own home by allowing flight only when a GPS signal is present. The FAA has no legal jurisdiction to regulate the airspace inside your home but they have proposed doing that; they already assert they own all the airspace in your backyard and on your patio, from the ground up.

AT&T, T-Mobile fight speed tests that could prove their coverage maps wrong | Ars Technica

AT&T and T-Mobile are fighting a Federal Communications Commission plan to require drive tests that would verify whether the mobile carriers’ coverage claims are accurate.

The carriers’ objections came in response to the FCC seeking comment on a plan to improve the nation’s inadequate broadband maps. Besides submitting more accurate coverage maps, the FCC plan would require carriers to do a statistically significant amount of drive testing.

Source: AT&T, T-Mobile fight speed tests that could prove their coverage maps wrong | Ars Technica

Tests conducted by some states suggest that coverage maps may overstate actual coverage by as much as double the actual coverage.

The FAA, in their Notice of Proposed Rulemaking requiring Remote Identification on all model aircraft, and further requiring logging in real time via a cell phone connection – was oblivious to the fraudulent coverage maps provided by cell carriers. Further, a month ago I drove out in the eastern part of my state in an area running LTE and showing full coverage – but in reality, over a very, very wide area, there was LTE service – but no data! Only voice and text messaging was supported.

A related problem has been that up to the present, the broad coverage map we see when looking at the state looks great – until you zoom in and discover that many of the covered areas are, in fact, 2G voice and text only.

I agree with all he wrote: “Buying Criteria Changes – Small Sensor Photography by Thomas Stirr”

Good insights in to the changing patterns of camera buyers, and why. I agree with every observation he made (I think I usually agree with everything Thomas posts!)

This article discusses camera industry factors and consumer behaviours that may be affecting buying criteria of cameras and lenses.

Source: Buying Criteria Changes – Small Sensor Photography by Thomas Stirr

NASA Is Using Red and Blue 3D Glasses to Pilot Mars Rover from Home

Journalists are morons when it comes to 3D:

The quarantine also meant they no longer had access to their special 3D goggles

Source: NASA Is Using Red and Blue 3D Glasses to Pilot Mars Rover from Home

They literally rave over “VR HELMETS” but tell us that “3D goggles” were unwieldy. Have covered this many, many times.  Many reporters call 3D glasses  “goggles” but then write enthusiastically about VR helmets – this makes no sense what so ever.

Drones take to the skies in overhead police-state surveillance in US East Coast cities

Last Friday, the mayor of Elizabeth, New Jersey, where there are more than 1,400 confirmed cases of COVID-19, announced plans to deploy drones to enforce social-distancing rules.

Source: Social Distancing Enforcement Drones Arrive in the U.S.

Yesterday I looked up the CDC’s rules on isolation and quarantine. They have the power to apprehend and move anyone with a contagious disease into quarantine. They also have a similar power for those who are thought to be a direct risk of spreading the  disease due to likely  having direct contact with the sick. I could not find anything giving them the right to order the quarantine of healthy people. Would like to see others with more knowledge on that topic provide us with some insight.

It seems the CDC has chosen to declare that everyone in the country is a high risk spreader of disease, which seems questionable.

China using #drones to enforce quarantine

Source: China adapts surveying, mapping, delivery drones to enforce world’s biggest quarantine and contain coronavirus outbreak | South China Morning Post

They are being used with sensors to detect people out and about, and to broadcast public health announcements from overhead speakers.

I wonder how long until the AmazonUPSGoogle drone fleets decide to play loud advertising as they fly low over our homes and cities?

FAA NPRM: The goal is to create toll roads in the sky and eliminate most recreational flight

“We’re building infrastructure to manage drones, those flying 400 feet or below and weighing 55 pounds or less,” Healander said. “We’re building highways in the sky or toll roads for commercial and recreational drones.

Source: Group pushing for drone highway over our heads

Looks like the  real reason for the Remote ID NPRM just got loose! Its about creating toll roads in the air six feet off the ground in our backyards.

The FAA, Homeland Security, and private industry have taken ownership of the air in your backyard (and inside your home – see my NPRM comments) and then will charge you a fee to access this airspace.

The FAA says it has the right to regulate the “navigable airspace” of the United States and it, not Congress, has defined that to be ground level and up.  This means the airspace in your backyard starting at ground level.

In the NPRM, the FAA envisions a world where only “compliant” drones are sold. A compliant drone is not capable of flight if it cannot receive a GPS signal – in other words cannot be flown in most indoor locations as GPS signals do  not penetrate most buildings. Through this NPRM, the FAA regulates your use of indoor airspace too. Thus, the FAA is asserting it regulates all “air” in the United States including inside your own home.

But, says the FAA, you can use the airspace in your backyard or inside your home if you pay a fee to be monitored in real time, sending data through your cellular phone data plan ($)  to a third-party, privatized air traffic control system, charging a fee for service.

