Venezuela President Maduro 'survives drone attack'

[Itsallaguess]

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro says he has survived an assassination attempt involving explosive drones.

Mr Maduro was speaking at an military event in Caracas when the alleged attack occurred.

Live footage of Mr Maduro's speech shows the president suddenly looking upwards - startled - and dozens of soldiers running away.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-45073385

Some footage of the incident here, although the explosion itself is not captured on the videos -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tI0Hrz9FqJk

This type of incident should come as no surprise, should it? Other than to ask why these types of issues haven't been more prevalent already?

It seems to me that a hugely dangerous new risk-vector has been actively placed in the hands of the worldwide public with these drones, some of which can carry very heavy loads. I'm shocked that this has been allowed to happen, as it was clear from day-one that such events as this would be the eventual outcome, and I really do think that we're still in the very early days of people like this using this type of technology for their 'causes'......

The speed and accuracy of the flying devices is startling, and I shudder to think what despicable acts could be carried out over large public events with a more organised and competent group of operators....

Sadly, I expect these types of stories to get much worse, and much more prevalent over the coming years, as elements intent on large-scale harm wake-up to the huge opportunities these devices can offer....

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[Itsallaguess]

I recall reading that ISIS in Iraq were using drones to drop grenades on their targets a couple of years ago.

I don't know if these thing can be pre programmed to fly to a destination yet, but I suspect it's not far off. And buying a swarm of say, 50, of these things wouldn't be that expensive for the determined group with a cause.

What I really cannot understand is that this is simply one of the inevitable uses of this technology.

It cannot be a surprise to anyone that there are groups who would rejoice in having this new attack-vector become available to them, and in a form that's -

1. Relatively Cheap.

2. Remotely operated.

3. Capable of both local and potentially widespread damage and harm.

I find it absolutely staggering that this technology is publicly available in a form that's capable of carrying the sorts of loads that can potentially cause such widespread harm....

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[kiloran]

100% agree with all you say, but it's the inevitable cost of progress. Drones could (should?) be withdrawn from public sale but professional drones used by the police etc would still get into the hands of the bad guys. And with the advanced state of technology and the availability of integrated circuits with amazing capabilities and computing power, it would be very simple for any half-decent techie geek to build one from scratch.

Going rather off-topic, it's often questioned why we have not detected signs of intelligent life elsewhere in our universe. After all, there are hundreds of millions of galaxies, each with hundreds of millions of stars, each with their planets. Intelligent life should be abundant. My own (crackpot!) theory is that intelligent life does not last very long. It gets wiped out by disasters such as big asteroids, or plagues/viruses, or just gets too clever for its own good. Earth has been around for 4.5 billion years, but we've only had modern technology for 100-150 years, and much of what we have today (such as drones) were not even in our dreams 20-30 years ago. We've developed plastics which gives us so many benefits, and now we are realising that they are gradually poisoning our seas and foodchain. We've had the benefit of cheap energy from fossil fuels, and we are now suffering the resultant climate change. We developed antibiotics, and then find that life develops an immunity to them.

It's impossible to stop progress, but I do feel that sometime in the next few hundred years it will bite us on the bum and any life which remains will be very different to life as we know it today. Individual things like drones will not kill off mankind on their own, but they are part of an ever increasing problem.

Perhaps I'm being a grumpy old git full of negative thoughts, but I do feel very lucky indeed that I am living my life in perhaps mankind's best period. I don't think I'd like to be around 200 years from now.

Sorry to spoil your weekend with my rambling odd thoughts!

--kiloran

[stewamax]

Scaled up (expensive) and provided with autonomous navigation (cheap) and ...way hey ... its a cruise missile.
At present the low and slow drones can be shot down with rocket grenades but it cannot be long before fleets of anti-drone drones are employed: thence Drone Wars.
Given their limited payload but low flying capability, I would have thought the main malicious use would be to spread nerve agents and bacteriological diseases.

DAK how far semi-autonomous navigation in commercial (surveying; farming etc) drones has progressed?

[UncleEbenezer]

It cannot be a surprise to anyone that there are groups who would rejoice in having this new attack-vector become available to them, and in a form that's -

1. Relatively Cheap.

2. Remotely operated.

3. Capable of both local and potentially widespread damage and harm.

Of course, that's made it a favourite of military cowards, sitting at home attacking wedding parties and the like. And they've been a more-or-less staple of SF since at least the 1950s. Dammit, we built flying model aeroplanes - with the option of radio control if you had money to burn - back when I was a kid in the '70s.

Bear in mind, drones are like knives: they have plenty of potential for good use. My neighbour is an enthusiast: he's built several for various purposes. He demonstrated a very practical use when some fallen roof slates were spotted after one of the storms of 2014, and he used a drone to identify where - and crucially on whose house - the damage was.

[Itsallaguess]

Going rather off-topic, it's often questioned why we have not detected signs of intelligent life elsewhere in our universe.

After all, there are hundreds of millions of galaxies, each with hundreds of millions of stars, each with their planets. Intelligent life should be abundant. My own (crackpot!) theory is that intelligent life does not last very long. It gets wiped out by disasters such as big asteroids, or plagues/viruses, or just gets too clever for its own good.

Earth has been around for 4.5 billion years, but we've only had modern technology for 100-150 years, and much of what we have today (such as drones) were not even in our dreams 20-30 years ago. We've developed plastics which gives us so many benefits, and now we are realising that they are gradually poisoning our seas and foodchain.

We've had the benefit of cheap energy from fossil fuels, and we are now suffering the resultant climate change. We developed antibiotics, and then find that life develops an immunity to them.

