NYC view from RC plane
 

Guy flying RC camera plane around the city. Suprised he didnt get locked up.

Some great shots.

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/M9cSxEqKQ78&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&versi on=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/M9cSxEqKQ78&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&versi on=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

A couple of years ago an Australian brought to light the fact that with modern RC components and off-the-shelf hardware, anyone could make a DIY "cruise missile".

I'm glad the TSA is keeping us safe.

Great video, looks like he might have done some preliminary damage control with authorities. Who knows?

He never gets onto Manhattan Island.

That's all Brooklyn.

That was a cool video. Thanks for sharing.

Theres a couple of spots where hes actually over Mahattan

I assume he's flying via VR goggles?

Cool!

FPV is really getting popular these days, the price of equipment is coming down due to market saturation ( I think ) . There are some pretty strict rules as far as altitude and distance set by the Academy of Model Aeronautics, I am pretty sure he broke most of them.

I always cringe when I see these folks who selfishly endanger our hobby to indulge themselves.

Flying Radio Control Airplanes over populated areas is inherently dangerous. Most modelers do not put in system redundancies to handle problems that might arise with radio interference and other types of failures to ensure that the people you're flying over are not needlessly endangered.

I might be a kill joy but I really don't care. I've been flying RC airplanes since I was 8 years old - 29 years now. I don't want my hobby taken away - it is hard enough to do it in the Los Angeles area with it being as packed with people as it is. I'm lucky that we have a large field in the valley that is reachable to me but if that were lost then I believe my only recourse would be to move.

I'd probably need a divorce to do that.

These people who fly FPV like this endanger people flying light aircraft. The FAA is looking at making rules about RC Aircraft which really is the worst thing that could happen.

Sure - they are neat pictures but my hobby (selfishly but there are many like me) would be safer without them.

Kinda scary what someone could do with that. Both destructive or surveillance????

Well, if there are Rules, then no bad-guys will ever use this technology against us. :rolleyes:

Looks like maybe he got to FDR shore and went no farther.

Yeah , looks like right over the FDR. He took of from the Brooklyn Promenade, Any farther hed probably be out of RC range.
I like the end, where the NYPD highway cop is telling him to do a flyover of him.

I understand Mikes point though. Stunts like can do have an impact on the hobby. the flying club I belonged to, lost its field because of nearby residents complaining of being buzzed by planes. something liek this definately has the potential to be dangerous. Those areas hes flying in have extremely heavy copter traffic.

i wonder what might have happened if he had tried to fly over the intrepid.

It's actually not about terrorism but 'sUAVs' or Small Unmanned Air Vehicles.

The FAA it trying to determine where RC models fit into the whole spectrum of UAVs and Man carrying Aircraft and how they can allow commercial interests to do their thing in a regulated airspace and still permit modelers to enjoy their hobby.

I predict that no good will come of it for me.

I believe your comment is in regards to a commend I made in one of the TSA threads and you're taking what I said out of one context and applying it to another unrelated context, if I'm mistaken I'll leave it at that. But if I'm not - are you running for office perhaps and practicing your form on me?

was regarding this

Gotcha. My Sarcasm gun got away from me, sometimes it has a mind of its own...

I'll apologize for my sharpness with you.

I'm an FPV'er. I have not followed the rules in the last 6 months, but a lot was still unwritten and just guidelines. I do know that you do have to be careful, especially with bigger planes. My telemetry is in a 3 meter glider and by the time batteries and lead goes in, it does get a bit heavy and could be quite the lawn dart if something happens while tooling around at 3,000' MSL.

I hope UAV's and the like are not banned. It would be a shame. I think the jets are more of a problem. At least two crash and start fires at the basin every year.

yeah, Mikester --Run-away sarcasm-- happens to me All o' the time. --no worries ;)

My engineering side knows of SO Many off-the-shelf bits that could be MacGivered together for bad intent, that the cruz-missile scenario really resonates with me. ...w/o even trying. That is, with so much easy computational power (even in an old cell phone) , it's only a matter of time before the bad-guys go there.

