Flying suicide bomber drones could be almost unstoppable

If you thought the 12-gauge shotgun-wielding AutoCopter was bad news, imagine one of the little menaces in the hands of a terrorist and strapped with several pounds of explosives -- or worse, biological, chemical, or radiological payloads. Several experts are warning that we are nearly defenseless against such attacks, even though terrorists have already shown a propensity for using such tactics in the Middle East and South America, and are known to have purchased so-called "drone" airplanes capable of high-precision navigation even over long distances. One scenario that is particularly disturbing involves a fleet of drones or robotic helicopters launched from an off-shore freighter, sent en masse to attack a large gathering like a sporting event where stampeding from panic would likely cause more deaths than the bombs themselves. The Pentagon is supposedly working on an drone-killing drone of its own, called Peregrine, that would patrol the skies and intercept any hostile aircraft -- but the main problem seems to be finding, not destroying these things, and you'd need a whole lot of Peregrines to cover every potential target in the US.

[Via Phys Org]

[Chris @ May 7th 2006 9:44PM]

I can think of 2 possible deterrents. Jamming and EMP. Jamming would obviously be the easiest solution.

http://www.golangroup.com/products-rfjammer.shtml

Looks like rf jammers are already being used in Iraq to disble IEDs.

[evo @ May 7th 2006 9:46PM]

Well, if the terrorists hadn't thought of this before, now we've given them a new idea. Way to go, guys! j/k

[Tom W @ May 7th 2006 9:49PM]

If the attacks are directed by remote control, odds are they have a limited range of radio frequencies available to them. Jamming those frequencies near potential targets would disable the attack.

If the attacks are pre-programmed and use GPS signals, then it might not be a bad idea to jam GPS signals near potential targets while the target is vulnerable.

[Jeff @ May 7th 2006 9:52PM]

"If the attacks are pre-programmed and use GPS signals, then it might not be a bad idea to jam GPS signals near potential targets while the target is vulnerable."

You're the second person who's said this so far.

Explain to me how, for example, you would protect Times Square by jamming RF or GPS signals "while the target is vulnerable".

[Tom W @ May 7th 2006 10:03PM]

When I said "while the target is vulnerable" I was referring to sporting and other events where the crowd is only there temporarily.

Potential targets that are vulnerable 24/7 should have full-time jamming. People in Times Square can get by without their GPS guidance and remote control toys from Radio Shack.

[Big Ed @ May 7th 2006 10:04PM]

Thank you experts for providing this information. By the way, did you also mention the coordinates to area 51?

[Chris @ May 7th 2006 10:15PM]

"Thank you experts for providing this information. By the way, did you also mention the coordinates to area 51?"

That's already too well known to bother. ;)

[Joe C. @ May 7th 2006 10:48PM]

Ironic; U.A.V.s have been toasting the Taliban and other various terrorists around the world for a number of years now. And now we are helpless to stop the terrorists from giving us a taste of our own medicine.

When we got our U.A.V. program up and running, why didn?t any one ask what do we do if our enemies developed similar weaponry? It?s obvious that the rapid adoption and subsequent advances in technology by the military and military industry are solely because of the tremendous potential U.A.V. weaponry offers. It?s a bit disappointing to see that we are lagging behind on a technology to protect our cities and troops against these devices.

I still feel the best way to stop a terrorist attack is to stop them from getting into our country. Obviously this is easier said than done.

[Karl Viklund @ May 7th 2006 10:59PM]

Not good. Not good at all.
I hope the terrorists don't read Engadget. Don't realy think this should have been posted. It can give some people ideas. But, I guess they already knew.

[spike117 @ May 7th 2006 11:31PM]

Alright is this not the funniest sentence of all time:

"The Pentagon is supposedly working on an drone-killing drone of its own"

Hahahaha, oh man.

[mai9 @ May 8th 2006 12:27AM]

is this engadget or a press conference from washington?

[Don Wilson @ May 8th 2006 12:30AM]

"Suicide" and "drones" is an oxymoron.

[Kim Laughton @ May 8th 2006 12:33AM]

Quantumphysics, of course we didn't. That would have required watching Mission Impossible III.

Quantumphysics, of course we didn't. That would have required watching Mission Impossible III.

Personally I think all radio control helicopters and planes should be banned, that way if you see one you know it's a terrorist. Also, fun should be banned, because terrorists can use that. YOU CAN NEVER BE TOO CAREFUL!

[zorg @ May 8th 2006 12:39AM]

Do IQs drop sharply on Sunday nights? I don't know, but I'm pretty sure that if drones were all that terrifying, we would have used them successfully on bin Laden's stronghold by now. I'm not really too scared that Al Qada, the people who brought us the shoe bomber, will really pioneer a robust new technology!

I would be vastly more worried if someone cut off GPS near Texas Stadium during a Cowboys game. I can just see the SUVs flying off the ramps, crashing into lakes and shopping malls!

