Just spotted this
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/17/flying_scotsman_drone_attack/ (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/17/flying_scotsman_drone_attack/)
I think the word "attacked" is a bit strong (although the Register likes to over-egg it). If you read the whole article, it seems that a numpty was taking pictures, then crashed into the train. More incompetence than maliciousness.
Quote from: Only Me on March 18, 2016, 09:07:46 AM
Incompetence of the operator more like, still if it hit the roof its likely condemned to the rubbish anyway!
Most drone operators are. Moving objects create a low pressure area around them that will suck a drone out of the air.
as usual with the press etc never let the facts get in the way of a headline or story.
OK so who will be the first person to post a link to the drones video of the crash. :goggleeyes:
Ok, superb journalism.
For "attacked" read...."bumped into".
For "drone hoards" read "one".
And let's not forget.... For "Flying Scotsman" read "The last coach of a train being pulled by the locomotive".
Ok, will take the pedantic hat off now.
Skyline2uk
Quote from: Skyline2uk on March 18, 2016, 12:52:29 PM
Ok, superb journalism.
For "attacked" read...."bumped into".
For "drone hoards" read "one".
And let's not forget.... For "Flying Scotsman" read "The last coach of a train being pulled by the locomotive".
Ok, will take the pedantic hat off now.
Skyline2uk
when I saw the headline, I was expecting to hear that some eco-terrorist cell had stolen a Predator and were launching missile attacks on the fire breathing dragon polluting the atmosphere :smiley-laughing:
mind you
'idiot hits railway carriage with radio control aircraft' doesn't have quite the same, if you will excuse the word, IMPACT :D
Like Steve Brassett wrote, El Reg (The Register) does have its own style, which mainly involves a tongue stuck firmly in one cheek and general unmentionable-taking.