Shoot that drone down

On 2016-05-29 18:15, Eric Stevens 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.

But that's not where it started. We were discussing the rules
governing the flight of drones.

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.

He doesn't have to state the elevation. All that is necessary is that
he knows it.

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.

I agree that he is too often sparse with support for anything he says
but on this occasion he has described how he knows in another post.
See his Message-ID:
Elsewhere he has said he has the necessary gear.

Yeah and there are further flies in the ointment. See my other post at
about this time.


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

On 2016-05-30 10:05, nospam wrote:
In article ,
Sandman wrote:


Here's a tip for you, if you wonder about something - ask!

Here's how this "conversation" should have gone:

nospam: planes sometimes fly at 2,000 or 1,700 feet above my house
Andreas: How do you know that exactly?
nospam: I see it on my radar
Andreas: But that's ASL
nospam: yes, but it's easily converted.
Andreas: Oh, ok.

pretty much, although there is no radar used at all.

Ground radar is what triggers the aircraft transponder to transmit in
reply for the sort of gear you have.

it's simply a radio that receives signals from the plane's transponder.

The fly in that ointment was that we talking about drones flying low and
that was your reply - it implied height above ground, not sea level.

QUOTE

where i live, small planes often fly over houses at around 2000 feet
(the lowest i've seen is 1700 feet).

someone on board could have a high resolution camera with a long
telephoto lens and get far better quality results than from an fpv
drone that's a few hundred feet up.

UNQUOTE

Then you say you're at about 300' elevation and claim that it is of no
import, well, here's another bit of fly in the ointment for your story:

Atmospheric pressure varies in the range of about 28.7" Hg to 30.7" Hg
at sea level (for 300' not much difference). That's without crazy
weather where the low's can of course be deeper.

At sea level (or 300' for that matter), that variance corresponds to
about -1200' to +790 feet from the standard (North America) of 29.92"
Hg. (The hoary saying is "from high to low, look out below" - eg when
flying from a high pressure area to low, be mindful of the altimeter
setting lest ye fly too low.)

So it is highly improbable to see the "floor" of aircraft in your area
at 1700 and no lower. Atmospheric pressure variance should see the
reported altitudes much lower (and higher) over time than what you've
reported. (And indeed if you had a clue you would have mentioned so).

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

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:


Hmmm- let's see a photo of _yours_ in operation.

what for? you'll claim it was faked.

No for you to prove you actually didn't just discover it in a desperate
attempt to prove your very weak story.

there's nothing weak about my story nor did i just discover anything.

i've had them for nearly a decade and am *thoroughly* familiar with how
they work. you are not.

you're making numerous assumptions, which are wrong.

You know - not knowing the
difference between ASL and AGL and that a/c routinely operate at 1000'
AGL over built up areas.

you're making stuff up again.

i know the difference between asl&agl and never said anything about
flying at 1000' over populated areas. that's complete bull**** on your
part.

what i said was that planes flying over houses near me are around
2000', sometimes less (and sometimes more too).

since i mentioned it being over my house, it would have to be agl.

mentioning altitudes above sea level for planes flying over my house
makes no sense at all.

the only reason sea level came up in the first place is because one
particular troll likes to argue about things he doesn't understand.

i'll post a photo of what i have on the condition that you'll admit you
were wrong, that you didn't know about such devices and also to stop
arguing with every post i make. deal?

I happily admit that I didn't know about the particular sort of device
you claim to have for non-ADS-B reception. It's a bit of a low cost,
band-aid passive solution, but could be useful in congested areas for
someone who can't afford a proper ADS-B system.

it predates ads-b.

the first such device i saw was back around 1990 or so and was rather
primitive. it just beeped for planes nearby and falsed a *lot*.

starting around 2000 or so, they became a lot more discriminating, plus
there are also user selectable options to filter it further.

Here's the proof you should:
1. Video, from your house (backyard or whatever), in operation,
reporting on an aircraft nearby, its altitude.

2. When you're ready to do your video, you send me a mail message. I
will return a phrase to you that you will print up in a large font and
include in the video with the device operating. You will have 2 hours
from then to make and post the video.

For further detail, write me at my address above. No freelunch.
Specify the day and time period that would best suit you.

here's a photo of both units with a piece of paper that says rpd and
today's date. that's more than enough proof.

http://i.imgur.com/GzhiejS.jpg

it was taken outside in the shade, with the only adjustments being
colour balance.

