L.A. County testing unmanned surveillance drones

We knew that something like this was coming sooner or later, and now the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department has officially begun testing what will likely be the first unmanned aerial surveillance vehicle to be deployed domestically in an urban environment. Called SkySeers, these three-pound, six-foot wide drones will initially be used on an as-needed basis to replace helicopters in searching for criminal suspects or lost children and hikers, according to Commander Sid Heal, as the $25,000 to $35,000 upfront cost of each plane will quickly be recouped by the $1,200 saved for every extra hour a copter can stay grounded. Since each of the foldable, GPS-guided SkySeers -- which are equipped with remote-controlled thermal and pan-tilt cams -- can only stay aloft for a maximum of sixty minutes, it's not yet feasible to use them as round-the-clock watchdogs, but privacy groups are concerned that eventually the sky could be filled with drones ripe for all kinds of abuse. Still, unless you're involved in some shady activities, a few more cameras peering down from the sky shouldn't bother you much more than the bevy of ATMs, security cams, and cameraphones already capturing your every move from the moment you step out of the house in the morning.

[Via The Independent, pic courtesy of Octatron]

[OtakuCODE @ Jun 20th 2006 3:04PM]

"If you're not doing anything wrong, you don't have anything to worry about" is one of the dumbest positions it is possible for a human being to conceive of. History shows that surveillance powers are ALWAYS abused and ALWAYS lead to terrible violations of human rights. That's 100% of the time.

What makes you think now is different?

[edru @ Jun 20th 2006 3:10PM]

I wouldnt say this is the same as security cameras seeing that it will be fully controlled by the sheriffs dept. Even if im up to nothing at all, I dont think i need to be watched by some remote controlled airplane.

[ken @ Jun 20th 2006 3:13PM]

Only the privacy fanatics point out the abuses everytime, they completely miss the good parts about this. Especially lost kids. Come on and give it a rest!

[falcom @ Jun 20th 2006 3:14PM]

i'm afraid of these things getting radar guns...

[TheOne @ Jun 20th 2006 3:20PM]

I could take one of those down with a 12 gauge if it got close enough.

Sounds like a new hunting season will be opening!

[mib @ Jun 20th 2006 3:24PM]

@falcom: no radar guns needed. after all, everything needed to measure the speed of something is a known distance and the time that something needs to travel it, both can be quite easily obtained from the video. the only problem would be to get a cars licence plate. cross-referencing with the footage from ground cameras, anyone?
hmm, the more I think about the possibilities, the scarier this gets... I'll stop NOW!

[dan @ Jun 20th 2006 3:36PM]

i for one, welcome our new, surveilling robot overlords.

[Hank Cazorp @ Jun 20th 2006 3:37PM]

I wouldn't mind government surveillance so much if we were permitted to surveil our government in return. But really, we're just taxpaying chattel. And privacy is a right afforded only to those with guns, badges, and oval offices.

Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

[Bobo @ Jun 20th 2006 3:39PM]

One man's drone is another man's target practice.

[James @ Jun 20th 2006 3:42PM]

$25-35k for a modded R/C airplane? I'll knock off a big $5k from this estimate and build them one myself and the profit marign would still be huge.

[Joshua Stein @ Jun 20th 2006 3:57PM]

I understand the fears of a slippery slope leading to a "Big Brother" scenario, but how is this different than if the sherrif's office decided to fly helicopters overhead 24/7? Here in Philly, we just took a non-binding vote to install security cameras in high-crime areas, as they have done with sucess in Baltimore and Chigaco. The measure passed by over 80%, and was most widely voted for in the very neighborhoods where these are likely to be installed.

There never has been, and never will be an expectation of privacy when you are out in public. If police departments had the budget, they would put cops on every corner. Would that be a violation of privacy? At least the cameras don't have guns, and can't pull over a minority driver just to harass them. Anything the cameras sees is recorded, and those tapes will/should always be a matter of public record. Let's not get too worried until the police refuse to hand over the video that they record. Then that means that they have something to hide.

