On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 01:30:39 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 18:18:20 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 15:56:06 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:45:37 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 17:01:24 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

...eagle takes down annoying drone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr-xBtVU4lg

Hope this happens everywhere...



No you don't, dumb****. What happened to the eagle (if that's what it was). Those
propellers will easily take off a finger, let alone cut up an eagle, or hawk or any
other bird, very badly. You'll note the drone is still transmitting, which means the
owner can easily retrieve and repair it.

No one knows what happened to the bird. I hope it made it.

And I hope you learned something.

Myth busters tested drones. All but the biggest were pretty much
harmless. Some of the big commercial ones with carbon fiber blades can
leave a mark ;-)

I've seen the damage a plastic airplane propeller going at a much slower rpm can do
to a leather covered ottoman corner. Ate right through it to the stuffing. My wife
was very unhappy. I'm thinking your 'myth busters' test is bull****. Although small
and plastic, those props are going several thousand rpm, and they're very sharp.

Here's a view of some of the damage caused with the airplane/drone that caused the
problem, in some cases. It's in French, but you get the idea. Imagine if those cuts
were in an eagle's neck? Or a foot joint?

http://chrismeme11.over-blog.com/article-36258812.html

Dunno. They were using a few different small hobby drones hitting a
ballistic gel dummy and watching it on a high speed camera.

This really comes down to this being a very light propeller driven by
a pretty weak motor. You can't compare that to the old 2 stroke model
airplanes.

Wrong. Do some research on these 'weak' little motors.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 17:15:37 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 01:30:39 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 18:18:20 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 15:56:06 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:45:37 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 17:01:24 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

...eagle takes down annoying drone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr-xBtVU4lg

Hope this happens everywhere...



No you don't, dumb****. What happened to the eagle (if that's what it was). Those
propellers will easily take off a finger, let alone cut up an eagle, or hawk or any
other bird, very badly. You'll note the drone is still transmitting, which means the
owner can easily retrieve and repair it.

No one knows what happened to the bird. I hope it made it.

And I hope you learned something.

Myth busters tested drones. All but the biggest were pretty much
harmless. Some of the big commercial ones with carbon fiber blades can
leave a mark ;-)

I've seen the damage a plastic airplane propeller going at a much slower rpm can do
to a leather covered ottoman corner. Ate right through it to the stuffing. My wife
was very unhappy. I'm thinking your 'myth busters' test is bull****. Although small
and plastic, those props are going several thousand rpm, and they're very sharp.

Here's a view of some of the damage caused with the airplane/drone that caused the
problem, in some cases. It's in French, but you get the idea. Imagine if those cuts
were in an eagle's neck? Or a foot joint?

http://chrismeme11.over-blog.com/article-36258812.html

Dunno. They were using a few different small hobby drones hitting a
ballistic gel dummy and watching it on a high speed camera.

This really comes down to this being a very light propeller driven by
a pretty weak motor. You can't compare that to the old 2 stroke model
airplanes.

Wrong. Do some research on these 'weak' little motors.

What kind of drone are you talking about? If it is a hobby drone, they
use a little stepper motor like dozens of machines I have worked on. I
suggest you track down that Mythbusters show and look at the high
speed photos of the drones smacking into ballistic gel.

I also think you underestimate the "armor" presented by feathers in
big birds. That is why goose hunters shoot "BB" shot or even 4 buck. A
goose will shake a 1 oz load of #8s out of their feathers and keep
flying.

BDTD.

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 17:15:37 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 01:30:39 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 18:18:20 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 15:56:06 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:45:37 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 17:01:24 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

...eagle takes down annoying drone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr-xBtVU4lg

Hope this happens everywhere...



No you don't, dumb****. What happened to the eagle (if that's what it was). Those
propellers will easily take off a finger, let alone cut up an eagle, or hawk or any
other bird, very badly. You'll note the drone is still transmitting, which means the
owner can easily retrieve and repair it.

No one knows what happened to the bird. I hope it made it.

And I hope you learned something.

