←back to thread

LAPD helicopter tracker with real-time operating costs

(lapdhelicoptertracker.com)
100 points polalavik | 1 comments | 21 Nov 25 22:11 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
ripberge ◴[21 Nov 25 22:32 UTC] No.46009808[source]▶
As someone who lives in central LA and has them circle my neighborhood frequently, actually shaking my house, I think this is awesome.

These needs should be filled by drones. Way less noisy, dangerous and expensive.

replies(5): >>46009819 #>>46009855 #>>46009900 #>>46009953 #>>46010195 #
polalavik ◴[21 Nov 25 22:33 UTC] No.46009819[source]▶
why LA is spending thousands/hour when drones exist is crazy.
replies(1): >>46009897 #
tcdent ◴[21 Nov 25 22:41 UTC] No.46009897[source]▶
You're talking about technology that's only become realistic in the last couple years. Even then, there's probably nothing off-the-shelf that would serve the current need.

LAPD has been patrolling with helicopters for decades. I have yet to see a drone follow a car in high speed pursuit down the 5 at 100+ MPH.

replies(3): >>46009957 #>>46009986 #>>46010056 #
digdugdirk ◴[21 Nov 25 22:51 UTC] No.46009986[source]▶
On the other hand, I have seen drones chase down F1 cars at 100+ MPH...

Realistically though, I agree with your sentiment. Solving this would drones would require a constant flock of something more akin to Predator drones.

The better question is - why do we allow high speed pursuit chases in the first place?

replies(2): >>46010058 #>>46010097 #
1. hatthew ◴[21 Nov 25 22:57 UTC] No.46010058{4}[source]▶
As far as I'm aware, high speed drones tend to have quite short flight durations due to battery limitations. Drones that have the range to follow a fleeing suspect for a long time would probably have to be big enough that they could cause a fatal accident if they crash, and in that case I'd rather have a pilot on board. Better reaction time, no risk from jamming, much better field of view/awareness, decades of testing, etc.