Drones are a game-changer...

[MaggieD]

They’re private eyes in the skies.Investigators are taking drones to new heights — using the remote-controlled aircraft to catch New Yorkers cheating on spouses, lying about disabilities and endangering their kids.
“People want you to believe there’s all this negativity associated with drones . . . but they could be a very helpful tool,” said Olwyn Triggs, a gumshoe for 23 years and president of Professional Investigators Network Inc. in Glen Cove, LI.
Triggs recently used a drone to find an upstate man suspected of insurance fraud. Signs on his rural property warned that trespassers would be shot, so she sent in her 2-pound, foot-long Phantom 2 Vision quadcopter, which costs about $1,000.
“He was supposedly fully disabled,” she said. “We knew he was active but couldn’t prove it because of the layout of the property. I couldn’t risk being shot.”
So, as a drone hovered above, snapping images of the man chopping wood, Triggs manned the controls from behind a vehicle about 1,000 feet away.
“You need to think outside the box when someone’s acutely aware,” she said, adding the fraudster pretended to walk with a cane. “That’s when you’ll consider using a drone.”
Still, the legality of piloting drones is a gray area.
The Federal Aviation Administration deems it illegal to fly them for commercial use, including film and television.
But since a federal judge dismissed a $10,000 fine against a commercial drone user in March, many businesses are going ahead and flying them anyway.
“A lot of PIs bought drones [after the ruling],” Triggs said. “But before you use a drone, you’re calling everyone you know just to be sure.”
PIs are also using drones to catch cheating spouses.
Matthew Seifer recently pretended to test-fly a drone in Central Park. He was actually recording a husband fooling around with a female coworker from 100 feet away.
“Sometimes the best thing is to be right there in plain sight,” said Seifer, president of Long Island- based Executive Investigations.
“We had to get in and get out real quick,” he added. “We deployed a drone for eight minutes and got five minutes’ worth of video. That was the closure our client was looking for.”
Seifer operates several Phantom models, including the Phantom 2 Vision, and said drones are a “selling point” for clients.

Firms like his are charging double for their use — hiking the hourly rate from $47 to $97.In another recent case, Seifer was having trouble tailing a fast-driving Long Island doctor suspected of hanky-panky. So the PI parked behind a steakhouse where the doc had taken a lover.
“We raised the drone above the restaurant, [and] he was engaged in a sexual act in the front seat of his car,” the investigator said.
“[Drones] get us those types of money shots.”
Drones have also been used in custody battles.
This year, Seifer’s team sent a drone to Sheepshead Bay to record a dad drinking and partying on a boat with his kids.
The PI snapped the boat’s serial number and images of the kids, who were not wearing life jackets, from more than 300 yards away.
Seifer’s footage has also busted criminals.
He recently helped a homeowner in another state file an insurance claim against tenants accused of running a dogfighting ring.
“We couldn’t get access to the back of the house through regular means,” Seifer said. “We utilized the drone to get evidentiary video of doghouses, chains and certain individuals.”
He turned over footage to authorities, and four people were arrested. The tenant lost his lease.
“Clients are amazed,” Seifer said. “The drones are a game changer.”

Your thoughts?

Private eyes use drones to nab scammers and cheating spouses | New York Post

 

[Carjosse]

In Canada we do not have that restriction and we have some surprising drone entrepreneurs and that ban in the U.S. needs to go. I have no idea how I feel about this, the PIs could get the information anyways by watching but it may also classify as an invasion of privacy.

 

[CalGun]

I heard they have said flying a drone within 32 miles of POTUS is a felony? I haven't seen a link to that.

Personally I love the technology and hope amazon can deliver by drone. Anything that cut costs, increases service, and maybe even take a polluting truck off the crowded roads is a good thing to me.

I was waiting for paparazzi to employ drones in tracking a kardashian or what ever it is they want photo's of 24x7. I'm sure it's just a matter of time. As a stake out tool (such as for cheating spouses) it's cheaper and safer then a PI. I hate that job....stopped doing it years ago. Very depressing. Drones don't have feelings so let them do it.

Your thoughts?

Private eyes use drones to nab scammers and cheating spouses | New York Post

 

[KevinKohler]

A drone watching me is still less invasive than tapping my phone calls, reading my emails, and monitoring my internet use.

