Over here the Washington Post is reporting reports of people who claim to have observed small surveillance drones at DC political rallies.
That is not possible, right? On the other hand, nowadays if you are not paranoid, you are delusional.
A (say) 10cm aircraft flying across a (say) 100M park would be the scale equivalent of some really, really, long flight. How could you power such a thing? Solar? Microwaves? (Better wear your tinfoil beanie).
There is no way such a drone could be made… Right?
There are a number of toy radio controlled aircraft on the market that fit the general description of the things in the article, so it could be done (that’s not to say it has been done here - seems more likely it was a bunch of locusts or something). Although fitting any kind of meaningful instrument package (such as a viceo camera) makes it a fair bit harder both in terms of weight and power requirements.
Well, if it keeps happenning, we should have some camera phone footage of same within the next couple of weeks.
This applicatio would seem like a silly use of technology though. This isn’t the 1960s and I don’t think the powers that be are all that worried about conspiracies between the enemy and the anti-war movement.
Here’s the thing. The government doesn’t need tiny UAVs to watch antiwar demonstrators.
You just get a cameraman and a few technicians, slap a local news sticker on the side of a van, and film the demonstration openly posing as reporters. Or set up video cameras in plain sight on top of streelights. Or just send a guy with a camera phone posing as a blogger taking pictures for his website.
There’s no need to employ top secret surveillance tools in this environment, especially since you’re risking the exposure of that tool. It’s possible that somebody has built a really really small surveilance UAV, but why would they waste such a top secret device on political rallies?
On the other hand, washing the wings with solvent and testing that solvent for explosive residue wouldn’t require any more technology than wings made out of the right material.
In previous years, the media would find out about it and raise hell (and rightly so), since it goes to the credibility about trusting the news. I’m not so sure the medias would do that today.
But why use an aircraft drone, especially since it’s limited with what it can carry. It is so much easier to put plain-closed dicks in the crowd with backpacks. What with lipstick cameras and sensing equipment these days, one can gather quite a bit of detailed info with small sensors being supported by the correct equipment in a backpack.
A plane that size is possible. Here’s one that weighs less than 1.5 grams and has a wingspan of 5.25". It is powered by a lithium ion battery.
However, it is a conventional plane, not an ornithopter. And due to its extremely light wing loading, it would be unflyable if there was any breeze at all.
I’m guessing that the dragonfly - looking objects that they saw were dragonflies.
There are several sub-gram RC planes out there. I forgot trying to find a link, but search “Baron Johnson” username on the site brewha linked to and he’s done some 20g UAVs with video feed…
Even simpler: Have the guys operating the cameras actually be reporters. If the media aren’t there already, call up the TV station’s tipline and tell them that there’s news happening there, then watch the footage they take.
As anyone that has been to a demonstration knows, navigating a crowd is not easy especially if you intend to inconspicuosly carry reliable chemical sensing equipment. I have no idea how small they can make a mass spectrometer these days, but they are probably not handheld devices.
A device such as these dragonflies however, could swoop above a crowd collecting air samples on its wings and swoop back with no more technology than is allready cheaply available. Once back, analysis at any mobile unit would be done as fast as it is done at airport security. There is no need for fancy camera’s or recording devices. All they have to do is make the wings out of a material that collects molecules from the air.
That is all assuming that such flying devices are practical in and of themselves. As has been mentioned, I suspect even a light breeze would be problematic. The physicists would know more than I about that.