[zorg @ May 8th 2006 12:41AM]

If drones can be successfully used against a Lakers game, the terrorists have already won.

[Sean @ May 8th 2006 12:46AM]

When will we all drop the whole light UAV threat and focus on something far more plausible: trucks loaded with explosives. Oklahoma City proved that anyone with a license (fake or real) can rent a truck, then just load it with your choice of terror spreading device and you're done. No need for an expensive one-off drone, besides do you know how much explosives one of these drones can carry? Even light aviation planes can't handle enough payload to make them much of a threat.

[Tom @ May 8th 2006 1:18AM]

What's with the fear-mongering? Is engadget trying to join the ranks of the 24-hour cable "news" networks? While you're at it why don't you spew some more thought-control propaganda our way? What's up with SARS nowadays? Or killer bees? C'mon, scare me! Make me buy bottled water and canned corn and duct tape so I can protect myself from an anthrax-laced letter in the mail! Well, I gotta go finish building my bomb shelter. BE AFRAID! BE VERY AFRAID!

[KC @ May 8th 2006 1:32AM]

drone patrol?!

sounds like the hovering bots (whatever they're called) in halflife 2 might become a reality!!

[hitkaiser @ May 8th 2006 1:38AM]

Wouldn't creating just one of these? (or a whole fleet as engadget suggest) be cost prohibitive to these terrorists? Sure, someone may quote "drug money etc.. moves trillions of dollars every month", but does any single terrorist organisation have the resources to do so? To launch these they would have to be somewhat close to the target... I mean... im not expecting them to take one of these from the middle east all the way to the states, if so, they would probably be spotted straight away.. and if they are close well.. dont the US watchdogs watch everything in their side of the world very closley anyways?

[Chuck @ May 8th 2006 1:58AM]

I'm much more worried about the terrorists in the White House and the Pentagon. Those guys have a long track record of terrorizing people around the world.

[BB @ May 8th 2006 2:26AM]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unmanned_aerial_vehicle

Hmm... nice list at the bottom... why is it not suprising in the least that the countries with the most UAVs are the US and Israel?

And you can bet their armed classified UAVs severly outrank the rest of the world too...

This article is scaremongering, nothing more. We're the enemy to them, they're the enemy to us. We both have weapons and vehicles and bombs, but we have more. Who is invading who's soil. Who are the terrorists?

Not the ones defending their homeland on their home soil.

[Debian Dog @ May 8th 2006 2:33AM]

We fly these helicopters all the time. I have 3 of them asa matter of fact... one of them can carry 25 lbs. We have heard these "scare stories" since 9/11 and the reality is you can buy a used flying one for less than $5,000. Nothing new to see here folks this technology has been publicly available a long time now it is just a LOT cheaper.

For all the brainiacs that say "jam it" remember, you would have to jam AM, FM, GPS, and spread spectrum. Once again all available and not that expensive. I would be more concerned with another truckload a diesel fuel and fertilizer.

http://www.helifreaks.com/

[Glenn @ May 8th 2006 2:38AM]

Lets see watergate, northwoods.. cia operations in afganistan, columbian drug money, bin laden connections, oil connections, coverup "puts" on airlines, non existant hijackers, threat of nuclear attack against countries who have nuclear energy.


Who are the real terrorists?

Americans obviously lol

If you dont want to be hated and disrespected by the rest of the world.. stop being war mongering idiots...

[Lagom Johannson @ May 8th 2006 3:00AM]

This exact use (abuse) of these helicopters was covered in the NYT back in fall 2001 after 9/11.

The folks on here who are suggesting jamming these things are just fantasizing. There is no such option.

A good navigation system can rely on GPS on an as-available basis, then can switch to inertial navigation and dead reckoning for segments where GPS is not available.

[mark @ May 8th 2006 3:06AM]

typical american response - trying to find ways to fight "terrorism" instead of fighting the causes of this behavior.

[JS @ May 8th 2006 4:05AM]

Easy way to end terrorism:
Any act of terror that kills over 500 Americans --> automatic nuke of Tehran.

That'll make 'em think twice.

[Dante @ May 8th 2006 4:50AM]

Stupidest thing ever, JS...

[Aariel @ May 8th 2006 5:35AM]

Thanks for the fear mongering guys. What the hell is this article doing on a blog like Engadget?

Seriously, I'm depressed now.. fucking sellouts..

[Tommy Mang @ May 8th 2006 7:17AM]

Not sure if this article belongs here on Engadget ...!!???

Friends of Bush maybe...? ;-)

[Martin @ May 8th 2006 7:31AM]

Jesus Evan Blass - how irresponsible are you?? Scare-mongering drivel at its worst..

[Albert @ May 8th 2006 7:58AM]

I agree with JS. One incident and we nuke 'em, and nuke 'em good. Its us or them, now. If things don't change, I'm buying my own drones for personal, wide-area protection against the upcoming "holy" war.

