Another illegal flight that could threaten the hobby, this time in Australia.

https://thewest.com.au/news/wa/d ... plane-ng-b88439235z

Perhaps manufacturers should start allowing motor arming only after flight location is established and blocking the use of 3rd party apps unless they feed flight log information to a flight log server so that should a legal contest arise, the offending person can be taken to court.

What do others think?

Fake, look at the angle of the 'drone' - Drones tend to stay straight, that one is at a weird angle. Guy probably feels that drones are taking punters away from his 'photography' business.

Fake
If you look closely the sky looks normal but around the drone it is all pixelated. My guess is photoshop.

I think it's weird that drone is the same size as 2-3 letters on the side of the plane.  It makes me think the drone is significantly closer than the depth of field makes it look.  OR it's fake.

The photographer is risking his reputation and potentially, livelihood as this went viral. Any Aussies chiming in? There was a story recently where a woman lied that she had a 'brain tumour' that responded dramatically to 'natural treatment' which she was promoting. She was since prosecuted and her business ruined.

I think that IF this is really real...I'm sure we would see it on YouTube or some other media of the footage from that quad.  I personally think it is fake and unfortunately there are people out there that are willing to risk there reputation and business' to "get a story" or "get recognized" and therefore business increases, etc.   

I would think that the quad operator would NOT post that anyplace, because there are WAY too many people watching for a post on that....but criminals are kinda stupid.

I don't think it is necessarily a fake photo, but I fully agree with method007 that is is a result of false perspective. The drone is both lower and closer to the camera than it appears.

Mike-the-cat Posted at 2017-4-7 04:24
The photographer is risking his reputation and potentially, livelihood as this went viral. Any Aussies chiming in? There was a story recently where a woman lied that she had a 'brain tumour' that responded dramatically to 'natural treatment' which she was promoting. She was since prosecuted and her business ruined.

MTC
looks fake and possible he is trying to bring more negative light to drones ? I think this  video should be investigated for tampering and this guy fined if found guilty

Rich

RichJ53 Posted at 2017-4-10 16:29
MTC
looks fake and possible he is trying to bring more negative light to drones ? I think this  video should be investigated for tampering and this guy fined if found guilty

Under what laws?

RichJ53 Posted at 2017-4-10 16:29
MTC
looks fake and possible he is trying to bring more negative light to drones ? I think this  video should be investigated for tampering and this guy fined if found guilty

Don't know what the follow up to this post was. Geebax might know better...

Mike-the-cat Posted at 2017-4-10 17:23
Don't know what the follow up to this post was. Geebax might know better...

No, I know nothing more than what is linked to here. This was such a momentous event it was not even reported on my side of the country.

If you convert to jpg and import to photoshop,  convert to b/w image and zoom on the drone, you will see that it was a cut and paste job.

Geebax Posted at 2017-4-10 17:35
No, I know nothing more than what is linked to here. This was such a momentous event it was not even reported on my side of the country.

Looks like someone in WA is looking to tar flying of MRs...

Kneepuck Posted at 2017-4-10 18:03
If you convert to jpg and import to photoshop,  convert to b/w image and zoom on the drone, you will see that it was a cut and paste job.

Wow.... why convert to B/W first?
Looks like we have some hidden talent on this forum.

At that resolution it would be very hard to tell if it has been dropped in or not. Even if it has been it may not have been done by the original photographer but instead by the news organisation to make the image look more dangerous by making the UAV larger. (I will have a look myself when I am able to access PS) Then again there can be compression artifact which could have an effect.

If we take the image as being genuine it is likely that the image was shot with a long focal length and this would result in telephoto compression which increases parallax error. It is quite possible that the UAV is being flown legally as it may well be below 400'. The question is what advantage would it be in this situation as the gimbal cannot tilt up very far to get a shot and being a wide lens it would be of little use when the subject was a long way away.

I have just zoomed in here on the linked photo. There is artifact around the UAV but it is also present around the Aircraft too. It is evident at high contrast transitions.

Geebax Posted at 2017-4-10 17:21
Under what laws?

You are right, this would most likely not be possible. But if this was given to the authorities claiming the drone was endangering the passengers on this flight,  it would be considered fraudulent misrepresentation of a crime.