 

[CalGun]

Besides you can shoot a drone. You can't the eavesdropping apps and spy wares.....

A drone watching me is still less invasive than tapping my phone calls, reading my emails, and monitoring my internet use.

 

[TNAR]

The biggest issue is the potential hazard they pose to other aerial traffic.

One of my biggest fears while stationed overseas was getting hit by a UAV. If every PI and deliveryman starts using drones in their businesses, the skies can get pretty congested. As it is now, the sky is the safest mode of travel and the increased congestion can significantly change this.

Currently, mid-air collisions are mitigated through the use of localized frequencies allowing traversing traffic to communicate with each other. I'm not so certain that drone operators are fully aware of the other traffic in the area and it is highly likely that they currently do not make area calls.

Another issue is the ability to see your surroundings. Drone operators have a very limited ability to observe their surroundings (even something as advanced as the Predator UAV has only one camera looking forward with a very limited field of view). Current air operators, when notified of nearby traffic via radio communication, have the ability to look through windows in a rather wide field of view. Drones lack this capacity.

However, as the next-gen technologies become implemented (and drone operators adopt them) the influx in drones will not be all that significant. The question is, will they adopt them? Technology has its price.

 

[NoC_T]

I don't know that drones are a game changer, but they beg the question of how many more methods we're willing to concede of invading our privacy. They won't stop pushing for more.

 

[jamesrage]

Your thoughts?

Private eyes use drones to nab scammers and cheating spouses | New York Post

I am against drones for domestic use.They should be banned on American skies. I could care less of the other uses. As far as I am concerned those other uses are nothing more than an attempt to get useful retards used to drones in the skies.Those useful retards getting used to drones in the sky will pave the way for drone surveillance.

 

[TNAR]

Those useful retards getting used to drones in the sky will pave the way for drone surveillance.

I am continually accused of needing a tinfoil hat, but you certainly deserve one for this statement. There are thousands of excellent reasons for drone use resulting in benefits for the average person. Prohibiting their use completely because of a fear of surveillance is irrational.

 

[jamesrage]

I am continually accused of needing a tinfoil hat, but you certainly deserve one for this statement. There are thousands of excellent reasons for drone use resulting in benefits for the average person. Prohibiting their use completely because of a fear of surveillance is irrational.

I am aware how governments breed compliance.The scum in the government will use all those so called thousands of excellent reasons for mass drone surveillance.

 

[TNAR]

I am aware how governments breed compliance.The scum in the government will use all those so called thousands of excellent reasons for mass drone surveillance.

Government agencies can easily get exceptions to drone prohibitions (they already do) so you would simply be restricting beneficial use of drones.

 

[TNAR]

Check this out: FAA Drone Authorizations

 

[jamesrage]

Government agencies can easily get exceptions to drone prohibitions (they already do) so you would simply be restricting beneficial use of drones.

The alleged beneficial uses are nothing more so government and business can use drones for spying on the American people.There are plenty of useful retards out there who will argue that they will have no problem with mass drone surveillance because they already out there in the masses.

 

[TNAR]

The alleged beneficial uses are nothing more so government and business can use drones for spying on the American people.There are plenty of useful retards out there who will argue that they will have no problem with mass drone surveillance because they already out there in the masses.

The government uses helicopters and airplanes heavily for surveillance too. Does this mean that private use of these aerial vehicles should be prohibited as well? The government uses the internet, cellular technology, phone taps, mail snoops, and GPS tracking for surveillance. Should we eliminate them too?

 

[PirateMk1]

Your thoughts?

Private eyes use drones to nab scammers and cheating spouses | New York Post

Hello, first off I need to let you know I have partnership in a "drone" controls and airframe company.

Drones are for all intents and purposes repurposed R/C aircraft. There is very little difference. In fact a drone would be a subset of the r/c aircraft world. R/C aircraft and the drone have been with us since before the thirties. Essentially as long as there has been portable radio transmitters and receivers. Were it gets more complicated is, as size increases the more in common with regular aircraft they have. A R/C/drone aircraft can literally be any size. The military converts many of their older aircraft in remote operated drones. The prime difference between the R/C aircraft and a drone is something called line of sight. Drone is a term used to differentiate from line of sight operations (where the aircraft in question is the line of sight ie seen) and non line of sight operations (ie where the drone cannot be seen directly).

