Shoot that drone down

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.

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

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.

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

The area where this incident took place was sufficiently built up that
one would have to stay above 1000'. A stabilized telephoto shot (and
yes, you would need a stabilization system) from there that would invade
privacy would be a very expensive endeavour and not likely at all except
perhaps for law enforcement or ENG. The later are very careful about
what they shoot and the former need cause or warrant.

stabilized lenses as well as stabilized camera mounts are common and
not that expensive, especially compared to the cost of flying.

Astounding ignorance about the cost of airborne stabilized long lenses.

not at all. any decent slr with a stabilized lens will work.

you're assuming that the photos have to be of such high quality that
someone can tell what book a person in the yard is reading. that's not
necessary.

anyone bothering to fly a plane to invade someone's privacy is going to
have the necessary camera equipment. otherwise, why bother with the
flight.

They would have to be financially well endowed privacy invaders. Like
the police and ENG.

what the police would want and what a privacy invader might want are
very different.

In article , Alan Browne
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.

wrong. i'm quite familiar with how altitude is reported and used.

you're the ignorant one, who can't see outside of the box, where
someone on the ground is using that data.

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.

wrong on that too. i didn't evade *anything*. i explained how i know
the altitude.

you're so intent on arguing that you skipped right past it.

He's never stated what the elevation is where he is.

there's no need to state my elevation. it makes no difference to you or
anyone else.

all that matters is whether i know it (and i do).

i also need to know the current barometric pressure, something you also
neglected to mention.

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.

again, it was mentioned yesterday.

try to keep up.

In article ,
Sandman wrote:

nospam:
you do if you have one and want the other.

Sorry, but you are way over your head here. There's no conversion.
The airplane is at, say, 2,000 feet agl and 2,200 feet asl at the
same time. There's nothing to convert.

Provide an example of any need or reason to convert and how it's
done.

You're being deliberately dense or inconceivably stupid just to argue.

i'm not sure it's deliberate. i think he really is that stupid.

The topic is nospam standing on the ground reading the broadcasted asl from
the
plane. That is one measurement. He then subtracts his current asl (i.e. his
current altitude at ground level) from that.

So if the plane is broadcasting 2,000 feet asl and nospam knows that in his
current position, the altitude is 50 feet when he is standing on the ground,
then he can calculate that by 2,000-50 = 1,950 *agl* for the plane.

If he is mobile, any GPS position can easily show his current altitude above
sea level.

where i live, it's mostly flat, so even if i'm mobile there is no issue.

Subtraction does not convert.

In this case, subtraction converts the airplanes ASL to AGL.

yep.

In article , Tony Cooper
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.

not at all.

as usual, when you don't understand something (which happens quite
often), instead of trying to learn, you immediately go into bash mode
and any explanation is immediately dismissed as bogus.

it's truly ****ed up. you take trolling to a new level.

On 2016-05-29 10:39, 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.

What receiver is that? And what elevation are you at?

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

On 2016-05-29 10:39, nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne
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.

wrong. i'm quite familiar with how altitude is reported and used.

you're the ignorant one, who can't see outside of the box, where
someone on the ground is using that data.

I'm a commercially licensed pilot and flight instructor.



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.

wrong on that too. i didn't evade *anything*. i explained how i know
the altitude.

you're so intent on arguing that you skipped right past it.

He's never stated what the elevation is where he is.

there's no need to state my elevation. it makes no difference to you or
anyone else.

Of course it does.

1. The minimum altitude over populated areas is 1000' above ground (or
above buildings to be pedantic).

2. You state that you -know- aircraft are at 2000' above, sometimes
1700', but you're ambiguous to whether that is ASL or AGL, ambiguous as
to how you determine that.

3. Then miracle of miracles you state in another post that you have a
"device" that receives transponder responses w/o stating more about that
mysterious piece of kit.


all that matters is whether i know it (and i do).

BS alarm.


i also need to know the current barometric pressure, something you also
neglected to mention.

Didn't need to at all. Aircraft fly below 18,000 feet (in North
America) based on pressure altitude and report that altitude. ATC
displays correct the blind encoder for local pressure and therefore also
show the altitude as ASL on radar and traffic sequencing displays. To
delve into that would only muddy the waters.

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.

again, it was mentioned yesterday.

try to keep up.


No it wasn't. You didn't specify what exactly you were using to
determine a/c altitudes. Never mind assuring that they were 1700' to
2000' AGL when it's now pretty clear you had no idea what you were
blabbering about.

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

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.


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

On 2016-05-29 11:53, nospam wrote:
In article , Tony Cooper
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.

not at all.

as usual, when you don't understand something (which happens quite
often), instead of trying to learn, you immediately go into bash mode
and any explanation is immediately dismissed as bogus.

it's truly ****ed up. you take trolling to a new level.


So, now, w/o referring to past statements, restate everything clearly.
What elevation are you at? 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; how is it displayed?

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

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