A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Shoot that drone down



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old May 30th 16, 02:26 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default Shoot that drone down

On 2016-05-29 18:41, nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

First he claims he knows the altitude of aircraft around his place - but
he's never specified exactly how he knows that. Evading that little
piece, he's glommed onto a nonsense discussion of conversion and so on.
He's never stated what the elevation is where he is.


He doesn't have to state the elevation. All that is necessary is that
he knows it.


correct, and i do, as well as the barometric pressure, which also
matters.

What he's manifestly failed to do is say how he knows the altitude of
the aircraft he's seen are 1700' to 2000' above him.


I agree that he is too often sparse with support for anything he says
but on this occasion he has described how he knows in another post.
See his Message-ID:
Elsewhere he has said he has the necessary gear.


my posts are not intended to be highly detailed instructional articles
on how to do something.


The absence of knowledge being convenient to that argument!



--
She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics.
-Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
  #62  
Old May 30th 16, 03:09 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Shoot that drone down

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

How (exactly) are you getting altitude
information on these a/c (what equipment that isn't an ADS-B receiver
that you're getting transponder data on;


mode-c transponder responses.

how is it displayed?


http://www.pooleys.com/images/products/1665.jpg
http://i19.servimg.com/u/f19/12/09/94/31/atd110.jpg


Hmmm- let's see a photo of _yours_ in operation.


what for? you'll claim it was faked.

i'll post a photo of what i have on the condition that you'll admit you
were wrong, that you didn't know about such devices and also to stop
arguing with every post i make. deal?

Be clear - don't say HS like "already said" 'cause you've actually said
nothing at all.


actually, i've said quite a bit, but you're so intent on arguing to pay
attention to any of it.


I'm ROTFL lauging at what lengths you've gone to defend the
indefensible. You see there's a big fly in the ointment about the
device you claim to have, buy you have no clue what that fly is.


the only fly is *you*, who has no clue about such devices and even
claimed they didn't exist when it's clear that they do.

now that you've been shown to be wrong, you come up with some
mysterious issue that you refuse to articulate.

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:
There are such receivers for ADS-B. They run about $500 or so (maybe
cheaper now). There were no transponder receivers (for older
traditional (pre-ADS-B) transponders that I know of other than test
equipment or actual decoding gear in the ATC radar receiver shed.

Even if you had such it would tell you quite little as you would not
know the range/bearing from the radar that ping'd it (or from you). You
would get a transponder code and optionally altitude (and some other
stuff that isn't especially relevant).

  #63  
Old May 30th 16, 07:45 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Sandman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,467
Default Shoot that drone down

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

nospam:
no it definitely doesn't.


*you* knowing my elevation doesn't change anything.


you're arguing just to argue.


Not at all. You talk about 1700 or 2000' w/o specifying whether that
was AGL or ASL. Quite important, wot.


But he did:

nospam
05/28/2016

"where i live, small planes often fly over houses at around
2000 feet (the lowest i've seen is 1700 feet)."

nospam:
it' not ambiguous at all. it's clear that it's agl.


why would i say a plane is 2000' msl over my house? that makes no
sense.


What altitude was it? Recall that the issue was how high above
someone's house, and you blurted out your observation of 1700' or
2000' w/o specifying AGL or ASL. Of course you should be clear if
only for clarity's sake.


Why, though? The topic was privacy invasion, not clear altitude reporting. He
made it clear after Andreas did his best to argue that he was indeed in
reference to AGL.

Alan Browne:
BS alarm.


nospam:
your alarm is self-triggering.


Not at all. Yes these devices are used by those w/o the means for
better equipment. There's just one little fly in the ointment you've
provided but you're too ignorant to even know what it is.


Also, it appears to be something you cannot express either.

nospam:
yes it was mentioned yesterday.


What you've never clarified is what the 1700' or 2000' is relative
to: AGL or ASL.


Yeah, he did. Read the entire part of converting ASL to AGL

nospam:
wrong.


what's clear is that you can't admit that you don't know
something.


No what is not clear is anything you've said. It does not and cannot
add up.


Which says more about the bullying and witch hunt you guys are doing than
what nospam is actually saying. Nospam can be a complete asshole and can
never admit to being incorrect. But the bullying you're doing here is not
over something he is supposedly incorrect about - just that he has been
"unclear" and you have failed to understand something. Same with Andreas.

Here's a tip for you, if you wonder about something - ask!

Here's how this "conversation" should have gone:

nospam: planes sometimes fly at 2,000 or 1,700 feet above my house
Andreas: How do you know that exactly?
nospam: I see it on my radar
Andreas: But that's ASL
nospam: yes, but it's easily converted.
Andreas: Oh, ok.

--
Sandman
  #64  
Old May 30th 16, 03:05 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default Shoot that drone down

In article ,
Sandman wrote:


Here's a tip for you, if you wonder about something - ask!

