Western Rifle Shooters Association

Do not give in to Evil, but proceed ever more boldly against it

Friday, February 26, 2010

Up In The Sky

Please review this collection of UAVs.

Think about what this means.

Think, also, about how to build their FreeFor equivalents and/or countermeasures.



Blogger Sean said...

They're already using this stuff on us, in Houston. Like anything else the statists do, it can be overcome and neutralized. As in counter-aircraft, and our own surveillance stuff. I also think some of our own people could be dedicated to doing things to keep this stuff occupied and interested, whilst the real game is played somewhere else. Should be a hell of a dance.

February 26, 2010 at 2:43 PM  
Blogger dakotas5 said...

Already seen helo version flying here in Ozarks. Experiment?

February 26, 2010 at 3:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let's watch the tap dancing the first time one of these takes out a Cessna 172 or some farmer in his antique Cub...or will those wrecks be tagged as 'pilot error' or 'unknown causes'?

February 26, 2010 at 5:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The same radio control, attitude stabilization, camera, and navigation systems would run a full-size aircraft, if the human-sized controls could be operated. There are youtubes of a group that used pneumatic cylinders to drive an old car around the desert, and the radio control range could be extended by switching to cell phones. It is possible to construct a roughly man-sized and shaped framework with one arm with a rotary hand to turn a steering wheel, and two legs to push gas and brake, that could be strapped into the seat of whatever vehicle is handy. Although currently expensive, this universal driving robot could be treated as disposable. What if that suicide-pilot software engineer had started building and selling "Agent Smith" remote pilot robots for $10K each, instead of self-destructing? Is there any existing law that specifically bans driver-simulator robots? Consider the huge peacetime market for automating existing farming, mining, and construction vehicles. Would the bans be implemented by BATFER (for robots)?

"...pry the flight control yoke out of my robot's cold, dead, hand"

February 26, 2010 at 5:44 PM  
Blogger Mayberry said...

I'm thinking a remote controlled model of "Enola Gay" that can drop hand grenades, heh heh heh. A miniaturized version of a .50 on board, that can shred their little spy toys. That would be cool....

February 26, 2010 at 5:58 PM  
Blogger Loren said...


February 26, 2010 at 6:03 PM  
Blogger pdxr13 said...

The ones that really "work" (in a cost-effective disposable way) now are small-ish and/or Israeli. USA defense contractors seem to really like the models that have massive high-tech complexity guaranteeing high-volume profits and long contracts more than battlefield usefulness.

Giving SkyNet a bunch of self-directed armed air assets sounds like a bad idea. Robots that can be remotely controlled can be hacked and become enemy assets.

The same MANPADS that can shoot down manned aircraft can shoot down unmanned aircraft. The little unarmed aircraft are like gnats to be caught in nets.

The ultimate defense against UAV's is to get them on the ground, and to attack the operators in their ConEx boxes. UAV's in the air are a difficult target until they come down to buckshot altitude.

The solar-powered model lingering at 55K feet could be removed with weighted wires tossed over it or a spray of water/ice killing lift or paint blocking the sun to panels. Fortunately, high-linger means low-maneuverability, butterfly fragility, and easy targeting (if you can get to 55K).


February 26, 2010 at 7:33 PM  
Blogger Matt said...

Make vol. 19 had the central topic of robots and had several articles on UAVs, including a blimp project.

"Open Source UAV projects" as a search string yields some useful results for the technically oriented.

diydrones.com is a good starting point as well.

February 26, 2010 at 8:24 PM  
Blogger Texas Shooter said...

So, are there any laws against hurling lead pellets at obviously remote-controlled objects that are "violating your airspace"?

Hell of a dance, indeed!

February 26, 2010 at 9:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the drone/UAV transmits video or telemetry it can be tracked and jammed.
These non-military UAV’s use standard radio gear. I could see 2+ Watt transmitter completely overwhelming the on-board receivers.

February 26, 2010 at 10:38 PM  
Blogger Scamp1776 said...

The bestus place to destroy aircraft or return them to the Citizens who paid for 'em is ON THE GROUND... history is so cool:


Higher Luftwaffe kill ratio than the RAF - in North Africa. Light Infantry/Dragoons rule...

February 26, 2010 at 11:31 PM  
Blogger Rogue Ghost said...

There are actually quite a few that you do not see there. The Army has a Predator variant too. There is also a helo one that is about the size of a Litte Bird called the Firescout that they are testing as well. They are using these things everywhere. Texas and Arizona for sure.

February 27, 2010 at 12:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Scary indeed. Did make me wonder about the counter-aircraft idea. It seems the .gov drones are either recon or air-ground, but are not fitted for aerial engagements. For some of the smaller, lower-flying versions, I wonder what it would take to mount and control a camera and maybe a 7.62 AR assembly. Been too long since I've worked with aircraft and design, and have yet to get funds to experiment.

February 27, 2010 at 1:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Comm disruption, if you can keep up with alternatives and enhancements.. plus, if you "miss" one, you're in trouble.....

Detection, think FLIR. A good group can pony up the cash for a civi version of automotive FLIR systems. Look in the skies for heat sigs. Only the big stuff will be visible. The little guys, packed with explosives as suicide bots, are a different matter. Locally controlled, like RC helos, they would be a pain to detect, interdict, and fend off.

Interceptors. Long range control is an issue, and control that is hard to interrupt..... Some kitchen developers will have a time with that!

Confusing the eyes in the sky will require:
.knowing that they're there
.knowing what they can see
.knowing what they can determine is fakery...

Good luck....

February 27, 2010 at 3:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Then there's the fact that satellites can also do "all of the above." Check out the "google earth" shots of your house - you can see the cars in my driveway and my dog in the yard - and you KNOW the .mil has even better stuff.

Can't worry about such things. Be a "gray man" as much as possible and plan to work solo if forced into action. BLEND. It's the prairie-dog/groundhog/gopher/etc who sticks his head up that gets nailed - practice keeping yours down...

February 27, 2010 at 9:05 AM  
Anonymous Happy D said...

Any duck hunters Here?

Just 1 option.

February 28, 2010 at 9:43 AM  
Anonymous Happy D said...

Anyone here know what a maser is?

Just another option.

March 1, 2010 at 8:39 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home