The "drones" (generally the little four rotor helicopter and other similar capacity aircraft) being used by private eyes and most other commercial operators are really for all intents and purposes glorified r/c aircraft operated actually in violation of current FAA rules which ought to be applied. Current rules that apply would be that they must fly under 400ft and away from occupied structure or land. The reason for the rule is very simple, objects with speed and height, if they crash can hurt people and damage property. Something that people would like to avoid. I think the current rules should only change far as putting a reasonable size limit on the size of the R/C aircraft / drone operating under these rules and the requirement for financial responsibility if they crash into someone or their property along with some sort of lighting requirement. The rules for drones that operate outside those parameters which are the drones my company build and designs should be subject to the rules in place for normal aircraft operations with the obvious changes required for their unique attributes.

As far as amazon and their drones and the parameters with they wish to fly those, they should be by permit for an exception to the normal hobbyist rules and proving financial responsibility. Personally I don't think their drones will be as successful as they think they will be as the size they are talking about has two main drawbacks as I see them. A) They are small and hence can only be really safely flown in good weather conditions with very light winds. In higher winds or wet weather they will use up their battery/fuel reserves much quicker compensating for that and possible and control issues from their small size in higher wind speeds. That in building congested flight areas is not a good recipe for safety. B) Accidents and crashes. Aircraft break and crash. If a drone is flying at a hundred feet weighs say a 150lbs with its payload and loses power, I think you and I can see the result of that if it lands on someone house or car, or just someone. There's a reason my company opted to go the controlled aircraft operating space route.

 

[PirateMk1]

The alleged beneficial uses are nothing more so government and business can use drones for spying on the American people.There are plenty of useful retards out there who will argue that they will have no problem with mass drone surveillance because they already out there in the masses.

So I shouldn't be able to use my specialized drones to combat forest fires or spray crops? Or take infrared video or pictures of said forest or farmland for analytic purposes?

 

[TNAR]

While I don’t necessarily disagree with you, your comments were rather sloppy and miss a few things.

Current rules that apply would be that they must fly under 400ft and away from occupied structure or land.

There is a total prohibition on commercial drone use. However, this prohibition is in contention because many companies believe (rightfully so, IMO) that the FAA does not have the authority to make this blanket prohibition without public comment. Thus, the multiple lawsuits surrounding this issue.

The rules for drones that operate outside those parameters which are the drones my company build and designs should be subject to the rules in place for normal aircraft operations with the obvious changes required for their unique attributes.

I summarized a few of the problems with this statement previously. Contrary to popular opinion, the vast bulk of airspace in the United States is uncontrolled. This means that there is no FAA controller telling aircraft where to go, how high to fly, etc. Instead, pilots rely on voluntary position reporting, recommended altitudes depending on flight type, and, most importantly, visual separation.

Drones are tiny and hard to spot while flying. And I’m not even talking about the drones which a typical small business would use (or the wicked cool OctoCopter that Amazon wants to use). The Predator drone has a 66 foot wingspan (!) and is very difficult to spot, not to mention very deadly in a mid-air collision. A pilot can inform surrounding aircraft of their position using geographic features; something drone pilots are simply incapable of doing.

Again, I’m not against drone use at all. However, I would much rather see use of things like Amazon’s OctoCopter keeping nice and low than massive Predators or other drones flying around where I spend most of my time.

 

[Hard Truth]

Using a drone for commercial puposes in the USA is illegal without a permit, and as of recently, only one business has obtained a permit. I don't have an issue with the use of drones to more easily see things that are already in public view (i.e. no reasonable expectation of privacy). I do not support legalizing their use to look inside people's homes, backyards etc without the affected person's permission when they are not in public view. That should be illegal to citizens, and law enforcement should be required to obtain a warrant for that type of search.

I look forward to seeing individuals using their drones to legally keep an eye on the politicians and other policy makers that have advocated for spying with drones so that they can experience being watched like the rest of us.

 

[PirateMk1]

While I don’t necessarily disagree with you, your comments were rather sloppy and miss a few things.



