Amazon teases new details of planned Prime Air drone delivery service

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 50

    Ok, simple for you: R/C airplanes and helicopters can do the same things as you describe above.

    Was that unsilly enough?

     

    And my resume exercise was in response to your comment that I have no idea what drones can do or how they work or are designed... keep up with your own insults.

  • Reply 22 of 50
    Ok, simple for you: R/C airplanes and helicopters can do the same things as you describe above.
    Was that unsilly enough?

    Not really. But at least you're trying. So let me ask you. Why is it that we don't hear of remote controlled airplanes and helicopters falling out of the sky into stadiums, interfering with firefighters, creating privacy issues, messing up planes landing and taking off, being used as weaponized devices, being used as photography devices, and being used as delivery devices by the likes of Amazon (which is what this story is about)? Why weren't they adopted numbering in the millions, by the public at large, as drones currently are?

    Incidentally, for a guy getting holier-than-thou about not being insulting, you might consider not starting a post in the future with "Um..." or condescending qualifiers like "simple for you."

    I'll wait for a substantive response, Mr. Drone Expert. No need to make it simple. Try me.
  • Reply 23 of 50
    tony1tony1 Posts: 259member
    Is it just me or does this take anyone else back to old Road Runner toons where Wile E. Coyote would order something and it would be delivered almost in an instant? A.C.M.E. must be another word for Amazon?
  • Reply 24 of 50
    You really should read more carefully the next time. Who said anything about 'stopping' anything? Nonsense.

    I expressed a worry that a number of pretty serious folks have about this technology (with essentially the premise that it is a free-for-all at this point). For example, drones create all kinds of privacy worries. Drones have come falling from the sky into settings of large gatherings like sports stadiums. They have interfered many times with first responders' ability to fight forest fires. They have been repeatedly a threat to aircraft in the US (esp. during takeoffs and landings). Non-lethal weaponized (e.g., rubber bullets) drones are already legal in some parts of the country. The list goes on. Do you seriously think that terrorists would not use such a weapon to create havoc?

    There is an entire regulatory and legal apparatus to deal with all the issues arising from vehicles, so it's a vacuous comparison to drones. Cars are licensed, regulated and taxed every step of the way from sale to ownership to disposal. There are rules of the road. Every vehicle is registered. There is no such regulation for drones.

    Also, if you think that there's no difference between a technology that essentially travels in two dimensions (vehicles) versus one that travels in three (drones) you're being pretty silly. Drones can go a lot of places that vehicles can't: they can take out high-rises; they can fly into dams; into the White House (as they have); into ships; into historical sites..... I could go on.

    Sure, planes and helicopters can do some of that too (as we well know), but it is a highly regulated and controlled technology. They're far more difficult to use to cause mayhem.

    Um. Silly post. You have no idea how drones can operate, how they're designed, and what they can do relative to "remote control airplanes and helicopters", do you? See above.
    I did. What you said was that the potential for abuse of the technology was immence which I agree with. What you seemed to be implying was that because of that potential we shouldn't impliment programs like it. My apolgies is this was in err.
  • Reply 25 of 50
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post





    Not really. But at least you're trying. So let me ask you. Why is it that we don't hear of remote controlled airplanes and helicopters falling out of the sky into stadiums, interfering with firefighters, creating privacy issues, messing up planes landing and taking off, being used as weaponized devices, being used as photography devices, and being used as delivery devices by the likes of Amazon (which is what this story is about)? Why weren't they adopted numbering in the millions, by the public at large, as drones currently are?



    Incidentally, for a guy getting holier-than-thou about not being insulting, you might consider not starting a post in the future with "Um..." or condescending qualifiers like "simple for you."



    I'll wait for a substantive response, Mr. Drone Expert. No need to make it simple. Try me.

     

    I'll have to concede that you are right. All of this tech that has been available and flying for decades is now all of a sudden dangerous to the world. Not really. The media just reports it more now. It's called sensationalism - "The kid down the block can KILL YOU AND YOUR FAMILY with his toy drone, more at 11."

     

    Really, adding two propellers (to make 4) doesn't mean that it is any more or less dangerous than what has been in the air above us all for a long, long time.

     

    You can see that Amazon totally rethought the look of it's drone to make them look more like the recreational R/C airplanes of the 70's and 80's - even the paint scheme as noted above. I applaud them really. This could be what changes perceptions like yours - that because the 'new' drones with dangerous blades swirling unprotected are out there cheap, they pose a hazard that is unprecedented.

     

    For the real world, drones were military and were big killing machines up until the media started to churn out their hand wringing over quad-copters. There is a big difference between the smaller DJI type copters and the bigger ones that can fly my Red Dragon camera... then there are the even bigger ones that are a totally different ballgame as well (in cost, skill, and track-ability on radar).

    The first shouldn't be regulated, the second should need a qualified pilot with a renewable license similar to a private or sport license, and the third should need special clearances when used in specific airspace as well as annual inspections and registration (like my Piper Cherokee which some of these things are actually bigger than!).