[oshean @ Jun 20th 2006 4:04PM]

These things will pay for themselves in a day.

[Hardcore @ Jun 20th 2006 4:08PM]

LA is a freakin Fascist city - I went as a tourist and got slapped with a RIDICULOUS $350 fine for being stuck in the middle of an intersection when their extortionist traffic camera changed from green to red in the span of a milisecond. Way to welcome tourists LOS GHETTOANGELES. They should just give you a GPS implant when you arrive at the airport. LA is a craphole; I hope it falls into the ocean.

[Zac @ Jun 20th 2006 4:12PM]

Aren't model airplanes nearly impossible to fly in any wind over 5 mph?

[Dave @ Jun 20th 2006 4:12PM]

This is great--but what would be even better is if they could fly into your house through the chimney! We need to make sure no terrorism is going on in the house, that nobody is doing drugs, that parents are only discussing appropriate subject matters with their children, and that everybody says grace before supper. Also, if you're not doing anything wrong, there's no reason why your choice of reading material, movies, and music shouldn't be logged and analyzed. I sure hope they're working on this so we can all be safer.

[Paul @ Jun 20th 2006 4:18PM]

Josh you nailed it. Maybe it is us philadelphias with our rising crime rates that see the benefits...

That said why do people believe that they have a right to privacy when in public? I dont get it...

throw some solar pannels on these baby's and keep em up 12 hours a day.

[Ogunlade @ Jun 20th 2006 4:30PM]

Wouldn't it be more practical to use a helicopter prototype? It could hover, drop into small places, and be a pointer to ground troops, oops, I mean security.

[Jon Lind @ Jun 20th 2006 4:33PM]

$25,000 - $35,000 each? Man, the manager at Early's House O' Hobbies really pulled something over on the Sheriff's Department. I'm in the wrong line of work. Geesh!

[ken @ Jun 20th 2006 5:19PM]

you know, that should post the ip address online, so everyone can see, that would be something if they did that like traffic cams

[Reality Check @ Jun 20th 2006 5:47PM]

Hopefully they can use this on the US-Mexico border.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060620/ap_on_re_us/illegal_immigrants_crackdown_4

There's some good news for you today...someone is actually doing something right for a change.

[Shane @ Jun 20th 2006 5:49PM]

This is different than flying a helicoptor 24/7 because it's a lot cheaper. With the helicoptor, you're limited in your coverage, with these, you can cover almost everything.

In the interest of turnabout is fair play, I think we should design our own surveillence drones and use them to monitor the police and government. Fair's fair, right?

[Anthony @ Jun 20th 2006 6:37PM]

I wouldn't really mind if these were only in certain, high-traffic areas, but seriously, these things fly... Don't be surprised when you're tanning in your backyard and the sun is blocked by a hovering BigBroBot 2000 who's scanning for activities as illicit as sunbathing, watering your flowers and cleaning up dog crap.

[Jimtomas @ Jun 20th 2006 6:38PM]

This is double plus good. I hope it keeps "The Children" from reading subversive literature.

[Aigarius @ Jun 20th 2006 6:40PM]

What, no HalfLife 2 reference?!

[Sam @ Jun 20th 2006 7:00PM]

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"

Benjamin Franklin

This is for you naive people!

[Alexandre D @ Jun 20th 2006 7:46PM]

nice quote...very nice quote...

[Andir2.0 @ Jun 20th 2006 7:49PM]

@Sam: If there is one thing we should have learned is that our founding fathers were great people, but they don't necessarily promote a conformist nation so their actions and words will be replaced with more meaningful and thought out phrases in the next edition.

[TOMCATS @ Jun 20th 2006 8:22PM]

If you can't beat em, join em. I'm not a privacy advocat, nor a breaker of the law, but something has to give. My only grip, is if you are going to watch me, I'm going to watch you. Put a RFID in my arm, and I will put one in you.

Again I'm not a person of the faith, but I think it is written in the bible about a marking of all people. 666 I think was the #. Accept it!!! But, at what price?