So I guess, this is in the same category of fake news    nobody cares ... and the UAV's get more bad press

Rich

Mike-the-cat Posted at 2017-4-10 19:50
Wow.... why convert to B/W first?
Looks like we have some hidden talent on this forum.

sorry Mike, just don't like the fact that UAV's are such an easy target ... the rules are getting harder, just ask the guys in Canada.

Rich

Cabansail Posted at 2017-4-10 20:27
I have just zoomed in here on the linked photo. There is artifact around the UAV but it is also present around the Aircraft too. It is evident at high contrast transitions.

The artifact is part of movement estimation, the item sits in a sea of identical blue pixels, and the advanced MPEG encoding  identifies it as a an item that is moving through the blue background so it simply cuts and pastes it into each new position without bothering to waste effort encoding it in each new location.

The other thing to consider is that it is shown on Seven News, one of two near identical scumbag news organisations we are saddled with in Australia, who for anything that will fill a 30 second void in the news, will manufacture any news item they wish.

I stand by what I said earlier, it is not fake, the drone is lower and nearer to the camera than you would think, but Seven will not let a simple explanation like that get in the way of a BS news story.

RichJ53 Posted at 2017-4-10 21:51
You are right, this would most likely not be possible. But if this was given to the authorities claiming the drone was endangering the passengers on this flight,  it would be considered fraudulent misrepresentation of a crime.

So I guess, this is in the same category of fake news    nobody cares ... and the UAV's get more bad press

In this case the authorities are CASA, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, who are not given to going off half-c*cked over a dubious story like this. And neither should we.....

There appear to be 1000s of photos of the fly past, yet only one person got photos with the drone in view...

We know the plane was at 500m, if the drone was at 100m would that make the flight illegal?  I assume that it wasn't on approach to an airport so normally there would have been no reason to not fly there?   The drone pilot simply needed to give way to the manned aircraft and since it appears to be around 1/2 Km away there doesn't appear to have been reason to even give way. What counts as illegally close in Oz?

Hard to judge the exact distance without knowing the focal length of the lens used and how much the photo has been cropped, but clearly it was a long lens and appears to have been on a boat, or at least very close to the shore line.

It appears that these guys were flying rather closer than the drone:

Geebax Posted at 2017-4-10 23:14
The artifact is part of movement estimation, the item sits in a sea of identical blue pixels, and the advanced MPEG encoding  identifies it as a an item that is moving through the blue background so it simply cuts and pastes it into each new position without bothering to waste effort encoding it in each new location.

The other thing to consider is that it is shown on Seven News, one of two near identical scumbag news organisations we are saddled with in Australia, who for anything that will fill a 30 second void in the news, will manufacture any news item they wish.

Geebax,

Thanks for your insights. Always good to get a local's point of view.

I think the willingness to pay for eye-catching news is a trend that serves as a major threat to civil society as we know it. Its everywhere and its trouble for decent people the world over.

Geebax Posted at 2017-4-10 17:35
No, I know nothing more than what is linked to here. This was such a momentous event it was not even reported on my side of the country.

It's not real lol  Look at the size of the drone supposedly at 500m next to the airliner.  That drone must be 10 feet across lol.

blackcrusader Posted at 2017-4-11 06:21
It's not real lol  Look at the size of the drone supposedly at 500m next to the airliner.  That drone must be 10 feet across lol.

I think I will go with the perspective argument and agree with a post here at: http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1359849 That is, it's a bloody small A350 or a ginormous drone. But there again, my trigonometry is rusty too.

Bootspike Posted at 2017-4-12 02:01
I think I will go with the perspective argument and agree with a post here at: http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1359849 That is, it's a bloody small A350 or a ginormous drone. But there again, my trigonometry is rusty too.

There is a different photo in that link, clearly taken with the same camera a second or so later.

If you overlay the two photos with the centre of the aircraft in the same place then the wing tip has moved 5 pixels while the drone has moved 418 pixels, knowing that the wing is 29.57m long I tried to use trigonometry to work out the distance of the drone from the aircraft.

Answer: 2473m  

Not convinced I got it right!  But I am convinced that the drone is a very long way away from the aeroplane, and that does explain why the drone did not appear in anyone else's photos.