     

    And for the initial offense of "Um", it sounds much more tame in my head that in yours apparently. Sorry for coming across as dismissive or diminutive. I thought it was a better way to correct you than to call you out like you did to the poster to whom you were replying.

  • Reply 26 of 50
    I don't care about the abuse. That exists for everything. It's also not comparable to the gun issue because guns are MEANT for killing. Duh.

    What concerns me is the utter impracticality of it. It's like self-driving cars. It just furthers the WRONG direction of resource utilization. It complicates air traffic and radio waves. It is inefficient to transport one small package at a time, repeated hundreds of thousands of times, when a truck can do more with less resource wastage (even better if it's an electric truck... which don't seem to exist yet).
  • Reply 27 of 50
    zabazaba Posts: 226member
    It's just a matter of time before drones are regulated out of existence. I am bracing myself for the Christmas kids and their dangerous cheap plastic drones all over the street. I'm all for regulating the shit out of this. This Amazon drone bs will never see the light of day, well definitely not in the UK.
  • Reply 28 of 50

    Really? I have no idea huh?
    Like one of the few professors at one of the first colleges working on getting a legit FAA Drone License program started... and having used R/C airplanes and helicopters (that had programmable gyros in them since waaaaaay back) since the 70's, and drones since 2004?
    I have no idea.
    Ya, you'll put your eye out kid.

    Wow. Impressed. (/s). I could impress you with lots of info about my bio too, so what?

    Ohh, a playground taut. Go ahead, impress me. I double dog dare you! 8-)
  • Reply 29 of 50
    tony1 wrote: »
    Is it just me or does this take anyone else back to old Road Runner toons where Wile E. Coyote would order something and it would be delivered almost in an instant? A.C.M.E. must be another word for Amazon?

    You made me smile!

    Though I do wonder at what altitude the Amazon drone drops the package onto the Amazon beacon/sign. This could be important as I intend to order a bowling ball and put my beacon/sign in the dead center of my backyard trampoline...
  • Reply 30 of 50
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,309moderator
    Ya, you'll put your eye out kid.

    Speaking of which:

    http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/11/toddler-loses-eyeball-after-errant-drone-slices-it-in-half/
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3336366/Horrific-picture-shows-toddler-left-blind-one-eye-drone-propeller-sliced-eyeball-half.html

    The second link has a story about a model helicopter pilot too. The first thing that needs to be regulated is unprotected spinning blades (Amazon's drone blades are just partially protected) and this should apply to large vehicles too: water propellers, helicopters, commercial plane propellers like so:

    1000

    At a minimum, there should be a protective ring round the outside of any spinning blade and the propeller should be non-functioning without one in place. This protects young children and pets. If a pet ran up to the side of an Amazon drone, it would get sliced.

    The second regulation has to be for weight and height because if the device loses power then the momentum from a certain weight falling from its maximum height shouldn't be enough to cause serious injury. Amazon's drones will be limited to 2.25kg/5lbs but this apparently covers 86% of their purchases.

    There needs to be regulations for privacy too. Drones that have cameras or mics attached should be clearly marked and possibly a minimum height regulation to avoid a drone being legally allowed to be flown into a neighbor's garden where someone might be sunbathing (NSFW - ). Any operator flying a drone with cameras or mics pointed at private property or individuals for a prolonged period of time should be able to be charged with some kind of privacy violation or harassment.

    Drone operators should have mandatory insurance to cover collision damage or health coverage for someone injured by their device.

    There can also be a requirement for identifying information so that pointing a smartphone at a drone identifies the operator and lack of identifying info would be illegal, like having a vehicle registration number. This would put off people trying to invade privacy because they could be charged for operating an unidentified drone without info or with false info and they'd be identified otherwise.

    Drones also need location restrictions like no flying frequently directly over traffic to avoid hitting a fast moving vehicle if it falls out of the sky and no flying within a certain distance of airports.
  • Reply 31 of 50

    Ohh, a playground taut. Go ahead, impress me. I double dog dare you! 8-)

    You may want to re-read. I was saying the exact opposite. I have ZERO interest in trying to impress you.
  • Reply 32 of 50
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post



    There needs to be regulations for privacy too. Drones that have cameras or mics attached should be clearly marked and possibly a minimum height regulation to avoid a drone being legally allowed to be flown into a neighbor's garden where someone might be sunbathing (NSFW - ). Any operator flying a drone with cameras or mics pointed at private property or individuals for a prolonged period of time should be able to be charged with some kind of privacy violation or harassment.

     

     

    That video was taken on the guy's own property! You can't film your own property now? And there are already peeping tom laws, and liability laws, and reckless endangerment laws, etc. on the books. More laws for the douchebags that are not going to respect them anyways?

     

    As for blade protection et al.- bubble wrap everything until it's too heavy to fly? How about real-life airplanes propellers? People walk into those all the time. We should regulate those too to save those that don't pay attention?

     

    I think if you get the text that your Amazon purchase is arriving, you take your pet indoors until the killing blades are gone. Wouldn't that be the responsible thing to do?