Myth busters tested drones. All but the biggest were pretty much
harmless. Some of the big commercial ones with carbon fiber blades can
leave a mark ;-)

I've seen the damage a plastic airplane propeller going at a much slower rpm can do
to a leather covered ottoman corner. Ate right through it to the stuffing. My wife
was very unhappy. I'm thinking your 'myth busters' test is bull****. Although small
and plastic, those props are going several thousand rpm, and they're very sharp.

Here's a view of some of the damage caused with the airplane/drone that caused the
problem, in some cases. It's in French, but you get the idea. Imagine if those cuts
were in an eagle's neck? Or a foot joint?

http://chrismeme11.over-blog.com/article-36258812.html

Dunno. They were using a few different small hobby drones hitting a
ballistic gel dummy and watching it on a high speed camera.

This really comes down to this being a very light propeller driven by
a pretty weak motor. You can't compare that to the old 2 stroke model
airplanes.

Wrong. Do some research on these 'weak' little motors.



http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/my...s-kill-people/

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 19:40:49 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 17:15:37 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 01:30:39 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 18:18:20 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 15:56:06 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:45:37 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 17:01:24 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

...eagle takes down annoying drone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr-xBtVU4lg

Hope this happens everywhere...



No you don't, dumb****. What happened to the eagle (if that's what it was). Those
propellers will easily take off a finger, let alone cut up an eagle, or hawk or any
other bird, very badly. You'll note the drone is still transmitting, which means the
owner can easily retrieve and repair it.

No one knows what happened to the bird. I hope it made it.

And I hope you learned something.

Myth busters tested drones. All but the biggest were pretty much
harmless. Some of the big commercial ones with carbon fiber blades can
leave a mark ;-)

I've seen the damage a plastic airplane propeller going at a much slower rpm can do
to a leather covered ottoman corner. Ate right through it to the stuffing. My wife
was very unhappy. I'm thinking your 'myth busters' test is bull****. Although small
and plastic, those props are going several thousand rpm, and they're very sharp.

Here's a view of some of the damage caused with the airplane/drone that caused the
problem, in some cases. It's in French, but you get the idea. Imagine if those cuts
were in an eagle's neck? Or a foot joint?

http://chrismeme11.over-blog.com/article-36258812.html

Dunno. They were using a few different small hobby drones hitting a
ballistic gel dummy and watching it on a high speed camera.

This really comes down to this being a very light propeller driven by
a pretty weak motor. You can't compare that to the old 2 stroke model
airplanes.

Wrong. Do some research on these 'weak' little motors.



http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/my...s-kill-people/

Well, I suppose all the cuts in the article I cited could have been fake. I know this
was caused by a plastic propeller on an electric motor.

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l2...1/P1010681.jpg

Yes, they were using small drones, with small motors and very flimsy propellers. Not
all drones are small, not all have very small motors, and not all have very flimsy
propellers. The flimsy propellers will not stand up to a decent breeze.

As to a comparison between gas and electric:


"With the changes in rc electric motor technology it is possible to fly ANY size
model using rc plane electric motors. The biggest leap in making this possible has
been two fold. First we have model airplane electric engines that are powerful
enough, not to mention much more efficient, that they rival or even surpass
gas/slimers/smokers/nitro hogs, or whatever else you may call rc airplane gas
engines."

"Example: Hangar 9 Arrow with a .40 size gas engine would require an electric rc
motor equivalent to an AXI 2826/12 External Rotor Brushless. "
[from: http://www.rcmb.org/Electric_Info/glow_elec_bonus4.pdf]

What is an AXI 2826?12 External Rotor Brushless?

http://www.hobbyexpress.com/brushless_axi2826.htm

Note the specs: Motor Diameter 1 3/8"

And I'm sure you'll recall the .40 gasser was a decent sized engine with a propeller
that could do some serious damage.

Yup, you're probably right that the drone might not be as bad as a load of buckshot.
Might not cut through all those feathers. But then again, it just might catch the
bird in the neck, in an eye, or on a wing tip.

