Jean Marie said: How does air deterrent work? 99.8% of poachers go out at night when land is cool. They rarely work at night. So your going to have to fit your machinery with night vision such as IR however as your flying in the sky an noise travels more at night then your not deterring them your just allowing them to watch YOU of which they will then go to other grounds. You need to learn how the poacher works, how he and she acts, what methods they use, people they speak to. A microlight is just as good as a helicopter it "makes noise" only useful in the morning when paroling the higher you go the less you see. If a poaching incident was to take place you then have to call in ground units. This is not Desert Storm, these are sophisticated well armed, intelligent poachers. There are technologies that are being put to the DEA however a microlight in the air is about as useful as a chocolate teapot. I apologise for being rude but we have 10 APU in Africa alone, and microlights are useless. HeliUAV's that emit less noise, can stay on the spot, beam back imagery to you as well as landing on a moving wagon are the best. They can be deployed with a multitude of weaponry, are able to use three alternative fuel cells and recharge. Drop the microlight as it fails. It's good for air surveillance and acting as a day deterrent that is all though.
Jean Marie That's fine we all have our opinions I have 40 years of conservation experience and no matter how high your in the air you not going to cease poaching by flying a microlight or fixed wing. Your dealing with highly sophisticated poachers of which we deal with on the ground. They can hear you, see you, and will only move to another location to even coming out in the day time and acting as tourists.Jean Marie I speak with "knowledge" not knowledge from a book or a tour guide or by looking on the internet or APU sites. To beat them then the war has to be fought on the ground like it has be done. You are covering large areas of land, how can one determine if a poaching unit is a unit? how can one land if they take a shot? if they go poaching in the day how do you see them? think before setting ideas like this up as it takes valuable resources away from those that need it and have been educated for years on the issues. We have all stroked and patted a few Rhinoceros, have you caught the poachers though and been to the root of the problem CHINA and VIETNAM where the demand is and needs to be ceased.
Jean Marie The conservation burden is not being shifted as such onto the government, and those that so are, are simply wasting their time and their breath as the government believe that there are still around 16,900 Rhinoceros in South Africa out of the 18,800 that the Department of Environmental Affairs announced this year and last. The government must though take more steps proactively and rapidly or their million year old dinosaur is going to vanish. Helicopters and fixed wing Planes have been and are being used in Africa daily to combat poaching however they are ineffective in actually ceasing it even at a silent cruising altitude.
If one could get a microlight at over 30,000 feet then were talking bushiness but in reality all you are achieving is acting as a seen deterrent which will just push the enemy to another area and not cease it. Doters, Rangers, veterinary staff, SAPs, and more are all watched by the poaching gangs. Tourists are watched hence why all the signs where removed pinpointing where the Rhinoceros is. Airports are watched and planes and helicopters timed daily by syndicate gangs that are using technologically advanced weaponry are communications telecoms.
I am not disagreeing with what your doing although I do disagree with more eyes in the sky pumping out more carbon fumes into the air along with noise pollution. Although this is not an issue as such yet and the machinery you use can be changed over to green fuel to even powered by solar light. The United Kingdom police force have been using a new modern state of the art HeliUAV now that we have been watching for now some two years. The HeliUAV that we use has quadruple rotary blades, (spider) as its mainly refereed to and its also fitted with three fuel cells. Solar, vegetable used oil that we have now fitted all 8 with as we didn't like the thought of releasing more Carbon in to the environment over protected conservation areas. The HeilUAV is also fitted with an small versatile battery that is linked linked to the solar device thus charging the battery.
The HeliUAV does comes at an expense and are NOT fitted with these three cells or other adaptions that we have fitted using the brains of skilled mechanical and electrical engineers from Cambridge, United Kingdom and our own that worked for a KLM and Boeing that now work for ourselves. HeliUAV or the spider as we prefer to call it is not like any normal unmanned Ariel Vehicle as it has as quoted been built up then adaptions added that are all light weight. Sound emittance is little to nothing, they can stay in flight and "enroute" with a APU for 6.7 hours (that's the most we have managed to keep one in the air) using all three adapted fuel cells. IR and Global Positioning System is standard but the best usage of these are the fact they can stay fixed in the air, pinpointing and sending back in real time to a hand held device what is on going on in the bush to at sea up to 20+ miles away.
Flying at night, in winds, or high temperatures is not an issue all HeliUAVs that we posses where put to use in the United Kingdom during the Autumn and Winter as we wanted to see more how well we could obtain solar energy in such poor day light times. The zone we picked where the east of the England and within the North of Scotland. They passed an array of tests that continued to push to it's limitations even in 70km winds to battering hail storms.
