• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

UFOs?

JTS11

Well-Known Member
pilot
Contributor
Last edited:

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
While I don't normally subscribe to the "they're doing this to distract us from what's really going on man" trope, if all the idiots out there are all caught up in looking for UFOs, perhaps they're less likely to do stupid shit like talking about civil war and cosplaying Delta Force on the weekend with their drunk buddies.
 

Brett327

Well-Known Member
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
One of the challenges in dealing with small UAS is the diversity of different types/sizes/operating frequency/etc. We have two types of counter UAS at my installation. These systems provide electronic surveillance/geolocation (is a known drone signal present), and an electronic attack capability to either disable or take control of certain kinds of UAS. These are library based systems, so they're great for handling commercial DJI UAS, and we can even look up the owner's registration, etc, but they wouldn't be very effective against a military type UAS.

Most of what we see are randos flying their DJIs in the nearby state park, and as a DJI owner myself, you have to jump through a lot of hoops to even fly near the Class D airspace here. The device just won't let you do it. Conventional wisdom is that an adversary doing surveillance would use a DJI (easy, plausible deniability, etc), but I'm sure there are some bespoke devices out there being used that won't even show up on most counter-UAS systems. Sounds like the guy at Langley is seeing a combination of those.

I have the authority to engage/bring down any UAS that crosses the installation perimeter, though the law is technically still a bit ambiguous and the FAA still views such actions as "interfering with the operation of an aircraft," which is a felony. DoD and FAA are working on some new language to address this. Bottom line, we don't have a lot of effective solutions for small UAS right now.
 

robav8r

Well-Known Member
None
Contributor
One of the challenges in dealing with small UAS is the diversity of different types/sizes/operating frequency/etc. We have two types of counter UAS at my installation. These systems provide electronic surveillance/geolocation (is a known drone signal present), and an electronic attack capability to either disable or take control of certain kinds of UAS. These are library based systems, so they're great for handling commercial DJI UAS, and we can even look up the owner's registration, etc, but they wouldn't be very effective against a military type UAS.

Most of what we see are randos flying their DJIs in the nearby state park, and as a DJI owner myself, you have to jump through a lot of hoops to even fly near the Class D airspace here. The device just won't let you do it. Conventional wisdom is that an adversary doing surveillance would use a DJI (easy, plausible deniability, etc), but I'm sure there are some bespoke devices out there being used that won't even show up on most counter-UAS systems. Sounds like the guy at Langley is seeing a combination of those.

I have the authority to engage/bring down any UAS that crosses the installation perimeter, though the law is technically still a bit ambiguous and the FAA still views such actions as "interfering with the operation of an aircraft," which is a felony. DoD and FAA are working on some new language to address this. Bottom line, we don't have a lot of effective solutions for small UAS right now.
I KNEW it !!!!! Traitor !!!!!!!!
 

ChuckMK23

FERS and TSP contributor!
pilot
One of the challenges in dealing with small UAS is the diversity of different types/sizes/operating frequency/etc. We have two types of counter UAS at my installation. These systems provide electronic surveillance/geolocation (is a known drone signal present), and an electronic attack capability to either disable or take control of certain kinds of UAS. These are library based systems, so they're great for handling commercial DJI UAS, and we can even look up the owner's registration, etc, but they wouldn't be very effective against a military type UAS.

Most of what we see are randos flying their DJIs in the nearby state park, and as a DJI owner myself, you have to jump through a lot of hoops to even fly near the Class D airspace here. The device just won't let you do it. Conventional wisdom is that an adversary doing surveillance would use a DJI (easy, plausible deniability, etc), but I'm sure there are some bespoke devices out there being used that won't even show up on most counter-UAS systems. Sounds like the guy at Langley is seeing a combination of those.

I have the authority to engage/bring down any UAS that crosses the installation perimeter, though the law is technically still a bit ambiguous and the FAA still views such actions as "interfering with the operation of an aircraft," which is a felony. DoD and FAA are working on some new language to address this. Bottom line, we don't have a lot of effective solutions for small UAS right now.
Concur with this. I direct the funding and approve the ops for counter sUAS ops at a number of AF installations. It's a big lift and exercised seriously. Its impressive to see AF security forces at work with their counter sUAS tools. The challenge currently I think now is defending against scale.

Remote ID as implemented is "just OK" - its really short range as far as detection and identification of owner and location of remote operator.

Pivoting - the FAA makes it very easy to operate legally and efficiently under Part 107. LNAAC waiver approvals come in near real time - minutes - to do things like operate in Class D/C/B airspace or operate >400' AGL or at night or populated / urban areas. This is an area where the FAA deserves praise.
 

MIDNJAC

is clara ship
pilot
Oh my lord, our flight attendants tonight were absolutely enthralled with this topic. One asked me, while we were waiting at the gate “so have you seen them?”. I think I really disappointed those 4 gals when I said “no not ever, just those lights up to the northeast that are always there”. They apparently haven’t been read in on the last 2 years of airline pilot gossip. I could not confirm that there are UFOs active over Oregon, unfortunately. They were even asking about it again on the pee breaks
 

sevenhelmet

Low calorie attack from the Heartland
pilot
Oh my lord, our flight attendants tonight were absolutely enthralled with this topic. One asked me, while we were waiting at the gate “so have you seen them?”. I think I really disappointed those 4 gals when I said “no not ever, just those lights up to the northeast that are always there”. They apparently haven’t been read in on the last 2 years of airline pilot gossip. I could not confirm that there are UFOs active over Oregon, unfortunately. They were even asking about it again on the pee breaks

The country does seem to have caught UFO hysteria again, doesn't it? I'd have thought we were decades beyond this, but I admit it seems right in line with our reckless national abandonment of intellect and expertise.

OTOH, It's probably just flouride in the water, or mind control from all the vaccines. What do I win?

:rolleyes:
 

jmcquate

Well-Known Member
Contributor
Now that Joe Rogan has weighed in and shared a bat-hit crazy video, this hysteria won't end soon


(To paraphrase the linked video if you don't want to watch: This rando has a buddy that says his buddy says he has talked to high level officials 😁, and that there is a loose nuke in NJ, and the drones are out there sniffing for it)

So all of this is the plot of a Tom Clancy book?
 

jmcquate

Well-Known Member
Contributor
Top