In any case, wishing more eagles would attack drones is, IMHO, pretty friggin'
stupid.

--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 15:44:19 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 19:40:49 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 17:15:37 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 01:30:39 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 18:18:20 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 15:56:06 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:45:37 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 17:01:24 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

...eagle takes down annoying drone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr-xBtVU4lg

Hope this happens everywhere...



No you don't, dumb****. What happened to the eagle (if that's what it was). Those
propellers will easily take off a finger, let alone cut up an eagle, or hawk or any
other bird, very badly. You'll note the drone is still transmitting, which means the
owner can easily retrieve and repair it.

No one knows what happened to the bird. I hope it made it.

And I hope you learned something.

Myth busters tested drones. All but the biggest were pretty much
harmless. Some of the big commercial ones with carbon fiber blades can
leave a mark ;-)

I've seen the damage a plastic airplane propeller going at a much slower rpm can do
to a leather covered ottoman corner. Ate right through it to the stuffing. My wife
was very unhappy. I'm thinking your 'myth busters' test is bull****. Although small
and plastic, those props are going several thousand rpm, and they're very sharp.

Here's a view of some of the damage caused with the airplane/drone that caused the
problem, in some cases. It's in French, but you get the idea. Imagine if those cuts
were in an eagle's neck? Or a foot joint?

http://chrismeme11.over-blog.com/article-36258812.html

Dunno. They were using a few different small hobby drones hitting a
ballistic gel dummy and watching it on a high speed camera.

This really comes down to this being a very light propeller driven by
a pretty weak motor. You can't compare that to the old 2 stroke model
airplanes.

Wrong. Do some research on these 'weak' little motors.



http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/my...s-kill-people/

Well, I suppose all the cuts in the article I cited could have been fake. I know this
was caused by a plastic propeller on an electric motor.

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l2...1/P1010681.jpg

Yes, they were using small drones, with small motors and very flimsy propellers. Not
all drones are small, not all have very small motors, and not all have very flimsy
propellers. The flimsy propellers will not stand up to a decent breeze.

As to a comparison between gas and electric:


"With the changes in rc electric motor technology it is possible to fly ANY size
model using rc plane electric motors. The biggest leap in making this possible has
been two fold. First we have model airplane electric engines that are powerful
enough, not to mention much more efficient, that they rival or even surpass
gas/slimers/smokers/nitro hogs, or whatever else you may call rc airplane gas
engines."

"Example: Hangar 9 Arrow with a .40 size gas engine would require an electric rc
motor equivalent to an AXI 2826/12 External Rotor Brushless. "
[from: http://www.rcmb.org/Electric_Info/glow_elec_bonus4.pdf]

What is an AXI 2826?12 External Rotor Brushless?

http://www.hobbyexpress.com/brushless_axi2826.htm

Note the specs: Motor Diameter 1 3/8"

And I'm sure you'll recall the .40 gasser was a decent sized engine with a propeller
that could do some serious damage.

Yup, you're probably right that the drone might not be as bad as a load of buckshot.
Might not cut through all those feathers. But then again, it just might catch the
bird in the neck, in an eye, or on a wing tip.

In any case, wishing more eagles would attack drones is, IMHO, pretty friggin'
stupid.

OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it
to myself if you like flying them ;-)

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 15:44:19 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 19:40:49 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 17:15:37 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Thu, 05 Nov 2015 01:30:39 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 18:18:20 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 15:56:06 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 04 Nov 2015 14:45:37 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Tue, 3 Nov 2015 17:01:24 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

...eagle takes down annoying drone:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hr-xBtVU4lg

Hope this happens everywhere...



No you don't, dumb****. What happened to the eagle (if that's what it was). Those
propellers will easily take off a finger, let alone cut up an eagle, or hawk or any
other bird, very badly. You'll note the drone is still transmitting, which means the
owner can easily retrieve and repair it.

No one knows what happened to the bird. I hope it made it.

And I hope you learned something.