3. I'll always point out when you're wrong. That is usenet. And you
are so often wrong. (eg: about the a/c at 1700' and 2000' reports that
you implied were above ground level).

the problem is that people *claim* i'm wrong when i'm not wrong.

not only was agl implied, but those altitudes absolutely were agl and
still are agl.

nothing about that was wrong. not a thing.

as i said before, why would someone say 1700' over houses and *not*
mean agl? that makes *no* sense.

a certain troll decided that i must have meant sea level and started
his usual bash-rant. as usual, he's wrong, as are you.

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

actually, i've said quite a bit, but you're so intent on arguing to pay
attention to any of it.

I'm ROTFL lauging at what lengths you've gone to defend the
indefensible. You see there's a big fly in the ointment about the
device you claim to have, buy you have no clue what that fly is.

the only fly is *you*, who has no clue about such devices and even
claimed they didn't exist when it's clear that they do.

I didn't say they didn't exist, I mentioned what I knew to exist. I'm
delighted there are these products now which we didn't have when I was
active as a pilot.

what you should have asked is something like 'even though i'm a cfi,
i've never heard of that, where can i find out more?' or 'how are you
getting agl from what a transponder sends?'

the problem is you automatically go into attack mode.

the answer to the second question is because it shows altitudes
*relative* to where it's at, so when the device is on the ground,
whatever it displays is agl. it's really quite simple.

during a flight, the numbers would be offset for whatever altitude it's
at.

a plane in my driveway would show up as 0 because it's at the same
altitude i am (assuming its transponder could be interrogated).

now that you've been shown to be wrong, you come up with some
mysterious issue that you refuse to articulate.

I'll back off on that one ... slightly. While the device will give you
the transmitted altitude from the other aircraft, you won't have other
information such as direction to the other a/c from where you are. That
is the fly in that ointment I was referring to.

that's not a fly at all because they were never designed to give
bearings, other than one model (xrx), which can also link to a garmin
gps.

bearing is also not particularly important for someone on the ground
who is watching flights overhead.

like everything, nothing is perfect and there are some limitations, but
you haven't come anywhere close to what they are.

But for the life of me I don't know why one would waste money on such a
thing if he wasn't an aircraft owner.

what difference would that make? people can spend money on whatever
they want for any reason they want.

i'm sure there's a lot of stuff you have that others would consider to
be a waste of money.

anyway, in my case, about a decade ago i was working on a project and
as part of that, we had to evaluate all existing products.

keep in mind that this all predated ads-b deployment. today, such a
project would be very, very different.

FlightRadar24 gives you much,
much more for much, much less.

flightradar requires a computer connected to the internet and even with
that, it won't have any information on a random general aviation plane
flying overhead.

flightradar is great, but it serves an entirely different purpose.

In article , J.
Clarke wrote:

I'm not an expert in aviation, so I don't know if such data exists, or
if such a receiver exists. But it would have saved a lot of time and
bandwidth if he had mentioned possession of such a receiver when he
first mentioned the altitudes of planes in his home area. Such as "I've
seen airplanes over my neighborhood at 2000 feet and as low as 1700
feet, based on flight data from my ACME model ABC555 flight data radio
receiver."

The signal is there for any aircraft with a transponder and an encoding
altimeter.

correct.

The receiver though is a fairly expensive piece of kit

not expensive at all. some go for well under $100 on ebay.

a nikon d810 with the magic three (14-24mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8 &
70-200mm f/2.8 vr ii) is a 'fairly expensive piece of kit'. so what?

and
one wonders why someone would have such a thing in his house.

one might wonder why someone would have all sorts of things, but it's
their house and they get to decide what goes in it.

i'm sure there's plenty of stuff in your house that others might wonder
about.

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

Here's a tip for you, if you wonder about something - ask!

Here's how this "conversation" should have gone:

nospam: planes sometimes fly at 2,000 or 1,700 feet above my house
Andreas: How do you know that exactly?
nospam: I see it on my radar
Andreas: But that's ASL
nospam: yes, but it's easily converted.
Andreas: Oh, ok.

pretty much, although there is no radar used at all.

Ground radar is what triggers the aircraft transponder to transmit in
reply for the sort of gear you have.

true, but it's not *my* radar, nor do i have a radar display of any
sort for planes (or anything else for that matter).

what i have is nothing more than a radio tuned to 1090 mhz which
receives and decodes transponder replies and alerts to any traffic it
deems as too close. that's all.

it's simply a radio that receives signals from the plane's transponder.

The fly in that ointment was that we talking about drones flying low and
that was your reply - it implied height above ground, not sea level.

not only did it imply above ground, but it *was* above ground.

i never said anything about sea level. why would i? stating altitudes
above sea level to describe planes over my house makes *no* sense.

the only reason why sea level came up at all was because of a troll who
tries to argue about anything and everything, even when he doesn't
understand what it is he's arguing about.