There is a total prohibition on commercial drone use. However, this prohibition is in contention because many companies believe (rightfully so, IMO) that the FAA does not have the authority to make this blanket prohibition without public comment. Thus, the multiple lawsuits surrounding this issue.



I summarized a few of the problems with this statement previously. Contrary to popular opinion, the vast bulk of airspace in the United States is uncontrolled. This means that there is no FAA controller telling aircraft where to go, how high to fly, etc. Instead, pilots rely on voluntary position reporting, recommended altitudes depending on flight type, and, most importantly, visual separation.

Drones are tiny and hard to spot while flying. And I’m not even talking about the drones which a typical small business would use (or the wicked cool OctoCopter that Amazon wants to use). The Predator drone has a 66 foot wingspan (!) and is very difficult to spot, not to mention very deadly in a mid-air collision. A pilot can inform surrounding aircraft of their position using geographic features; something drone pilots are simply incapable of doing.

Again, I’m not against drone use at all. However, I would much rather see use of things like Amazon’s OctoCopter keeping nice and low than massive Predators or other drones flying around where I spend most of my time.

My comment were general and only meant to cover the basics for the uninitiated.

R/C aircraft which is what a drone is, must be line of sight under 400ft and away from occupied or unauthorized property. This is the operating regime for current R/C craft. If the drone does not operate under these restrictions it is operating unlawfully. Further said drones must operate within the spectrum granted by the FCC for R/C fight or be in violation. These rules have been LONG established since the 70's and earlier. Further the commercial proscription has also been in place since the time the rules were made. Public comment was made when the current rules were put into place. The FAA didn't just make them. So if you operate any drone for money you are in violation as you pointed.

I think the commercial proscription being removed and the remainder staying the same with permits for exceptions to operating conditions is a workable solution that people deal with along with a having a minimum financial responsibility for commercial operation.

Drones that operate in normal airspace need to comply with current FAA standards. Further they should be required to file flight plans. And operate under IFR rules. They should also be lit and colored in such a way to be conspicuous. Our drones are lit up with bright led illumination and are painted in florescent orange, pink, and green. Further we install TACAN and transponders on our craft. Further all our craft have 360 degree facing camera arrays vertically and horizontally. We want them to see and be seen. I have to point out that the drones we design are designed for agriculture and forest and military. So two of the three would be operating in controlled space and the third would be operating under modified hobbyist rules. As for rules the drones should be limited to 400ft unless they file a flight plan and all should be lit and conspicuously colored.

Predator drones by the way operate in flight regimes normal aircraft don't fly in, typically 50'000ft. Further Predators are in controlled space due to the nature of their operations.

 

[jamesrage]

The government uses helicopters and airplanes heavily for surveillance too. Does this mean that private use of these aerial vehicles should be prohibited as well? The government uses the internet, cellular technology, phone taps, mail snoops, and GPS tracking for surveillance. Should we eliminate them too?

THose things can not fly up to my window, those things can't be made smaller and smaller or mass produced cheaply and easily.Nice try though.

 

[Donc]

Your thoughts?

Private eyes use drones to nab scammers and cheating spouses | New York Post

Drones close to penitentiaries?:shock: Drones in the hands of terrorist?:shock: Drones’, snooping, to me is not a big concern.

 

[DiAnna]

Well, they'd need some regulation. Having a drone beeping outside my bathroom window while I'm in the tub would be a bit disconcerting.

Basically, if drones are used while people are in public places with no expectation of privacy, in lieu of some human with a perfectly legal long-distance camera lens, I have no problem. When they start trespassing over private property, peering into backyards and into house windows, then I have a problem with 'em.

 

[TNAR]

My comment were general and only meant to cover the basics for the uninitiated. ... Predator drones by the way operate in flight regimes normal aircraft don't fly in, typically 50'000ft. Further Predators are in controlled space due to the nature of their operations.

Okay, no beef then!

And you gotta pass through 1,000' before you can get to 50,000!

 

[TNAR]

THose things can not fly up to my window, those things can't be made smaller and smaller or mass produced cheaply and easily.Nice try though.

You only say that because you don't realize the capabilities of larger drones and surveillance aircraft.

 

[jamesrage]

You only say that because you don't realize the capabilities of larger drones and surveillance aircraft.

I seriously doubt a the larger drones and large surveillance aircraft can easily and cheaply be mass produced.