Here's how this "conversation" should have gone:

nospam: planes sometimes fly at 2,000 or 1,700 feet above my house
Andreas: How do you know that exactly?
nospam: I see it on my radar
Andreas: But that's ASL
nospam: yes, but it's easily converted.
Andreas: Oh, ok.


pretty much, although there is no radar used at all.

it's simply a radio that receives signals from the plane's transponder.
  #65  
Old May 30th 16, 08:49 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
George Kerby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,798
Default Shoot that drone down




On 5/29/16 9:39 AM, in article ,
"nospam" wrote:

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:


i wasn't talking about flightradar24 or notams.

i'm talking about the altitude of planes flying over my neighborhood.
that's all.


So how are you getting the altitude data? Do you own an ADS-B receiver?


not yet, but it's on the list.

as i mentioned yesterday (which you clearly missed), i have a receiver
for transponder responses that decodes them and displays altitude.


And there are apps and programs like PlaneFinder, https://planefinder.net.

Looks like I missed all the fun...

  #66  
Old May 30th 16, 08:53 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
George Kerby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,798
Default Shoot that drone down




On 5/29/16 2:46 PM, in article ,
"Tony Cooper" wrote:

On Sun, 29 May 2016 15:12:54 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2016-05-29 11:27, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Sun, 29 May 2016 10:20:35 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

On 2016-05-29 04:26, Eric Stevens wrote:

I'm with nospam.

Then you're duped. While his math is correct he's taken everyone on a
boondoggle of unrelated hoo hah to disguise his basic ignorance about
how altitude is reported and used by pilots and controllers.

First he claims he knows the altitude of aircraft around his place - but
he's never specified exactly how he knows that. Evading that little
piece, he's glommed onto a nonsense discussion of conversion and so on.
He's never stated what the elevation is where he is.

What he's manifestly failed to do is say how he knows the altitude of
the aircraft he's seen are 1700' to 2000' above him.

Yes, he's created a scenario after the fact to justify what he
claimed.


Yep.


There are two possible takes on this claim of nospam's:

1. He made a statement here - that he had seen aircraft at specific
altitudes - that he later realized was an impossible claim, and then
proceeded to Google-up a backstory about operating a device that
allowed him to listen in on aircraft transmissions and ascertain their
altitude.

2. He truly does have such a device and is weird enough to sit in his
backyard and monitor aircraft altitudes as they pass overhead. This
seems to be a rather far-fetched hobby to engage in, but evidence of
nospam's weirdness is not new here.

Aircraft transmissions have to be about as boring a thing to monitor
as can be imagined. It's not like he's able to monitor cockpit
conversation between flight officers of commercial airlines where he
could at least "creep on" the private conversations where salacious
comments of last night's goings-on are made.

Personally, I vote for Door #1.



Agreed. However, as I mentioned above there are easy and free ways to get
id., airspeed and altitude of aircraft flying overhead...

  #67  
Old May 30th 16, 08:55 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
George Kerby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,798
Default Shoot that drone down




On 5/29/16 3:17 PM, in article , "Ken Hart"
wrote:

On 05/29/2016 10:20 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2016-05-29 04:26, Eric Stevens wrote:

I'm with nospam.


Then you're duped. While his math is correct he's taken everyone on a
boondoggle of unrelated hoo hah to disguise his basic ignorance about
how altitude is reported and used by pilots and controllers.

First he claims he knows the altitude of aircraft around his place - but
he's never specified exactly how he knows that. Evading that little
piece, he's glommed onto a nonsense discussion of conversion and so on.
He's never stated what the elevation is where he is.

What he's manifestly failed to do is say how he knows the altitude of
the aircraft he's seen are 1700' to 2000' above him.

Respectfully submitted, you must have missed one of his posts.

In one of his posts, maybe the third or fourth round, he mentioned that
he has a radio receiver that can pick up the transmitted data from the
plane.

I'm not an expert in aviation, so I don't know if such data exists, or
if such a receiver exists. But it would have saved a lot of time and
bandwidth if he had mentioned possession of such a receiver when he
first mentioned the altitudes of planes in his home area. Such as "I've
seen airplanes over my neighborhood at 2000 feet and as low as 1700
feet, based on flight data from my ACME model ABC555 flight data radio
receiver."


But it would have been SO boring for his nature of baiting the hook!

  #68  
Old May 30th 16, 10:15 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default Shoot that drone down

On 2016-05-29 22:09, nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

How (exactly) are you getting altitude
information on these a/c (what equipment that isn't an ADS-B receiver
that you're getting transponder data on;

mode-c transponder responses.

how is it displayed?

http://www.pooleys.com/images/products/1665.jpg
http://i19.servimg.com/u/f19/12/09/94/31/atd110.jpg


Hmmm- let's see a photo of _yours_ in operation.


what for? you'll claim it was faked.