QUOTE

where i live, small planes often fly over houses at around 2000 feet
(the lowest i've seen is 1700 feet).

someone on board could have a high resolution camera with a long
telephoto lens and get far better quality results than from an fpv
drone that's a few hundred feet up.

UNQUOTE

saying 'a few hundred feet up' makes it *very* clear that i'm talking
about agl.

Then you say you're at about 300' elevation and claim that it is of no
import,

it isn't important *to* *you*.

as long as *i* know what my elevation is, and i do, everything works
out just fine.

and i don't really need to know that because of how the device actually
works, another thing you don't understand and are making incorrect
assumptions.

the device reports *relative* altitude (e.g., +1700), and since its on
the ground, traffic is automatically displayed as agl.

during a flight, the very same traffic (assuming it was still there)
would be displayed relative to whatever altitude you're at (e.g.,
-1000).

it gets your altitude from your transponder as well as an internal
barometric altimeter, which is used for several reasons, including to
validate mode c replies as well as tracking altitude changes between
transponder interrogations or if there's no transponder at all.

its altimeter can be calibrated and i check it every so often, but
that's about it.

in my case, it thinks i'm 'flying' at 300' (my ground elevation), and
if a plane overhead sends 2000', it will show 1700' because it's 1700
feet above 'my plane'.

if there was a plane in my driveway (assume its transponder was
interrogated and responding), it would display 0 because it's at the
same altitude as i am.

well, here's another bit of fly in the ointment for your story:

Atmospheric pressure varies in the range of about 28.7" Hg to 30.7" Hg
at sea level (for 300' not much difference). That's without crazy
weather where the low's can of course be deeper.

At sea level (or 300' for that matter), that variance corresponds to
about -1200' to +790 feet from the standard (North America) of 29.92"
Hg. (The hoary saying is "from high to low, look out below" - eg when
flying from a high pressure area to low, be mindful of the altimeter
setting lest ye fly too low.)

So it is highly improbable to see the "floor" of aircraft in your area
at 1700 and no lower. Atmospheric pressure variance should see the
reported altitudes much lower (and higher) over time than what you've
reported. (And indeed if you had a clue you would have mentioned so).

no flies at all.

what's clear is that i have *far* more of a clue about how these
devices work as well as any limitations they might have than you do.

while what you wrote above is true, it doesn't actually matter.

again, it reports *relative* altitude, so when used on the ground, what
gets displayed is relative to *that*, or agl.

the actual fly in the ointment is something you don't even realize,
which is that it's also looking for traffic *below* itself (important
during flight, not so much on the ground), so when it's used on the
ground, half of its range is wasted looking for flights below ground
level. there aren't very many of those.

On 2016-05-31 16:54, nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne
wrote:


Hmmm- let's see a photo of _yours_ in operation.

what for? you'll claim it was faked.

No for you to prove you actually didn't just discover it in a desperate
attempt to prove your very weak story.

there's nothing weak about my story nor did i just discover anything.

i've had them for nearly a decade and am *thoroughly* familiar with how
they work. you are not.

you're making numerous assumptions, which are wrong.

You know - not knowing the
difference between ASL and AGL and that a/c routinely operate at 1000'
AGL over built up areas.

you're making stuff up again.

i know the difference between asl&agl and never said anything about
flying at 1000' over populated areas. that's complete bull**** on your
part.

what i said was that planes flying over houses near me are around
2000', sometimes less (and sometimes more too).

The other great fly in your ointment is you would see a lot of lower
altitudes displayed due to pressure variation (other post). But of
course you neglected that too...

BS alarm still ringing.


since i mentioned it being over my house, it would have to be agl.

mentioning altitudes above sea level for planes flying over my house
makes no sense at all.

the only reason sea level came up in the first place is because one
particular troll likes to argue about things he doesn't understand.


Now you're scambling to muddy the waters.



i'll post a photo of what i have on the condition that you'll admit you
were wrong, that you didn't know about such devices and also to stop
arguing with every post i make. deal?

I happily admit that I didn't know about the particular sort of device
you claim to have for non-ADS-B reception. It's a bit of a low cost,
band-aid passive solution, but could be useful in congested areas for
someone who can't afford a proper ADS-B system.

it predates ads-b.

the first such device i saw was back around 1990 or so and was rather
primitive. it just beeped for planes nearby and falsed a *lot*.

starting around 2000 or so, they became a lot more discriminating, plus
there are also user selectable options to filter it further.

Here's the proof you should:
1. Video, from your house (backyard or whatever), in operation,
reporting on an aircraft nearby, its altitude.

