FBI agents, like most cops, aren't inclined to believe in coincidence.
Cheers,
-- jra
Correct me if I’m wrong, but these FO vandalisms have been going on in the bay area since before the stadium
was even funded.
This leads me to believe that this is just another example of an LE landgrab.
Owen
Or a media site generating click bait.
Before significant public events, as part of their planning, law enforcement and security folks prepare long lists of potential things that could happen. There are often hundreds of potential things that could happen. They range from reuniting lost parents/childen and first aid stations up to earthquakes and mass casualty events. Potential loss of telecommunications due to an accident, natural hazard or malicious actors
seems like something that should be on the planning list.
Proper Planning and Practice Prevents Piss Poor Performance.
How old's the stadium? The article does mention late '14.
Cheers,
-- jra
Broke ground in April 2012
http://www.mercurynews.com/southbayfootball/ci_20434376/49ers-break-ground-this-evening-stadium-at-center
-Grant
Am I the only one who thinks the below line is BS?
"...pose a risk of injury to event-goers if an operator loses control."
If there is not safeguards in-place for "normal" network issues then
we would of heard of injuries before.
Well,
( In context )
I can tell you that a 4 propeller's drone to the face kinda hurt.
Because that was the context where that quote was ripped from.
I think that line refers to drone operators ...
I fail to see how drones relate to fiber cuts and the superbowl. Did the
article author just throw that in there? The news helicopter getting aerial
footage also poses a risk, so not sure what's special about drones.
I'm fairly certain they are most concerned with this specific section: "allow unauthorized video coverage of events". It's not surprising they threw a drone into the story, seems to be all anyone talks about these days...
I'm fairly certain they are most concerned with this specific
section: "allow unauthorized video coverage of events". It's not
surprising they threw a drone into the story, seems to be all
anyone talks about these days...
While I agree that the broadcast networks are concerned about
unauthorized recording and/or rebroadcasting of the event, there's
also a precedent on a drone crashing during a high-profile sporting
event in the U.S.:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/04/us/us-open-tennis-drone-arrest/index.html
$.02,
- - ferg
Drones don't cost $200 per hour to keep in the air, and they're not as
obvious as a helicopter. So it becomes a lot easier to get in there and
grab some unauthorized video....
Helicopters near the Super Bowl are cleared to be there and are flown by vetted professional pilots. A human pilot in a helicopter presumably has some kind of qualification to be there while a drone (although I don't like that word) could be flown by any moron with a couple hundred bucks. I also think the government is going completely overboard with the "drone threat" but in the case of the Super Bowl, there should definitely be a reasonable restriction on drone flights, ANY flight for that matter. I think reasonable drone pilots would agree with that.
Steven Naslund
Chicago IL
Helicopters near the Super Bowl are cleared to be there and are flown by vetted professional pilots. A human pilot in a helicopter presumably has some kind of qualification to be there while a drone (although I don't like that word) could be flown by any moron with a couple hundred bucks. I also think the government is going completely overboard with the "drone threat" but in the case of the Super Bowl, there should definitely be a reasonable restriction on drone flights, ANY flight for that matter. I think reasonable drone pilots would agree with that.
Can't wait for autonomous drones in the $50 range. And the autonomous counter-drones.
*Twitch **Plays* Super Bowl Drone needs to be a thing.
Unmanned aircraft systems are subject to the same Temporary Flight Restrictions(TFR) as manned aircraft.
While the TFRs for Superbowl 50 are not yet published, you can be assured that the FAA will issue some
and likely several.
Most likely everything below at least 10,000 feet for at least a 5 nautical mile radius of the stadium
will be closed to all but the following:
1. Flight operations in support of the superbowl authorized by superbowl management
2. Scheduled Air Carriers
3. Military
4. Law Enforcement
5. Medical/Emergency Services
6. Possibly certain other flights authorized by ATC and on a discrete transponder code.
It’s not unlikely that this will go to 18,000 instead of just 10,000 and also not unlikely that this could
extend to 10 or even 15 nautical miles.
Personally, I’m planning to drive out of the area on the 5th and not return until the 11th or maybe even
the 12th to avoid the whole mess. I want nothing to do with the first Superbowl in the worst possible
place to put a stadium in the bay area.
Whatever idiot(s) thought putting a major stadium at the confluence of the most congested freeways
in the bay area was a good idea should be flayed.
The only good thing I can say about the stadium is that unlike the San Jose Arena, I am not being
forced to subsidize Levi’s advertising through taxes to the best of my knowledge.
I expect the traffic on the ground to be a nightmare and everything related to aviation in the area
to be even worse. There will likely be limited landing and parking reservation slots allocated at all
surrounding airports (SJC, HWD, RHV, E16, PAO, and possibly even SQL, SFO, OAK, CVH, SNS).
According to preliminary data, the Superbowl will affect operations at APC, CCR, CVH, HWD, LVK, MRY,
OAK, PAO, RHV, SCK, SFO, SNS, SQL, STS, and WVI. (Not sure why E16 didn’t make the list, but I guarantee
you it will be affected).
“Special security provisions” whatever that means will be implmented in the San Jose and San Francisco areas
three to five days prior to the Super Bowl.
More information can be found here:
http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2016/January/05/Super-Bowl-50-flight-advisory-coming
Owen
Commercial Pilot, Airplane Single Engine Land, Instrument Airplane
Drone enthusiast
AOPA Member
Enclosed stadiums won't have to worry about remote drones until they get smart enough to open doors on their own. Not sure why the NFL gets uptight about unauthorized recording. Most sporting events have little value once the event is over.
matthew black
Drones could do unauthorized streaming just as well as unauthorized recording.
Also, the Santa Clara stadium is not enclosed.
Owen
Control. Which might include contractual obligations like against
showing some big-shot coach or player picking his nose or crying or
whatever (tho spitting seems ok even on artificial turf yuck!),
upskirts, whatever. Maybe certain people in attendance particularly in
the expensive boxes don't want to be shown (e.g., with their, um,
girlfriends), etc etc etc.
At least some money would be in bloopers or scandals.
WHo cares? TOG (your third party shooting what you loosly call un-authorized video) is not a party to the contract and therefore does not give a flying fuck what it says. Nor do the parties to the contract have anything to say about the matter.
So in other words, TOG is free to do whatever he pleases and there is nothing that anyone can legally do about it. Get that down your gullet and choke on it.
In fact, TOG can sue anyone who attempts to unlawfully prevent him from exercizing his unrestricted rights.
Get that in ya, you fascist commie bastard.