[David @ Jun 21st 2006 12:37AM]

I had an LA helicopter pilot give me a bogus ticket for "reckless driving," which turned out to be a simple case of "motorcyclist failing to put foot down at stop sign." So you can imagine exactly what kind of high crimes and misdemeanors these will be deployed to control.

I couldn't agree more about LA. This place is a horrible police state and I hope it falls into the ocean so I the movie companies will go somewhere else and I can move there instead.

[[e-mail] @ Jun 21st 2006 1:55AM]

I wonder if the NSA and the rest of the Federal Goverment gets access to this data realtime. The data is going to be a nice addition to their growing databases.

Neal Saferstrein

[Sam @ Jun 21st 2006 3:14AM]

A civilized society is not the one that restricts the freedom of it's citizens,
invades their privacy, violates their rights and spends considerable resources to watch for criminals. It's the one that does not produce them.

[j.cranford @ Jun 21st 2006 5:47AM]

fly it over my property it will be shotdown

[j.cranford @ Jun 21st 2006 5:52AM]

better yet, i will save some cash on anti-aircraft guns, and build a drone of my own and "accidently crash into" hmmm kamakazi.......

this is attack on your 4th amendment protections....lol.were to trust the L.A. sherrifs dept...lmfao,

im no liberal- registered republican and GULF WAR VET

[scott @ Jun 21st 2006 9:15AM]

This seems like the problem that those camera sensing laser things were designed to solve. Put one of those on your roof, car, meth lab, etc and you have instant privacy. Technology can always be beaten by some other technology.
Oh yeah and if it cant see you, you can shoot at it without getting arrested

[Takeo @ Jun 21st 2006 11:42AM]

j.cranford has a point, at this moment I don't think it's actually illegal to knock down a UAV yet, you might get in trouble for damaging police property, however it's the crash that destroys the plane, not the impact that sends it out of control LOL. Time to break out my brushless Zagi!

Oddly enough this is how aviation got started in WWI, planes set up to do observation and recon, and then the opposing side put up planes to shoot down the recon units. Odd how history repeats itself eh?

[Nihls @ Jun 21st 2006 12:23PM]

We are looking at this all wrong. If the LAPD (legal criminals) puts an RC device in the air, we can jam their signal and take control of it. Give me $40.00 and a Radio Shack.
Ebay ad: One slightly used "unmanned surveillance drone"

[Craig @ Jun 22nd 2006 8:16AM]

Los Angeles Times: FAA Grounds L.A. Sheriff's Drone Air Force
Federal officials say the sheriff didn't have the OK for a media demonstration of his surveillance drone.

[url]http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-drone22jun22,0,4150612.story?coll=la-home-headlines[/url]

[Craig @ Jun 22nd 2006 8:17AM]

Sorry about the link:


Los Angeles Times: FAA Grounds L.A. Sheriff's Drone Air Force
Federal officials say the sheriff didn't have the OK for a media demonstration of his surveillance drone.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-drone22jun22,0,4150612.story?coll=la-home-headlines

[jcranford @ Jun 22nd 2006 5:50PM]

any one know what elivation this will fly at and what frequncy will the controls work on?

the manufactuer http://www.octatron.com/Products/SKS.html

makes no mention of this, and there not answering there phone, I have been waiting from a call back from a faa official in LA for this info john goldflush 310-725-7249

[jcranford @ Jun 22nd 2006 6:13PM]

any one know what elivation this will fly at and what frequncy will the controls work on?

the manufactuer http://www.octatron.com/Products/SKS.html

makes no mention of this, and there not answering there phone, I have been waiting from a call back from a faa official in LA for this info john goldflush 310-725-7249

[Leopold Porkstacker @ Apr 30th 2007 1:06PM]

I wonder how many gangbangers and crooked-hat wearing thumpin bass baggy pants kiddies will try to shoot them down? I mean, we're talking Los Angeles here.

-he who stacks pork

[bernadette @ Jan 26th 2009 4:04PM]

nice site