2. When you're ready to do your video, you send me a mail message. I
will return a phrase to you that you will print up in a large font and
include in the video with the device operating. You will have 2 hours
from then to make and post the video.

For further detail, write me at my address above. No freelunch.
Specify the day and time period that would best suit you.

here's a photo of both units with a piece of paper that says rpd and
today's date. that's more than enough proof.

http://i.imgur.com/GzhiejS.jpg

Pretty ****ty photo for someone who's in a photo group.

Not accepted. Must be working and showing an altitude and in VIDEO.
After all you have at least an iPhone.

it was taken outside in the shade, with the only adjustments being
colour balance.

Nope. See above. No adjustments. VIDEO WITH THE UNIT OPERATING, and
while were at it, move the camera around. After all you claim you
operate the unit a lot.


3. I'll always point out when you're wrong. That is usenet. And you
are so often wrong. (eg: about the a/c at 1700' and 2000' reports that
you implied were above ground level).

the problem is that people *claim* i'm wrong when i'm not wrong.

not only was agl implied, but those altitudes absolutely were agl and
still are agl.

nothing about that was wrong. not a thing.

as i said before, why would someone say 1700' over houses and *not*
mean agl? that makes *no* sense.

a certain troll decided that i must have meant sea level and started
his usual bash-rant. as usual, he's wrong, as are you.

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

actually, i've said quite a bit, but you're so intent on arguing to pay
attention to any of it.

I'm ROTFL lauging at what lengths you've gone to defend the
indefensible. You see there's a big fly in the ointment about the
device you claim to have, buy you have no clue what that fly is.

the only fly is *you*, who has no clue about such devices and even
claimed they didn't exist when it's clear that they do.

I didn't say they didn't exist, I mentioned what I knew to exist. I'm
delighted there are these products now which we didn't have when I was
active as a pilot.

what you should have asked is something like 'even though i'm a cfi,
i've never heard of that, where can i find out more?' or 'how are you
getting agl from what a transponder sends?'

No. You should have been clear from the start. Instead, as usual, you
put up vague numbers w/o clarity of any kind and then scramble to backfill.



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

On Tue, 31 May 2016 16:54:06 -0400, nospam
wrote:

it was taken outside in the shade, with the only adjustments being
colour balance.

Pretty funny...

On 2016-05-31 16:54, nospam wrote:
In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

Here's a tip for you, if you wonder about something - ask!

Here's how this "conversation" should have gone:

nospam: planes sometimes fly at 2,000 or 1,700 feet above my house
Andreas: How do you know that exactly?
nospam: I see it on my radar
Andreas: But that's ASL
nospam: yes, but it's easily converted.
Andreas: Oh, ok.

pretty much, although there is no radar used at all.

Ground radar is what triggers the aircraft transponder to transmit in
reply for the sort of gear you have.

true, but it's not *my* radar, nor do i have a radar display of any
sort for planes (or anything else for that matter).

what i have is nothing more than a radio tuned to 1090 mhz which
receives and decodes transponder replies and alerts to any traffic it
deems as too close. that's all.

it's simply a radio that receives signals from the plane's transponder.

The fly in that ointment was that we talking about drones flying low and
that was your reply - it implied height above ground, not sea level.

not only did it imply above ground, but it *was* above ground.

i never said anything about sea level. why would i? stating altitudes
above sea level to describe planes over my house makes *no* sense.

the only reason why sea level came up at all was because of a troll who
tries to argue about anything and everything, even when he doesn't
understand what it is he's arguing about.


Not really - you should have been clear about your observation and
correction for AGL.


QUOTE

where i live, small planes often fly over houses at around 2000 feet
(the lowest i've seen is 1700 feet).

someone on board could have a high resolution camera with a long
telephoto lens and get far better quality results than from an fpv
drone that's a few hundred feet up.

UNQUOTE

saying 'a few hundred feet up' makes it *very* clear that i'm talking
about agl.

Then you say you're at about 300' elevation and claim that it is of no
import,

it isn't important *to* *you*.

as long as *i* know what my elevation is, and i do, everything works
out just fine.

and i don't really need to know that because of how the device actually
works, another thing you don't understand and are making incorrect
assumptions.

the device reports *relative* altitude (e.g., +1700), and since its on
the ground, traffic is automatically displayed as agl.

during a flight, the very same traffic (assuming it was still there)
would be displayed relative to whatever altitude you're at (e.g.,
-1000).

it gets your altitude from your transponder as well as an internal
barometric altimeter, which is used for several reasons, including to
validate mode c replies as well as tracking altitude changes between
transponder interrogations or if there's no transponder at all.

its altimeter can be calibrated and i check it every so often, but
that's about it.

in my case, it thinks i'm 'flying' at 300' (my ground elevation), and
if a plane overhead sends 2000', it will show 1700' because it's 1700
feet above 'my plane'.

if there was a plane in my driveway (assume its transponder was
interrogated and responding), it would display 0 because it's at the
same altitude as i am.

well, here's another bit of fly in the ointment for your story:

Atmospheric pressure varies in the range of about 28.7" Hg to 30.7" Hg
at sea level (for 300' not much difference). That's without crazy
weather where the low's can of course be deeper.

