Indeed, but in general the people with the IQ to build something won’t be flying it down the ILS at their local airport 
It has always been possible to do crazy things with model planes. FPV made it especially easy, some 10 years ago, but FPV needs quite a lot of skill and determination to get something working and keep it in one piece for more than 2 minutes. For long range FPV stuff (illegal mostly) you need some electronics and other skills. I have seen it done. And if you go back say 10 years, we didn’t have people doing the dangerous things. Well, apart from a few dicks posting FL200 FPV videos on youtube
The big change has been the availability of drones on the retail market, and any dickhead can buy one and just fly it. It is for those that the geo limitations are intended for.
I suppose the management of drones is a hot topic for some pilots, but I do find myself wondering if some of those pilots are the same ones that argue for their right to fly an aircraft or glider without transponder. I am guessing that because of their small size, there is statistically less risk of colliding with a drone than a non transponding aircraft, and less risk that if you do collide the result will be catastrophic.
I suppose in the world of drones there is an even more valid argument that weight and power restrictions make the carriage of a transponder impossible!
I suspect the “problem” with regulation is that it relates to an area that is very difficult to effectively police, for numerous reasons. That usually means that education and collective responsibility is likely to achieve a more sucessful outcome, short, of course, of a total ban on the flying of drones.
I think Peter’s point that there will always be those who are reckless is difficultt to refute however, again short of a total ban, and possibly even then, there will be a small number brought into the country regardless.
The good news however is I suspect unless the operator has a purpose for flying their drone the interest in doing so is relatively short lived, and their will be very few people with entirely malicious intentions. Statistically you probably are more likely to hit another non transponding aircraft than a drone I suspect.
Peter wrote:
The vast majority of manned aircraft do not have ADS-B IN and never will.
You might be surprised how many have – I was at the Knott End beach fly in the other weekend, and a significant proportion of the microlights had devices that could receive ADS-B in, even some of the weight shift machines. It’s very low cost to do ADS-B IN on a tablet.
I’m replacing my transponder this year and due to the significant uptake of low cost ADS-B IN devices, my new transponder will also have a GPS source. While a transponder alone is enough for the high cost certified devices like yours to see where I am, the ADS-B OUT is necesary and useful so that people with low cost ADS-B IN receivers for their tablets can also see me. Things are changing, and quite fast!
Peter wrote:
The big change has been the availability of drones on the retail market, and any dickhead can buy one and just fly it.
And the evidence that people are ignoring the guidelines is strong.
For example, we had delays during this years IOM TT races because of people flying drones – despite a hugely well publicised RA (T) over the course and the reminder that this included drones (the publicity was put on on social media, in the newspapers, and on the radio – yet there were still races and practises delayed because some idiot decided to fly a drone over the course. Unfortunately the Police couldn’t get there in time before whoever it was made themselves scarce, which is too bad, becuase the justice system during TT week is extremely swift against offenders).
I’m replacing my transponder this year and due to the significant uptake of low cost ADS-B IN devices, my new transponder will also have a GPS source. While a transponder alone is enough for the high cost certified devices like yours to see where I am, the ADS-B OUT is necesary and useful so that people with low cost ADS-B IN receivers for their tablets can also see me. Things are changing, and quite fast!
I am “all ears” as always and I have also been banging onto Avidyne about the ADS-B IN upgrade (yes we did this to death in more appropriate threads here) but that won’t show the ADS-B OUT emissions from “uncertified” devices. The only way to display these is on a tablet and that is a really bad way to be aware of conflicting traffic. It’s like having a speed camera database on the car satnav but with no audio warning… Maybe there is some (obviously illegal) way to merge the traffic streams? Both the ARINC429 and RS232 TAS protocols are “secret”… So I don’t see any way around this, and the same would apply to any larger aircraft; they will just not have any means of detecting ADS-B OUT emitting drones unless the drones are emitting fake certified (SIL=3 or whatever; I don’t remember) data, which is obviously possible, but since most relevant flyers are illegal and know they are illegal, they will have no incentive to thus equip.
The police will never catch the sods because you can program a drone to fly, with a big enough battery, on GPS, to Place X, loiter for a bit, and fly back, and do it in radio silence, recording footage on an SD card, so it cannot even be tracked like an FVP plane can be.
Peter wrote:
It’s like having a speed camera database on the car satnav but with no audio warning…
I have to imagine most (all?) the tablet based ADS-B in solutions will make audio warnings. Skydemon already audio warns on airspace and obstacles, I’d find it strange if it didn’t also make audio warnings if it’s being fed ADS-B data.
Additionally, many of the aircraft I saw at the recent fly-in had a tablet/phablet mount where you didn’t need to look down to see the device, it was essentially “in the panel”.
Then you have to connect the tablet’s audio out to the aircraft intercom…
Most “IFR” planes have no room for putting a tablet in the field of view.
Maybe one day somebody will do this properly… but I just know that most pilots that fly “distances” don’t want their cockpit full of dangling wires.
A drone which radiates fake-certified ADS-B OUT would be the best solution. It must be pretty easy to do. But the incentive within the drone community to be visible has to be less than stellar, because the responsible members don’t fly them where they shouldn’t, and the irresponsible ones…?
Peter wrote:
Then you have to connect the tablet’s audio out to the aircraft intercom…
This is true, but Bluetooth inputs in headsets and intercoms are becoming a lot more common these days. (Anticipating things like this I ensured the aux in on my intercom was wired to a standard jack socket). Even with an IFR panel there’s usually enough room for a phablet or phone.
Is it that difficult to jam drones within a RAT?
Yes, it is. I was referring for the vision technology, but you need to ask F35 pilots and Military UAV operators I guess.
You might be right, but perhaps then you could post a link describing these systems rather than ADSB based devices. The military systems of which I’m aware have often looked for infra-red signatures so might not see drones or light aircraft easily.
15 watts is not a huge amount of power for even a smaller UAV so the system Peter linked to sounds potentially very pretty practical to me. They say they’re only seeing traffic a mile or so off, but drones are so maneuverable and can potentially react so quickly that this seems sufficient to me for most situations.