No for you to prove you actually didn't just discover it in a desperate
attempt to prove your very weak story. You know - not knowing the
difference between ASL and AGL and that a/c routinely operate at 1000'
AGL over built up areas.

i'll post a photo of what i have on the condition that you'll admit you
were wrong, that you didn't know about such devices and also to stop
arguing with every post i make. deal?


I happily admit that I didn't know about the particular sort of device
you claim to have for non-ADS-B reception. It's a bit of a low cost,
band-aid passive solution, but could be useful in congested areas for
someone who can't afford a proper ADS-B system.

Here's the proof you should:
1. Video, from your house (backyard or whatever), in operation,
reporting on an aircraft nearby, its altitude.

2. When you're ready to do your video, you send me a mail message. I
will return a phrase to you that you will print up in a large font and
include in the video with the device operating. You will have 2 hours
from then to make and post the video.

For further detail, write me at my address above. No freelunch.
Specify the day and time period that would best suit you.

3. I'll always point out when you're wrong. That is usenet. And you
are so often wrong. (eg: about the a/c at 1700' and 2000' reports that
you implied were above ground level).



Be clear - don't say HS like "already said" 'cause you've actually said
nothing at all.

actually, i've said quite a bit, but you're so intent on arguing to pay
attention to any of it.


I'm ROTFL lauging at what lengths you've gone to defend the
indefensible. You see there's a big fly in the ointment about the
device you claim to have, buy you have no clue what that fly is.


the only fly is *you*, who has no clue about such devices and even
claimed they didn't exist when it's clear that they do.


I didn't say they didn't exist, I mentioned what I knew to exist. I'm
delighted there are these products now which we didn't have when I was
active as a pilot.

now that you've been shown to be wrong, you come up with some
mysterious issue that you refuse to articulate.


I'll back off on that one ... slightly. While the device will give you
the transmitted altitude from the other aircraft, you won't have other
information such as direction to the other a/c from where you are. That
is the fly in that ointment I was referring to.

But for the life of me I don't know why one would waste money on such a
thing if he wasn't an aircraft owner. FlightRadar24 gives you much,
much more for much, much less.


--
She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics.
-Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
  #69  
Old May 30th 16, 10:19 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default Shoot that drone down

On 2016-05-30 15:53, George Kerby wrote:

Agreed. However, as I mentioned above there are easy and free ways to get
id., airspeed and altitude of aircraft flying overhead...


That was also mentioned much earlier in the thread (FlightRadar24).

--
She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics.
-Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
  #70  
Old May 30th 16, 10:51 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,640
Default Shoot that drone down

On 2016-05-30 17:15, J. Clarke wrote:
In article , says...

On 05/29/2016 10:20 AM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2016-05-29 04:26, Eric Stevens wrote:

I'm with nospam.

Then you're duped. While his math is correct he's taken everyone on a
boondoggle of unrelated hoo hah to disguise his basic ignorance about
how altitude is reported and used by pilots and controllers.

First he claims he knows the altitude of aircraft around his place - but
he's never specified exactly how he knows that. Evading that little
piece, he's glommed onto a nonsense discussion of conversion and so on.
He's never stated what the elevation is where he is.

What he's manifestly failed to do is say how he knows the altitude of
the aircraft he's seen are 1700' to 2000' above him.

Respectfully submitted, you must have missed one of his posts.

In one of his posts, maybe the third or fourth round, he mentioned that
he has a radio receiver that can pick up the transmitted data from the
plane.

I'm not an expert in aviation, so I don't know if such data exists, or
if such a receiver exists. But it would have saved a lot of time and
bandwidth if he had mentioned possession of such a receiver when he
first mentioned the altitudes of planes in his home area. Such as "I've
seen airplanes over my neighborhood at 2000 feet and as low as 1700
feet, based on flight data from my ACME model ABC555 flight data radio
receiver."


The signal is there for any aircraft with a transponder and an encoding
altimeter. The receiver though is a fairly expensive piece of kit and
one wonders why someone would have such a thing in his house.


Indeed, esp when there are so many free apps (PC/Mac/iOS/Android) that
do far more, far better for free or about $20.

Moreso, that ground ADS-B receivers do far more and cost about half (or
less) of the widget quoted.

--
She hummed to herself because she was an unrivaled botcher of lyrics.
-Nick (Gone Girl), Gillian Flynn.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Shoot that drone down newshound Digital Photography 0 May 28th 16 12:40 PM
One of the hazards of drone-photography. Eric Stevens Digital Photography 3 October 28th 15 09:27 PM
More drone issues Savageduck[_3_] Digital Photography 7 July 1st 14 05:48 PM
The 1st FAA Prosecution of a Civilian Drone UAV Eric Stevens Digital Photography 8 November 3rd 13 12:27 AM
Drone helicopter with 1.8G camera Savageduck[_3_] Digital Photography 1 December 30th 11 04:14 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.