Versatile and light they can also land on a moving vehicle but the most important issues here is the element of surprise which intimidates the poachers to farmers knowing their land is protected. We are now working on purchasing 10 more for APU units along with free training. The price without adaptions is $13,000 each then with adaptions another $4,000 that has a life time guarantee. Is it worth the money? yes in the long run as the farmer is paying you that eventually then pays for it'self, fuel is also "very very cheap"
We have now been working with new security that we are keeping tight lipped on, which the DEA are more than aware of. We are also working with three security firms with regards to these 2 high grade ex-military technologically advanced pieces of equipment that again are completely environmentally friendly of which one "similar piece of equipment" has already been put to use in the aviation industry and the other in the marine and security industry.
Once are given the go ahead then we will trial this for one year in 4-5 farms in Africa that has already been tried and tested in the United Kingdom, working with marvelous results. The devices communicate to the UAV or other aircraft and can detain a poacher if fitted to a UAV using high grade ex-military weaponry a well as being placed "ensite". Problem is, working with others comes at a cost as of the vast amount of inside corruption hence why we only work with and those that are 100% pro bono and have gone through a polygraph test and 1 year of basic and intensive training. We have already reported 5 offences along with veterinary medicines still being sold under the counter that being Etorphine which only veterinary staff or zoologists can use now. When the hunter wants to become best friends then we see that as very suspicious. With the correct training and correct employment selective process then one can project the same quality thinking of the hunter.
Peter Milton and his organisations SPOT's along with ProTrack are the only two NGO' APU's that we trust although have never worked with they do seem to have positive results and feedback. The government must be held accountable for their failings and corruption within South Africa. The fact that President Zuma was seen in a meeting with South African hunters and the Prince of Dubai last year when all others where REFUSED a meeting to discuss poaching, the then Rhinoceros horn trade being lifted and more just explains what we are all as conservationists and guardians are up against.
SWAT PATROL UK said: Thank you for your concern and interest. I guess the 650 rhinos killed number tells me you are coping very well with the systems you have in place!
SWAT is in phase 1 setting up infrastructure and raising awareness . phase 2 working with accredited rhino originations providing assistants using whatever funds and technology is available to us. Phase 3 provide ongoing support and continue raising awareness. Problem is that there is often not enough personnel to patrol the entire vast area and we need to give any initiative the the best chance of success. Safeguarding rhinos is to specifically support rhino protection organisations,hence SWAT-SWAT is registered with Companies House UK as a private limited company (not for profit) company number 8283778, on the 7th November 2012. Companies House publish audits of accounts which will be available online, as SWAT only set up a few months ago, this information will not be ready until end of tax year. We have set up http://www.gofundme.com/1lhng8 meanwhile. SWAT has no intention taking work away from SA residents rather than, hopefully provide training and hopefully jobs for the local community specialising in anti poaching
How does air deterrent work? 99.8% of poachers
-
flying4rhino
- Pre flight checks done
- Posts: 38
- Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:52 am
-
Beefmaster
- Going for flight test
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:24 am
- Location: Nelspruit
Re: How does air deterrent work? 99.8% of poachers
To whoever it was that blurted out all this hogwash:
It seems as if someone (read: you) is trying to promote their own interests/business here and wanting to hog resources. You say that microlights/fixed wings/heli's - or anything apparently thats not yours - are useless in the fight against poaching? Funny that, just today Abe Sibiya, the managing executve of the Kruger said that the aerial surveillance projects around the park are paying off. You say that aerial surveillance will only drive poachers to new areas? True, but have you thought that if a handful of willing and able pilots covered large-ish areas a few times a week, this would mean the poachers are driven to poach elsewhere? You blabber on about 30 000' or something, sorry lost concentration trying to absorb your logic there, so how exactly would you reckon somebody in a trike should spot a person from 10km above the earth's surface? Can you spot a person over 10km horizontal distance? Now this is of course where your machines beat everybody else's. So how high do you plan to fly this machine? What resolution camera would you put on there? How huge must your screen's resolution be to actually discern something on the ground if you're say 1000' up and working a handheld lcd screen? Okay so you say you'll fly lower maybe, good call that, but your field of view needs to be super wide to get a decent picture. Not so?
