Firefighters vs drone: Camera drone attacked & damaged by fire hose-wielding firefighter – TomoNews


JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA — The owner of a drone says he’s thousands of dollars out of pocket after firefighters at the scene of a house fire attacked his …


  1. A person filming at a distance. Firefighters don't care.
    A drone filming from the same distance. Firefighters care alot.
    Not to mention, water applies to gravity, so it eventually comes down. And if it hit a powerline, there's a possibility he and the transformer of the powerline could get hurt.
    There was no reason to spray it while worrying about a fire.

  2. I look at it like this. Would the U.S. government allow a North Korean drone to fly over a city? Or to make a more fair comparison, would that man be allowed to fly his drone over the White House? If not then what gives that man the right to fly his drone over someone else's property? If I see a drone flying over my house I will shoot it down and I'm keeping it.

  3. Then something happens, drone falls, hits a fire fighter, he's injured, fire grows bigger, 5 people dead by the fire. 5 people killed just so a POS can get a good shot.

  4. i can say that both the phantom 3 and phantom 4 do have to be fairly close to get the footage in the video. the buzz of the blades would be highly distracting making it difficult to hear communications, and even causing a distraction that could result in injury or death in a emergency response situation. as the reason we are not allowed to fly near emergency crews. it's law.

  5. Some one said that the firefighters were there so its public.  Well, it is filming private property.  The drone footage might be good for the insurance company and firefighter review.  OTOH, if it was four teenage children laying out by the pool, it might be seen differently.  I think there may be no black and white stance here, some of it goes to intend and context of recording.  The only other safety related issue is if this was a forest fire, say, and the drone got inhaled by a helo or plane engine?

  6. I will agree in this specific case it should have been brought down. People are not used to drones yet and it would have undoubtedly cause confusion and distraction to the firefighters at a dangerous time when they need to be concentrating on keeping thenself alive. Perhaps in the future when it is not such an oddity. But for now if it is putting someone's life at potential risk (through simple distraction) we should steer clear of using a drone to record.

  7. we don´t need drones everywhere just because their owners were not allowed to play as a kid… it´s not funny recording and spreading a video how somebody´s house is burning down.Maybe we should put a drone in the toilet or bedroom of the guy, it´s just a drone. Many drone owners do not accept the privacy of others

  8. If firefighters are more concerned about a drone, and focusing more on that, than doing what they're supposed to: Fight a fire, then they clearly, doesn't take their job too seriously, and should loose their job.
    If I were a fire fighter, I would prefer people using a drone, instead of having 20 reporters around my feet all the time. A drone watching from a distance, is a lot better than people getting too close to the fire.

  9. He looked to be overhead the ground crew at parts. That is a huge no no according to the FAA and you will be fined.

    I have my part107 and I fly drones for my fire department. House fires is not a huge use for these. We use them for search and rescue and as spotters in wildfires. They also help extend the range of radio signals in mountainous terrain… sort of an aerial antennae we can deploy as we need.

    We don't need rubbernecks on the highway for an accident or at a house fire. Instead of rubbernecking, get certified, get in there and help!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here