This regulatory scheme is predicated on a hypothesized massive threat from model aircraft.

If you read the above article, the people quoted vastly exaggerate the risk of drones – as noted in my own comments on the NPRM, the FAA left out that “industry experts” said there was no drone, in one of their examples, and in another scary story they told of a drone flying over a stadium, the FAA left out that it was flown by a child. Four of the FAA’s cited references went to “page not found” errors.  If the threat is so great, why do they have to omit key details in their evidence?

The goal is to privatize the airspace and restrict  use to the wealthy, large corporations and government. That is what many in industry want to happen and they are pressuring the FAA to adopt rules that would meet industry’s desire. From the above linked article, we see this is the case – the goal is to create toll roads above our heads.

The FAA’s NPRM on Remote ID  seems written by industry and Homeland Security – and  eliminates as many recreational users of the airspace as possible  to privatize the airspace for profit. By mandating real time tracking and logging of every recreational flight, the FAA may use software to find infractions, even minor ones, and automatically generate fines. This creates a “fear” factor that will ground most everyone.

Post 9/11, the FAA tweaked regulations in a way that largely grounded many of the nation’s ultralight aircraft. They did this by eliminating the waiver for 2-seat ultralight trainers – this largely ended the availability of flight training for ultralight aircraft and the ultralight market collapsed.  20 years ago, popular air shows had acres of ultralights on display. At a huge air show I attended more recently, there were five ultralights on display. Everyone I asked told me the same story – the FAA de facto eliminated ultralight flying – because, they said, Homeland Security was scared of ultralights. And they all noted that air shows used to have acres of aircraft.

The FAA  will not ban model aircraft but instead are being pushed to create rules and regulations that have the same effect, limiting model aircraft to the wealthy (and limited locations) and to drones operated by the AmazonUPSGoogle cartels flying 100′ over our homes, collecting aerial surveillance imagery and wireless signals that will be analyzed for consumer product opportunities (and sold to local governments and law enforcement as well), and for use by international foreign espionage. (Think of the business intelligence  gathered from low flights over competitors business facilities.)

The “cat is out of the bag“, so to speak. The primary purpose of this Remote ID NPRM is to privatize the airspace for industry. The FAA   can accomplish that by exaggerating  the risks of model aircraft and use that as justification to create an expensive, Rube Goldberg-like complex, expensive, privatized air traffic control system. Entrepreneurs see an economic opportunity to create toll roads in the air to clear out the airspace for industrial applications.  Those entrepreneurs do not have a business unless you are mandated to subscribe to their services. (A  genuine business would sell its products and services based on value to the customer – here, there is generally no value delivered to recreational flyers.) To that end, they have run a PR campaign fostering fear and hysteria over recreational drone usage in order to provide cover for unnecessary and draconian regulations.

I hope you have filed comments with the FAA – comments are due by March 2nd. There is plenty of information on this blog on how to do that.

U.S. government “Tips for Submitting Effective Comments” regarding FAA NPRM on Remote ID

Here is the Federal government’s official guideline for submitting comments regarding notices of proposed rulemaking:

Tips for Submitting Effective Comments (PDF)

Some organizations have encouraged their members to submit “Form letters” and barely modified “Templates” as a submission. As noted on this blog last month, this is the wrong way to go about making a difference in the rule making proceeding.

Here is the official statement from the U.S. government on the Regulations.gov web site:

Form Letters
Organizations often encourage their members to submit form letters designed to address issues common to their membership. Organizations including industry associations, labor unions, and conservation groups sometimes use form letters to voice their opposition or support of a proposed rulemaking. Many in the public mistakenly believe that their submitted form letter constitutes a “vote” regarding the issues concerning them. Although public support or opposition may help guide important public policies, agencies make determinations for a proposed action based on sound reasoning and scientific evidence rather than a majority of votes. A single, well-supported comment may carry more weight than a thousand form letters.

Of course as showed previously, many comments were filed by those that followed some organizations’ misdirection to file form letters.

When I checked this morning, I found this in the comment file including the first one labeled “Template”.

From the linked PDF above:

8. The comment process is not a vote. The government is attempting to formulate the best policy, so when crafting a comment it is important that you adequately explain the reasoning behind your position.
9. Identify credentials and experience that may distinguish your comments from others. If you are commenting in an area in which you have relevant personal or professional experience (i.e., scientist, attorney, fisherman, businessman, etc.) say so.
10. Agency reviewers look for sound science and reasoning in the comments they receive. When possible, support your comment with substantive data, facts, and/or expert opinions. You may also provide personal experience in your comment, as may be appropriate. By supporting your arguments well you are more likely to influence the agency decision making.

If you still wish to file a form letter and submit a template letter with “Template” as the first word of your comment, go right ahead and waste your time.

Guide to 3D VR video and photos