I say a human eye in the sky will always be better, you could fly at lower altitudes (lower than 1500'agl current limitation over national parks, with permission of course), your eye has better resolution than ANY camera on the market, you can at least pause and control your eyesight to identify suspicious looking objects, you could easier distinguish between a human footprint in the sand and say a buffalo's etc etc. Besides, in your case, you need ground crew anyway, so up in the trike, spot something fishy, send in a ground crew to follow prints, and possibly nail some poaching bastards.
Another thing, these sophistocated, modern-armed-to-the-teeth poachers you talk of, where do they come from? Coz the ones here in Kruger are village folk from Mozambique and rural areas around the park. They dont look like they have an operating braincell to speak of, and they're mostly armed with typically commie weapons, i.e. AK47's etc. We read it in the news all the time. The intelligent ones are maybe the guys controlling the syndicates up top.
I just dont think you should be coming up here and slamming every other possible counter poaching measure just because you believe in your product. We need all the help we can get to use whatever means available to counter the surge in poaching, even if it is just pushing them out of the area with measly trikes, heli's and blik's
It seems as if someone (read: you) is trying to promote their own interests/business here and wanting to hog resources. You say that microlights/fixed wings/heli's - or anything apparently thats not yours - are useless in the fight against poaching? Funny that, just today Abe Sibiya, the managing executve of the Kruger said that the aerial surveillance projects around the park are paying off. You say that aerial surveillance will only drive poachers to new areas? True, but have you thought that if a handful of willing and able pilots covered large-ish areas a few times a week, this would mean the poachers are driven to poach elsewhere? You blabber on about 30 000' or something, sorry lost concentration trying to absorb your logic there, so how exactly would you reckon somebody in a trike should spot a person from 10km above the earth's surface? Can you spot a person over 10km horizontal distance? Now this is of course where your machines beat everybody else's. So how high do you plan to fly this machine? What resolution camera would you put on there? How huge must your screen's resolution be to actually discern something on the ground if you're say 1000' up and working a handheld lcd screen? Okay so you say you'll fly lower maybe, good call that, but your field of view needs to be super wide to get a decent picture. Not so?
I say a human eye in the sky will always be better, you could fly at lower altitudes (lower than 1500'agl current limitation over national parks, with permission of course), your eye has better resolution than ANY camera on the market, you can at least pause and control your eyesight to identify suspicious looking objects, you could easier distinguish between a human footprint in the sand and say a buffalo's etc etc. Besides, in your case, you need ground crew anyway, so up in the trike, spot something fishy, send in a ground crew to follow prints, and possibly nail some poaching bastards.
Another thing, these sophistocated, modern-armed-to-the-teeth poachers you talk of, where do they come from? Coz the ones here in Kruger are village folk from Mozambique and rural areas around the park. They dont look like they have an operating braincell to speak of, and they're mostly armed with typically commie weapons, i.e. AK47's etc. We read it in the news all the time. The intelligent ones are maybe the guys controlling the syndicates up top.
I just dont think you should be coming up here and slamming every other possible counter poaching measure just because you believe in your product. We need all the help we can get to use whatever means available to counter the surge in poaching, even if it is just pushing them out of the area with measly trikes, heli's and blik's
ZU-DMB -> Worlds hottest Raptor 582
A powerline never hits an aircraft, except in self-defence.
Gavin Kukard
A powerline never hits an aircraft, except in self-defence.
Gavin Kukard
Re: How does air deterrent work? 99.8% of poachers
BeefmasterI read through your message and from the 5 words you open with......... I was CONFUSED ? ( read: You...... was that aimed at flying4rhino or Jean Marie ? ).
My confusion stems from the fact that flying4rhino is planning to use WCM & CCM to patrol the AREA to give surveillance of Rhino, the desire to use UAV is something that flying4rhino is now also contemplating which seems to fall into the majority way of thinking.... I on the other-hand feel that UAV are just White Elephants * and I don't mean the animal *
WCM & CCM are still the most cost effective way to patrol for surveillance and taking acquisition and operating costs into account, the acquisition and operating costs of a 'Fit for purpose' UAV will be 8-10 times the cost of the superior WCM/CCM outfit.
The WCM / CCM Operations will be at 1501ft agl ( or lower with owners permission over a designated game reserve area ).
By law, no helicopter or aeroplane is permitted to fly below 1 500 ft over a designated game reserve area without the permission of the land owner. This seems to be cast in stone so a 'Hard Deck of 1501ft agl will always be complied to.