[ross @ May 8th 2006 9:16AM]

I am buying a really really big fishing net, an air rifle and a roll of duct tape... I will send these drones back to hell in a handbasket!

[John Geek @ May 8th 2006 9:28AM]

If this is an Engadget plot to get me to click the banners... It's working!!!

[popeye @ May 8th 2006 9:57AM]

An MQ-1 you say, on MI:3...

BTW all one needs to do is find the GCS for the drones and hit that, drones outta commish. Ok provided they have a mobile GCS and you know where it is...

[JM @ May 8th 2006 10:21AM]

"You have more of a chance of getting hit by a falling Russian Weather Satellite"

OH MY GOD! CAN YOU *PLEASE* STOP GIVING THE TERRORISTS IDEAS?!!?

[mark @ May 8th 2006 10:34AM]

There's an easy answer to all this: shotguns and skeet shooting lessons for all.

[minus_273 @ May 8th 2006 12:15PM]

"25. typical american response - trying to find ways to fight "terrorism" instead of fighting the causes of this behavior."


Do you want to convert to islam? short of that, there is nothing that will pervent the terrorism we see today. There is reason jihadis call people like you a dhimmi (look it up)

[SkeetSkeet @ May 8th 2006 1:03PM]

#36- "Skeet shooting lessons for all"

I just had an awesome vision of every pedestrian toting around 12 gauge over-under shotguns. You could take care of all those disgusting pigeons in NYC too, thus limiting the risk of a bird flu epidemic. And who is going try any sort attack in a place where everyone is toting a shot gun. Man that would be awesome, forget whistlling for a cab, just fire off a round into the air.

Of course I suppose rush hour and standing in line at the bank might get a little bloody... but thats just details.

[Frankenstein Black @ May 8th 2006 1:19PM]

Another way to solve this is to stop putting your faith in ?for profit? leaders who pretended to have your best interest and safety at hart!
http://www.cbsnews.com/images/2005/04/25/image690875x.jpg

[Yehuda Hamaccabi @ May 8th 2006 1:27PM]

Hey minus 327 IQ,

While you're at it, you might want to look up Goy in Judaism. And while you're at it read a little about how Ethiopian Jews are discriminated against in Israel because of their skin color, how Tzabars (Native born Israelis of European decent) refuse to sit next to an Ethiopian passenger on the bus, and how thousands of them live in slums because the great state of Israel treats them as third rate citizens. This stuff is happening today, in the 21st century. So why don't you check your condescending Jewish elitist racist ideas at the door and go read a book or two about how many innocent people Israel has killed in the Middle East using U.S. made aircraft and ammunition.

[minus_273 @ May 8th 2006 1:45PM]

"40. Hey minus 327 IQ,"

"minus 327", very clever. do you know what minus 273 is? its an important number not something i made up.

but very classy post. I like how all of a sudden it is the fault of jews. I'm not sure how you even managed to bring that up. Then you go on to call me a "jew" as if that were an insult. nice one. I'm going to leave the rest of your post to stand on its own because it is just too precious. Everyone else, 3 guesses on what religion #40 follows.

but racism and anti-semistism aside, there is nothing I, an asian buddhist can do to prevent a Jihadi from killing me short of converting to islam. There is no understanding and trying to change the behaviour. Do you seriously think understanding will pervent Zarquawi or bin Laden from killing me as long as i am an "infidel" . I didnt see that happen when people got their heads chopped off in iraq. Read some of those statements that get released with the execution videos you people love so much. One can learn a lot more abou motivation from a statement than from a bloody video, no matter how much it excites you.

[MC @ May 8th 2006 1:54PM]

I don't think jamming these would be that difficult. There are already systems out there that scan RF frequencies looking for "threats" then jam accordingly.
unstoppable is a bit of a overstatement.. of course we would actaully have to have one handy in the event of an attack...

[Chris @ May 8th 2006 1:56PM]

"instead of fighting the causes of this behavior."

Oh yeah. The Koran.

[Yehuda Hamaccabi @ May 8th 2006 2:09PM]

Hey minus, you have just proven my point.
You can claim to be a buddihst all you want. One thing is fore sure, you're one sick delusional person. Get a grip on reality. Calling you a Jew wasn't intended to be an insult. By the way. I'm half Jewish half christian if you must know. So chew on that for a while why don't you. You read too much into my post. Perhaps you're having a hard time wrapping your twisted mind around a few facts.

[minus_273 @ May 8th 2006 2:17PM]

"43. Hey minus, you have just proven my point."

how so?

no really, stop joking.

tell me how understanding will pervent a jihadi from killing an infidel like me? clearly i am not a muslim, it doesnt matter what i am. Or you for that matter, if you really arent a muslim, do you really think understanding will pervent Zarquawi from killing someone who is not a sunni muslim? that is simply one of the most idiotic things i have read on the net

come on, get your head out of the sand. the only reason i bother replying to you is out of rather morbid curiosity. Could a person really be so naive? are you 12?

please tell me about how understanding will save your life, i'm all ears.