At sea level (or 300' for that matter), that variance corresponds to
about -1200' to +790 feet from the standard (North America) of 29.92"
Hg. (The hoary saying is "from high to low, look out below" - eg when
flying from a high pressure area to low, be mindful of the altimeter
setting lest ye fly too low.)

So it is highly improbable to see the "floor" of aircraft in your area
at 1700 and no lower. Atmospheric pressure variance should see the
reported altitudes much lower (and higher) over time than what you've
reported. (And indeed if you had a clue you would have mentioned so).

no flies at all.

what's clear is that i have *far* more of a clue about how these
devices work as well as any limitations they might have than you do.

More deflection after the fact - as you've learned (by post event
research) and being challenged you've simply gone all internet.

Anyway, post video of your widget working and I'll get off your back.


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

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

You know - not knowing the
difference between ASL and AGL and that a/c routinely operate at 1000'
AGL over built up areas.

you're making stuff up again.

i know the difference between asl&agl and never said anything about
flying at 1000' over populated areas. that's complete bull**** on your
part.

what i said was that planes flying over houses near me are around
2000', sometimes less (and sometimes more too).

The other great fly in your ointment is you would see a lot of lower
altitudes displayed due to pressure variation (other post). But of
course you neglected that too...

i didn't neglect anything.

the only reason i'd see 'lower altitudes' is because it filters out
anything more than 5000' above (or less if configured for less).

the pressure doesn't actually matter, for reasons i already explained.


BS alarm still ringing.

as it should be, since you're creating all of it.


since i mentioned it being over my house, it would have to be agl.

mentioning altitudes above sea level for planes flying over my house
makes no sense at all.

the only reason sea level came up in the first place is because one
particular troll likes to argue about things he doesn't understand.


Now you're scambling to muddy the waters.

not at all.




here's a photo of both units with a piece of paper that says rpd and
today's date. that's more than enough proof.

http://i.imgur.com/GzhiejS.jpg

Pretty ****ty photo for someone who's in a photo group.

Not accepted. Must be working and showing an altitude and in VIDEO.
After all you have at least an iPhone.

i've already spent way more time on this than is necessary. the above
photo is more than enough to prove i own what i said i did.


it was taken outside in the shade, with the only adjustments being
colour balance.

Nope. See above. No adjustments. VIDEO WITH THE UNIT OPERATING, and
while were at it, move the camera around. After all you claim you
operate the unit a lot.

i never claimed i operate the unit a lot.

you're making up more stuff and it's also irrelevant. the issue was
whether i owned them, not how much i use them.

you're moving the goalposts again.


I didn't say they didn't exist, I mentioned what I knew to exist. I'm
delighted there are these products now which we didn't have when I was
active as a pilot.

what you should have asked is something like 'even though i'm a cfi,
i've never heard of that, where can i find out more?' or 'how are you
getting agl from what a transponder sends?'

No. You should have been clear from the start. Instead, as usual, you
put up vague numbers w/o clarity of any kind and then scramble to backfill.

complete nonsense.

everything has been clear from the start.

i said that planes are typically 2000' over my house, and they are.

that's clear as can be. there's nothing vague about it.

In article , Alan Browne
wrote:

it's simply a radio that receives signals from the plane's transponder.

The fly in that ointment was that we talking about drones flying low and
that was your reply - it implied height above ground, not sea level.

not only did it imply above ground, but it *was* above ground.

i never said anything about sea level. why would i? stating altitudes
above sea level to describe planes over my house makes *no* sense.

the only reason why sea level came up at all was because of a troll who
tries to argue about anything and everything, even when he doesn't
understand what it is he's arguing about.


Not really - you should have been clear about your observation and
correction for AGL.

it was clear.



what's clear is that i have *far* more of a clue about how these
devices work as well as any limitations they might have than you do.

More deflection after the fact - as you've learned (by post event
research) and being challenged you've simply gone all internet.

more bull****.

all i did was find links to photos of units i own and have used after
you asked about them.


Anyway, post video of your widget working and I'll get off your back.

you aren't going to get off my back no matter what i do.