  • Reply 33 of 50
    This is the type of tech that gets me hyped. And that is saying a lot.

    It's a complex solution to a non-problem. It's absurd.
  • Reply 34 of 50
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post





    It's a complex solution to a non-problem. It's absurd.



    It is not absurd.  There is no problem I agree.  The fact that I can order something and have it within 30 minutes is great.  Right now Prime 2 day is pretty darn good.  Large metros have within 1 hour so that is probably good enough.  Not sure why getting a product sooner is a bad thing.

  • Reply 35 of 50

    It is not absurd.  There is no problem I agree.  The fact that I can order something and have it within 30 minutes is great.  Right now Prime 2 day is pretty darn good.  Large metros have within 1 hour so that is probably good enough.  Not sure why getting a product sooner is a bad thing.

    You won't be getting any products sooner anytime soon. This is all PR hype.
  • Reply 36 of 50
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post





    You won't be getting any products sooner anytime soon. This is all PR hype.



    I just like the tech side of this and a company pushing the boundaries...I am in small town USA...2 day prime is more than likely the best I will ever see...

  • Reply 37 of 50

    I just like the tech side of this and a company pushing the boundaries...I am in small town USA...2 day prime is more than likely the best I will ever see...

    Yes, and especially because you live in Nowheresville, you will see no benefit from this (I'm guessing "ever").
  • Reply 38 of 50
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,309moderator
    That video was taken on the guy's own property! You can't film your own property now? And there are already peeping tom laws, and liability laws, and reckless endangerment laws, etc. on the books. More laws for the douchebags that are not going to respect them anyways?

    People don't have to respect the laws at first but the laws are necessary to prosecute them and they'll respect them eventually, just like with driving regulations. It's not just to prevent stupidity either, experienced operators have accidents like anyone else and the fewer the better.
    As for blade protection et al.- bubble wrap everything until it's too heavy to fly? How about real-life airplanes propellers? People walk into those all the time. We should regulate those too to save those that don't pay attention?

    A simple band around the blade tips wouldn't make it too heavy to fly and I think this regulation should apply to airplane propellers, helicopters and boats. Drones can work just fine inside a full cage:



    A basic protection frame isn't much to add. The Parrot drone is already designed this way and can happily bang into walls and keep going.
    I think if you get the text that your Amazon purchase is arriving, you take your pet indoors until the killing blades are gone. Wouldn't that be the responsible thing to do?

    Not everyone is going to be aware of the danger, especially when people keep going around lying to everyone about how safe they are and then people or animals get hit and have lifelong injuries. Regulations prevent dangerous situations before they happen so the responsible thing to do is to add basic protection first. When you go to a country with lots of disease you get an inoculation before you go, you don't wait until you have a life-threatening illness to do something about it.
    It's a complex solution to a non-problem. It's absurd.

    It cuts down the cost of delivery by removing some of the human labor. Normally there would be a driver picks up the package from the source (1 human plus van), delivers it to a delivery depot close to the source (another human sorting the parcel), which then gets transported to a depot local to the destination (1 human plus van and another human sorter), then it gets sent out for local delivery (1 human plus van). Amazon drone ranges are 15 miles so it will only be tackling the local deliveries of the parcels but that cost goes way down to something like a few cents cents per delivery and if the products are already in a local warehouse it works out very low cost. It's probably more environmentally friendly too having small electric drones per parcel than large trucks running on fuel for all the parcels. There's no waiting in for a delivery either.

    1000

    http://www.businessinsider.com/delivery-fee-for-amazon-prime-air-2015-4

    Fast food will start doing it. McDonalds, Subway, pizza restaurants, local takeaways will be able to deliver light packages of food directly across town as soon as they are ready without scheduling drivers on a route and getting lost.

    For security and weather protection, there can be bins that can be secured and only open with a security signal and the drone can drop packages into them and the bin will close afterwards. It might be a good way to repurpose chimneys. Think how amazing it would be if you could just be sitting in the middle of a park somewhere and have some drone fly a burger out to you by sending it your location from a smartphone and paying via the phone. It can even just parachute the package down instead of landing. There's nothing else that can do that just now.
  • Reply 39 of 50
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member

    "All of this tech that has been available and flying for decades is now all of a sudden dangerous to the world. Not really."

     

    Actually these aren't your grandmothers R/C aircraft at all. With GPS and autonomous flight control they're far more sophisticated with, for instance, no need at all to maintain line of sight for control purposes: these things can and will (in the case of loss of signal for instance) fly themselves. In the case of loss of signal they can be set to return to their start point autonomously. try that with a joystick R/C and see what happens.... Others have a "no fly zone" list loaded so they can detect when they're about to enter or launch into, say, an FAA restricted space such as around a major airport. No R/C has that sort of capability.

  • Reply 40 of 50
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member



    Marvin: Food is a good one I hadn't thought of, now there's a purchased item where immediacy is sort of built in. Though the weight could build fast.

Sign In or Register to comment.