Our WCM /CCM Aircraft with legitimate reasons to be flying low level will always ensure that they are on frequency 124.8 at all times. Ground reporting networks to monitor and report all low level aircraft activity are being established across the country so we will have a SOP Document that outlines how we will be operating and copies will be lodged with all neighbouring farm owners, the local security networks and police.
Having 'real time' surveillance from WCM /CCM Pilots using their eyes whilst recording events on Hi Res Camera Imaging and having the 'ability' to " Call it in " as it happens is as good as it gets..... it also beats UAV Capability.
Reading between the lines it seems that the general concensus is : " Here are a bunch of guys/gals who want to come to Africa to fly masquerading as a Anti Poaching Aerial Support Unit "
Sadly that isn't quite how it is....... I along with many EU Pilots are devastated by the ever expanding trend in Wildlife slaughter and think it is time that 'outside intervention' is filtered into your existing objectives.
We are not planning to come there to just have a 'flying holiday'..... you do need all the help you can muster and we are available to help you cleanse your designated game reserve areas of these braincell deficient poachers.
DISCLAIMER : The opinions and views expressed throughout my post are the opinions of myself and do not reflect the opinions or views of SWAT or of their clients or law firms or the opinions or views of any other individual.
My confusion stems from the fact that flying4rhino is planning to use WCM & CCM to patrol the AREA to give surveillance of Rhino, the desire to use UAV is something that flying4rhino is now also contemplating which seems to fall into the majority way of thinking.... I on the other-hand feel that UAV are just White Elephants * and I don't mean the animal *
WCM & CCM are still the most cost effective way to patrol for surveillance and taking acquisition and operating costs into account, the acquisition and operating costs of a 'Fit for purpose' UAV will be 8-10 times the cost of the superior WCM/CCM outfit.
The WCM / CCM Operations will be at 1501ft agl ( or lower with owners permission over a designated game reserve area ).
By law, no helicopter or aeroplane is permitted to fly below 1 500 ft over a designated game reserve area without the permission of the land owner. This seems to be cast in stone so a 'Hard Deck of 1501ft agl will always be complied to.
Our WCM /CCM Aircraft with legitimate reasons to be flying low level will always ensure that they are on frequency 124.8 at all times. Ground reporting networks to monitor and report all low level aircraft activity are being established across the country so we will have a SOP Document that outlines how we will be operating and copies will be lodged with all neighbouring farm owners, the local security networks and police.
Having 'real time' surveillance from WCM /CCM Pilots using their eyes whilst recording events on Hi Res Camera Imaging and having the 'ability' to " Call it in " as it happens is as good as it gets..... it also beats UAV Capability.
Reading between the lines it seems that the general concensus is : " Here are a bunch of guys/gals who want to come to Africa to fly masquerading as a Anti Poaching Aerial Support Unit "
Sadly that isn't quite how it is....... I along with many EU Pilots are devastated by the ever expanding trend in Wildlife slaughter and think it is time that 'outside intervention' is filtered into your existing objectives.
We are not planning to come there to just have a 'flying holiday'..... you do need all the help you can muster and we are available to help you cleanse your designated game reserve areas of these braincell deficient poachers.
DISCLAIMER : The opinions and views expressed throughout my post are the opinions of myself and do not reflect the opinions or views of SWAT or of their clients or law firms or the opinions or views of any other individual.
Beefmaster wrote:To whoever it was that blurted out all this hogwash:
It seems as if someone (read: you) is trying to promote their own interests/business here and wanting to hog resources. You say that microlights/fixed wings/heli's - or anything apparently thats not yours - are useless in the fight against poaching? Funny that, just today Abe Sibiya, the managing executve of the Kruger said that the aerial surveillance projects around the park are paying off. You say that aerial surveillance will only drive poachers to new areas? True, but have you thought that if a handful of willing and able pilots covered large-ish areas a few times a week, this would mean the poachers are driven to poach elsewhere? You blabber on about 30 000' or something, sorry lost concentration trying to absorb your logic there, so how exactly would you reckon somebody in a trike should spot a person from 10km above the earth's surface? Can you spot a person over 10km horizontal distance? Now this is of course where your machines beat everybody else's. So how high do you plan to fly this machine? What resolution camera would you put on there? How huge must your screen's resolution be to actually discern something on the ground if you're say 1000' up and working a handheld lcd screen? Okay so you say you'll fly lower maybe, good call that, but your field of view needs to be super wide to get a decent picture. Not so?