Myth busters tested drones. All but the biggest were pretty much
harmless. Some of the big commercial ones with carbon fiber blades can
leave a mark ;-)

I've seen the damage a plastic airplane propeller going at a much slower rpm can do
to a leather covered ottoman corner. Ate right through it to the stuffing. My wife
was very unhappy. I'm thinking your 'myth busters' test is bull****. Although small
and plastic, those props are going several thousand rpm, and they're very sharp.

Here's a view of some of the damage caused with the airplane/drone that caused the
problem, in some cases. It's in French, but you get the idea. Imagine if those cuts
were in an eagle's neck? Or a foot joint?

http://chrismeme11.over-blog.com/article-36258812.html

Dunno. They were using a few different small hobby drones hitting a
ballistic gel dummy and watching it on a high speed camera.

This really comes down to this being a very light propeller driven by
a pretty weak motor. You can't compare that to the old 2 stroke model
airplanes.

Wrong. Do some research on these 'weak' little motors.



http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/my...s-kill-people/

Well, I suppose all the cuts in the article I cited could have been fake. I know this
was caused by a plastic propeller on an electric motor.

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l2...1/P1010681.jpg

Yes, they were using small drones, with small motors and very flimsy propellers. Not
all drones are small, not all have very small motors, and not all have very flimsy
propellers. The flimsy propellers will not stand up to a decent breeze.

As to a comparison between gas and electric:


"With the changes in rc electric motor technology it is possible to fly ANY size
model using rc plane electric motors. The biggest leap in making this possible has
been two fold. First we have model airplane electric engines that are powerful
enough, not to mention much more efficient, that they rival or even surpass
gas/slimers/smokers/nitro hogs, or whatever else you may call rc airplane gas
engines."

"Example: Hangar 9 Arrow with a .40 size gas engine would require an electric rc
motor equivalent to an AXI 2826/12 External Rotor Brushless. "
[from: http://www.rcmb.org/Electric_Info/glow_elec_bonus4.pdf]

What is an AXI 2826?12 External Rotor Brushless?

http://www.hobbyexpress.com/brushless_axi2826.htm

Note the specs: Motor Diameter 1 3/8"

And I'm sure you'll recall the .40 gasser was a decent sized engine with a propeller
that could do some serious damage.

Yup, you're probably right that the drone might not be as bad as a load of buckshot.
Might not cut through all those feathers. But then again, it just might catch the
bird in the neck, in an eye, or on a wing tip.

In any case, wishing more eagles would attack drones is, IMHO, pretty friggin'
stupid.

OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it
to myself if you like flying them ;-)

We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)!
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 06:22:41 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote:


OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it
to myself if you like flying them ;-)

We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)!

If you say that out loud about the ones the FAA considers hobby
machines, get ready for much more regulation.

On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 11:49:59 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Mon, 09 Nov 2015 06:22:41 -0500, John H.
wrote:

On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 22:25:23 -0500, wrote:


OK you win, they are flying death machines but I think I would keep it
to myself if you like flying them ;-)

We're flying machines that could hurt a bird (or a human for that matter)!

If you say that out loud about the ones the FAA considers hobby
machines, get ready for much more regulation.

There have been plenty of people hurt, and a couple that I know of killed, by RC airplanes over the years. That has not driven any regulation. The whole problem with the new "drones" (more properly quadcopters, drones are sophisticated military killing machines) is that they can be flown nearly anywhere by anyone with the cash to buy one and with minimal skills.

The RC hobby was, and still is, almost entirely self-regulated since the skills to fly an airplane or heli are slowly learned, require assistance, and require a sizable area in which to learn and fly. That almost always means there is a club with its rules and regs, and the requisite membership in a RC organization that provides landowner and member insurance coverage.

Unfortunately the proliferation of inexpensive gyro stabilized quadcopters with cameras, coupled with a few ignorant assholes that have bought them and use them improperly, has driven proposed regulation that may affect large groups of very safety conscious, responsible RC hobbyists.