So there are news reports going around that in an Australian triathlon a hexacopter being operated by a videographer had fallen from the sky and may have struck one of the athletes. The athlete is adamant the hex struck her but the videographer (Warren Abrams) claims the video footage shows the device fell behind the athlete and she must have fallen over through shock of having a drone nearly hit her. The full story is here: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-07/triathlete-injured-as-drone-filming-race-drops-to-ground/5371658 And a summarising report is here (this is where I first read about it): http://www.kitguru.net/channel/jon-martindale/hexacopter-drone-falls-during-race-injures-athlete/ Sounds like the pilot was flying against some of Australia's drone regulations, but he also claims his hex was hacked by a method known as 'Channel Hopping' which can be performed by a mobile phone. I don't know much about Channel Hopping but it isn't a great suspect as it would be almost impossible to determine who hacked the drone. However I do worry this will be yet another blow to the RC community, some areas are already having issues accepting people want to use Multirotors for non-malicious intents, but with news that they could be so easily hacked and brought down, it will likely raise concerns among governments and air-space management organisations.
I guess it depends how you look at it. In terms of acceptable risk, the accident would have been a lot worse if she was hit or nearly hit by a full sized helicopter, or a camera on a motorcycle. In this country we had a police helicopter fall onto a pub and kill people, but we accept that as a rare accident. I would say this accident with the drone was also rare, and far less destructive. Still, I doubt that the controls were hacked. It was more likely a fault and the accident perhaps could have been avoided if they were a bit more careful with choosing their flying location and emergency crash site... if they had been certified like they are supposed to be they would have known these things already, assuming they have similar training in Australia as we do here. P.S. If the organisers of the event asked them to be there, they are at fault for not checking their credentials.
I agree, but 'drones' are the in thing for the media to write about now in a negative light especially.
True, but compare the above story to this story. Miles apart in terms of danger, but lumped together in terms of media coverage. We probably shouldn't call our stuff drones, they're hardly the same thing as the military stuff. In terms of filming I prefer to call what I use a hovercam, for instance.