At 13:06 +1100 3/12/13, Jim Birch wrote:
>> Is a drone more dangerous than a car?
>...I refer, of course, to the type of machine suggested for short range
>urban delivery of non-lethal payloads.
Maybe.
>The majority of personal use of model aircraft has long been by
>individuals acting with considerable care and responsibility,
>typically as members of a club that sets constraints, arranges
>insurance cover, and uses dedicated and somewhat isolated airfields.
>The costs involved in acquiring and operating aerial devices has
>[sic] plummeted, however, and the less expensive models have now
>come within the price-range of adolescents' Christmas presents. The
>rash of remote-controlled model cars terrorising neighbourhoods may
>be about to give way to a rash of remote-controlled devices that are
>not terrestrially-limited, that may exhibit many additional
>failure-modes, that are subject to gravity, whose impact-velocity
>may be significantly greater than out-of-control model cars, and
>whose operators may exhibit little responsibility and have little in
>the way of assets or insurance.
But that's in the paper I sent the RFC for, so why would anyone read it.
Additional aspects:
- rotorcraft commonly have dangerous, whirling parts
- cars are (for the most part) limited to roads.
Drones are limited to the air, but in principle at any altitude,
down to and including the road, and the not-road
--
Roger Clarke http://www.rogerclarke.com/
Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd 78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
Tel: +61 2 6288 6916 http://about.me/roger.clarke
mailto:Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au http://www.xamax.com.au/
Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Law University of N.S.W.
Visiting Professor in Computer Science Australian National University