Yet, the 'officials' will first take away the tech-toys of responsible people. Just so they'll feel like they are doing something useful. --of course they are not, but they feel it.

It's actually probably more than that. My personal opinion is that Jets should not be flown at the Basin. We have had to cancel a few Jet specific events due to conflicts with other events and the club tries to be very aware of what other events are going on on weekends where a big jet event is happening. The club plans the event schedule in October of the previous year and approves it by December or January. We work with Parks and Recs to make sure we aren't conflicting with any big festivals and if we do - we move things. If we find out that some big event is going to happen after we have already finalized our schedule - the Jet event might be canceled - it has happened, in fact I think it happened last weekend but I'm not sure of all the details. Our 'Jet director' on the board for the club quit this year after a crash that caused a small fire and endangered some folks at a park across the street from the field. To be honest though, while it was a jet - it could have been ANY airplane including your lawn dart (or my own). My supposition is that his departure was directly related to that incident - it spooked him.

Dave - I don't want to be too critical of you personally - but I have expressed my opinion. I am not perfectly safe myself but I try to be reasonable. I know a guy down here in the south bay that flies his easy star up and down the coast with his buddy driving a car and him in the back seat. Sure it's fun and the video is damned cool but it is risky.

What can terrorists do? Well, they can do whatever they want. They don't have to worry about the law do they...

I have thought about that as well and all I can do is be vigilant if I see something way out of whack. I don't even know what that might be...I guess I will when I see it. I do think that this renegade FPV stuff sure seems close to it though.

My point mainly is that it is risky to the hobby and people just don't seem to get that. They thing 'hey, I'm just having a good time' and they don't see that it takes our accident prone models and takes them out of our usually kind of controlled environments and puts them out there in the wide open national airspace. It's just irresponsible. Do it at the field, fly around the field, keep it safe and as controlled as possible or take it out to the desert. Stay under 400' and use a spotter or two to keep track of the airspace.

Mike,

I understand. :) My glider would be hard pressed to catch anything on fire, since it carries not fuel, but if I have the video gear in it, that means a Li-Po is in it too and that could burst. The other batteries are NiMh I'm not too worried about them catching fire.

As far as the 400' rule, that really seems to be in effect around real airports, like VNY, which the Apollo filed is very close to. I have yet to see an actual rule created by the FAA or AMA that dictates that I need to stay at or below 400' if I am 5 miles+ from the nearest airport. Since I fly at Pierce, I am out of that circle. As far as distance, our club was really into setting records, but everything was done in the desert, away from the general population.

The 400' rule is also why you don't see me at the basin. It's just no fun at the altitude. :) When I am not flying FPV, I enjoy trying to set altitude records (unofficial).

As far as using RC planes as guided missiles, naw.... I can't see that happening. :D
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/FJciEH-qdT0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/FJciEH-qdT0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
The A, B and C are waypoints, so yes, i could program in a buildings coordinates and it would be easy to remotely fly to it and...

I have so much info available to me with my telemetry, it's just too easy to do.

The 400' rule is an FAA rule for the entirety of the national air space - I have seen the rule but I'm not sure where to look for it and I'm studying for some test for work right now so I can't take the time to look for it.

I'll ask someone I know who works for the FAA though...I could be wrong.

As of last year, the FAA had no rule about this and I still don't think there is. There is a guideline under one of the AC's to stay below 400', but it's not a rule or law. That's not to say things have changed in 2010. I was actively reading the discussions about all this on rcgroups last year and the beginning of this year.

EDIT: Here's a link to the pdf on the AMA's website. This was from last year and was the purposed rules. If anything past, it would have been in the last two weeks, as there is a current thread on rcuniverse on this.
http://www.modelaircraft.org/faa/recommendations.pdf

If nothing else, I'll throw a mode C transponder in there, set to 1200.. Problem solved. :)

FAA AC from 1981:
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/1acfc3f689769a56862569e70077c9cc/$FILE/ATTBJMAC/ac91-57.pdf

Ah yes, the difference between a rule and a law... :)

Read the AC, it's voluntary. :) Yes, rule/law - law just sounds so menacing. :D