Am I the only one who doesn't want this specifically because of the noise nuisance?
But first can we please solve the leafblower problem? Modern american suburbia is already ruined by an almost constant 120dB buzz and pollution & smell of cheap 2-stroke engine exhaust.
(I’m not sure what portion of leaf blower noise is caused by the fan vs. the engine. I suspect even if the fan creates the larger component, it’s probably less annoying than the buzz of a two stroke engine).
EDIT: At the moment, I think gas powered units are still more powerful. But with battery technology going the way it is, and prices falling, I’d be surprised if a backpack electric unit doesn’t become cheap enough to rival current gas units. And even with some reduced power, users may prefer it to having to mix oil and maintain the units.
Cue the torrent of entitled comments explaining to me that they like their freshly cut lawns (not by them of course, but by minimum wage landscapers) and consider it their fundamental human right.
Of course watering it every day then cutting it in the summer (rather then just let it turn a bit brown and stop growing) is idiocy.
And maybe also a tarp if there is some distance to move the leaves.
Can anyone with more quadcopter experience describe how noisy that is? I know they are loud when they are nearby, but 400ft is far.
One single drone may not produce a lot of noise but a whole group of them might be a different story.
Bottom line: you'll probably be able to hear these large Amazon UAVs when you're outdoors and when they're within 500 feet of you.
It would also mitigate sound issues since road-noise would easily drown out a 400ft high drone.
I think there already have been a few example cases, so there should be info at least for the US.
In general, you don't have the right to destroy property in retaliation for trespassing though, especially if you'd be violating other laws by doing so such as discharging a weapon in the vicinity of other people/houses.
That is such a dangerous and irresponsible thing to propose, unless you're out in the country, on your own land, with enough of your own land around you that your bullets won't come crashing down onto the rest of us.
(Edit: I'm obviously talking about it not hovering directly over your head at this altitude, in that case you will hear it. I'm talking about it passing over you at a fast horizontal speed at 300ft above you that you won't hear it unless your in near dead silent environment with no background white noise).
This is a massive step forward technologically for consumers. With every new technology I've noticed that there's always that croud of people that oppose it, talking nostalgically of the good old days when we didn't have phones or the internet.
Just for a second can we marvel at what has been accomplished here? Deliveries aside, ordinary people can buy, or even make, devices that _fly_. Actually fly. How anyone can just take it for granted and then dismiss it by saying it makes noise is beyond me.
Why not? We have the tools. The only barrier sense to be our ego. We view something as net positive and as a technical marvel and become upset at any suggestion that there maybe be done undesirable consequences.
I know this won't be the popular opinion here. But the least we can do is learn to engage these kinds of thoughts. Perhaps middle ground can be found. Dismissing them helps nobody.
But we've adapted our cities to accommodate this. We have zoning rules, traffic engineering, sound barriers, and so on to accommodate or redirect this noise and those solutions have been developed over the last century.
We had the same problem with cars when they were first on roads [0]. You can't expect people not to have a problem with drones until we are able to adapt our planning and design to their existence.
[0] For more on this, I recommend Fighting Traffic: The Dawn of the Motor Age in the American City by Peter Norton.
Buzzing over the street in my neighborhood is a lot less intrusive than flying directly over my house.
Obviously it would be a longer route, but maybe the trade off would be worth it.
Note I'm explicitly making a vague, handwavy argument in the direction of current laws about property owners and their ownership of the airspace over their property, as I am not anywhere near expert enough to opine on how that would precisely manifest in this case. I'm only opining that there exists already law that matters.
If I recall correctly, the Dyson air dryer was tuned to sound more like white noise than just a noisy fan. Maybe that's a solution too.
I'm sure Amazon already has this on their roadmap.
Motor noise in general seems like it's kind of an overlooked issue though.
Eventually sooner or later you will have state/gov/some department to regulate how much noise those can make.
Plenty of young people put good skills to use in stupid ways until they get older (and some never hit "until"). Sometimes it's how they develop those skills in the first place.
The big reason why I think this is likely is the same as why I think it's more likely with autonomous car package delivery. An employee is a wildcard in the equation, they may care above all reason about the crime, and that can be the difference between easy money and going to jail.
If I wanted to, I could just walk around and take packages off as many stoops as I wanted.
Why don't I? Because it is illegal.
Of course 'youths' are going to do dumb things but I am doubtful theft from drones are going to become illegal. Although that brings up the point of stealing packages using drones for anonymity.