It's impossible to stop progress, but I do feel that sometime in the next few hundred years it will bite us on the bum and any life which remains will be very different to life as we know it today. Individual things like drones will not kill off mankind on their own, but they are part of an ever increasing problem.

Perhaps I'm being a grumpy old git full of negative thoughts, but I do feel very lucky indeed that I am living my life in perhaps mankind's best period. I don't think I'd like to be around 200 years from now.

Sorry to spoil your weekend with my rambling odd thoughts!

No worries there Kiloran, it's an interesting topic too!

This of course leads into other interesting territory such as The Fermi Paradox (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox) and The Great Filter (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter), and both those articles are really good reads for anyone that's interested in this particular subject....

I totally agree that the seeds of our downfall will most probably be delivered by our own hands, one way or another...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[Rhyd6]

Tweets from Venezuela seem to cast doubt on the attack by drone story. Firemen are tweeting that there was a gas explosion in a nearby building. Still no doubt the attack story is a great soundbite for the President. I too am thankful that I have lived my life in a period of relative stability and have benefited from the advances in medicines etc. but I often wonder what the future holds for my grandchildren and great grandchildren. I was reading my grandmother's diary for 1910 the other day. She was greatly excited by her first sighting of a motor car but thought that they would be too dangerous to catch on! She was even more sceptical about aeroplanes refusing to believe they really existed.

R6

[AndyPandy]

Given their limited payload but low flying capability, I would have thought the main malicious use would be to spread nerve agents and bacteriological diseases.

DAK how far semi-autonomous navigation in commercial (surveying; farming etc) drones has progressed?

I don't know if these thing can be pre programmed to fly to a destination yet, but I suspect it's not far off. And buying a swarm of say, 50, of these things wouldn't be that expensive for the determined group with a cause.

Already there. Until March I flew one commercially. No longer do so as everyone is doing it. The one I fly (DJI Inspire) is controlled via an App from Android / Apple Store. Free with the drone. DJI have released an API (a way of allowing others to write a program to control the drone). One of the popular programs that have been written (and the one that I use) is called 'Litchi'. It cost £20. With that I can, using that in conjunction with Google maps (built into the App), preprogram a flight using waypoints. The camera can be programmed to pan, tilt, zoom take a picture/video and so on. Easy enough to adapt to deploy a payload instead.

Current uses are, for instance, zig-zagging a field to take plan shots that can be stitched or flying the same route repeatedly over time to generate timelapses (think Construction site).


It's totally autonomous. Once you hit 'go' It will fly the route even if it loses contact with the controller. Even staying in contact, standard range is about 2 miles and you can get better aerials to extend contact to about 5 miles. My drone can fly at about 25-30mph. Above about 50' it's silent at ground level. I get about 10-15 minutes flighttime in a standard configuraton, so 5+ miles?

I live about 10 miles from Windsor. Nothing to stop me driving about half way, setting up in a field and programming a route to Windsor Castle, dropping an object then flying about 1/2 a mile South and dumping the drone in the Thames. Nothing whatsoever.

Mine has just under a Kg payload. Others can take several Kg.


On the upside, jammer technology has been developed and has been tested - e.g. last year on Remembrance day in London and, no doubt, this year's Royal wedding. May even be permanently in place around the Castle. That will stop remote control of a drone, but I don't know if it would work against autonomous flight. For that you'd have to jam the National GPS System I think.

[AndyPandy]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45020853

The crop-spraying drones that go where tractors can't

Large unmanned hexacopters fitted with 20-litre tanks for carrying fertiliser or pesticides follow pre-mapped routes and spray crops accordingly.

[Lootman]

On the upside, jammer technology has been developed and has been tested - e.g. last year on Remembrance day in London and, no doubt, this year's Royal wedding. May even be permanently in place around the Castle. That will stop remote control of a drone, but I don't know if it would work against autonomous flight. For that you'd have to jam the National GPS System I think.

A mobile phone jammer is quite effective within a few hundred feet and can fit in your pocket. The military may have more powerful ones.

But I suspect the defence would be more primitive. Radar to detect any foreign object. Even 80 years ago barrage balloons were used to deter low-flying threats using cables and nets. Electro-magnetic fields could run interference. Drones have been shot down using air guns and basic firearms, let alone advanced ordnance. I'd certainly take one down if it was over my property.

Or drones will just be banned if owners abuse them.

[Bhoddhisatva]

A British ex-Army entrepreneur set up Drone Defence to produce kit that will disable drones

https://www.dronedefence.co.uk/

https://www.linkedin.com/in/rigill/

Given a Venezuelan army helicopter pilot tried to kill him last year, the death squads riding round intimidating voters at last election, the collapse of currency, economy and the lack of food etc. despite Venezuela being a major oil reservoir "holder" (if not producer as they're plant has just about shut down) I am not surprised that someone might decide it's time for Maduro to go.

Ruined the country and economy, barred others from standing against him so fixed the elections .. about his only international friend is Jeremy Corbyn!

[Bhoddhisatva]

PS For the sci-fi fans out there, I recommend the three books by the Chinese author - Cixin Liu - starting with "The Three Body Problem":

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Three-Body-Pro ... 1784971553

In a later book in the series - The Dark Forest - it is postulated that there ARE civilisations out there but the fear of being wiped out by a superior species mean they do not draw attention to themselves ...

[Watis]

PS For the sci-fi fans out there, I recommend the three books by the Chinese author - Cixin Liu - starting with "The Three Body Problem":

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Three-Body-Pro ... 1784971553

In a later book in the series - The Dark Forest - it is postulated that there ARE civilisations out there but the fear of being wiped out by a superior species mean they do not draw attention to themselves ...

If only we had thought of that.

But no, we send out spacecraft advertising our presence, along with our address!

Watis