Drone Defender Project suggestion

Lestraveled

Joined May 19, 2014
1,946
I think adding some sport to it would make a big difference. I see using a CO2 driven net cannon. They already make them for capturing small animals. The net would have to be lightened to increase range. After I bagged a nice drone I would mount it on a board and hang it on the wall next to the fire place.:D:D

To lure the drones in you could use life sized mannequins of the Kim Cardashian or Taylor Swift doing naughty things in your backyard. You could also add a "drone blind" that looks like a utility shed to conceal your presence until the drone gets close enough.
 
Last edited:

shortbus

Joined Sep 30, 2009
7,078
Shortbus,

We are not talking about phone jammers. That is the restricted topic. That and the fact no one put up a schematic of one.
Quote from the thread I linked to, by Bertus, " Hello, Jammers of any kind are a prohibited subject over here:
The following topics are regularly raised however are considered “off-topic” at all times and will results in Your thread being closed without question: "

As to actually closing this thread or any thread on the topic, doesn't make a difference to me. Was just wondering why some "jammer" threads are OK and others(by new members) are closed
 

Lestraveled

Joined May 19, 2014
1,946
I don't think this thread has crossed the line into how to specifically build a jammer. Most of the posts are concerned with FCC rules, licensing, feasibility and assorted banter. I don't see any schematics.
 

Thread Starter

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,159
The net would have to be lightened to increase range.
I could suggest "nylon net". You would find it in a fabric store because it is used to make "crinolines", a way to fluff out large skirts. It was also used as an early form of the Dobie pad for washing dishes.

As for the taxidermy, I am at a loss as to how one would stuff a quadcopter.:confused:
 

JoeJester

Joined Apr 26, 2005
4,126
Bertus said "all jammers" but the rule he cited stated "phone jammers."

We are not talking about constructing them. We are talking about the U.S. regulatory agency's rules and regulations in the ISM band and some useful calculations that could be part of associative learning when discussing other parts of 47 Code of Federal Rregulations ... boring those outside that agencies jurisdiction, yet probably similar to their own governing body.
 

nsaspook

Joined Aug 27, 2009
6,478
I would think it would be pretty difficult to electronically 'jam' most government Drones as I suspect they would use some sort of Spread-Spectrum EPM (Electronic Protective Measures) anti-jamming technology that even powerful local broadband noise-based (barrage noise) transmissions would be unable to defeat. You would need a 'NCFSK follower' and that's not something you will find on ebay unless someone has a old SLQ-32 for sale cheap.:)
 
Last edited:

JoeJester

Joined Apr 26, 2005
4,126
I tend to think if your attempting to "jam" a government drone, you'll be in a jam ... with the courts system.

on edit ...

There have been a few drones shot down ... in the Middle East and Far East.
 

alfacliff

Joined Dec 13, 2013
2,458
power levels? liscensed hams, technician class and above are allowed around 1800 watts input on the 2.4 ghz band. pulse is also allowed there, giving a much greater power. a high power "beacon" might not be too hard to build.
and as for interfearing, the rules state that an unliscensed radio must accept any interfearance from a liscensed system.
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
16,114
So your wife or daughter is sunning in the back yard when this clown floats over head. Or maybe one of these. How do you decide when to deploy your 12 gauge pump?
 
Last edited:

Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
21,906
The clown had protection for his head as part of the vehicle. He needs to work on fly by wire seems to me. It is interesting electric motor and battery tech has hit this point. Wonder if a fuel cell would be more efficient than a battery for long term flight?
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
16,114
Electric powered airplanes are superior for short trips. The motors have a superior power-to-weight and there's a lot of energy savings while on the ground. Their problem is the energy-to-weight density of the "fuel". Liquid fuel is really good to start, and gets even better because it loses weight as you go. The amount of battery needed for a long trip is prohibitive. For now.
 

cmartinez

Joined Jan 17, 2007
6,593
Top