I say a human eye in the sky will always be better, you could fly at lower altitudes (lower than 1500'agl current limitation over national parks, with permission of course), your eye has better resolution than ANY camera on the market, you can at least pause and control your eyesight to identify suspicious looking objects, you could easier distinguish between a human footprint in the sand and say a buffalo's etc etc. Besides, in your case, you need ground crew anyway, so up in the trike, spot something fishy, send in a ground crew to follow prints, and possibly nail some poaching bastards.
Another thing, these sophistocated, modern-armed-to-the-teeth poachers you talk of, where do they come from? Coz the ones here in Kruger are village folk from Mozambique and rural areas around the park. They dont look like they have an operating braincell to speak of, and they're mostly armed with typically commie weapons, i.e. AK47's etc. We read it in the news all the time. The intelligent ones are maybe the guys controlling the syndicates up top.
I just dont think you should be coming up here and slamming every other possible counter poaching measure just because you believe in your product. We need all the help we can get to use whatever means available to counter the surge in poaching, even if it is just pushing them out of the area with measly trikes, heli's and blik's
DISCLAIMER : The opinions and views expressed throughout my post are the opinions of myself and do not reflect the opinions or views of ZAPAS or of their clients or law firms or the opinions or views of any other individual.
-
Beefmaster
- Going for flight test
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:24 am
- Location: Nelspruit
Re: How does air deterrent work? 99.8% of poachers
Hi Wobbly,
I myself, by reading flying4rhino's post, could not seem to establish who wrote what. My message was aimed and whoever was trying to slam the use of, let's call it "conventional aircraft", being WCM, CCM, Gyros, fixed wing heavier plane, helicopters etc. If flying4rhino was quoting Jean Marie, then this message was aimed at her, and I hope now that he sees this and does not take offence by what I say!
You are absolutely correct in stating that we need all the help we can get, and I most definitely would welcome any foreign help in aid of curbing the growing problem here. This sounds like I speak from a position of authority which I definitely do not, I'm just a WCM pilot who wants to do his bit
In terms of the allowable altitudes flown, I'm pretty sure there is some leeway in terms of how hi the guys fly over the Kruger. I know one of the section rangers who flies a Bantam, and every now and again whilst in the park, we would see him zipping along, most definitely not at 1500'agl!
Apologies if you took offence by my reply, I was ranting over the seemingly business-focussed one sided viewpoints.
Happy (not wobbly) flying!!
I myself, by reading flying4rhino's post, could not seem to establish who wrote what. My message was aimed and whoever was trying to slam the use of, let's call it "conventional aircraft", being WCM, CCM, Gyros, fixed wing heavier plane, helicopters etc. If flying4rhino was quoting Jean Marie, then this message was aimed at her, and I hope now that he sees this and does not take offence by what I say!
You are absolutely correct in stating that we need all the help we can get, and I most definitely would welcome any foreign help in aid of curbing the growing problem here. This sounds like I speak from a position of authority which I definitely do not, I'm just a WCM pilot who wants to do his bit
In terms of the allowable altitudes flown, I'm pretty sure there is some leeway in terms of how hi the guys fly over the Kruger. I know one of the section rangers who flies a Bantam, and every now and again whilst in the park, we would see him zipping along, most definitely not at 1500'agl!
Apologies if you took offence by my reply, I was ranting over the seemingly business-focussed one sided viewpoints.
Happy (not wobbly) flying!!
ZU-DMB -> Worlds hottest Raptor 582
A powerline never hits an aircraft, except in self-defence.
Gavin Kukard
A powerline never hits an aircraft, except in self-defence.
Gavin Kukard
-
Beefmaster
- Going for flight test
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:24 am
- Location: Nelspruit
Re: How does air deterrent work? 99.8% of poachers
Hi Wobbly,
I myself, by reading flying4rhino's post, could not seem to establish who wrote what. My message was aimed and whoever was trying to slam the use of, let's call it "conventional aircraft", being WCM, CCM, Gyros, fixed wing heavier plane, helicopters etc. If flying4rhino was quoting Jean Marie, then this message was aimed at her, and I hope now that he sees this and does not take offence by what I say!
You are absolutely correct in stating that we need all the help we can get, and I most definitely would welcome any foreign help in aid of curbing the growing problem here. This sounds like I speak from a position of authority which I definitely do not, I'm just a WCM pilot who wants to do his bit
In terms of the allowable altitudes flown, I'm pretty sure there is some leeway in terms of how hi the guys fly over the Kruger. I know one of the section rangers who flies a Bantam, and every now and again whilst in the park, we would see him zipping along, most definitely not at 1500'agl!
Apologies if you took offence by my reply, I was ranting over the seemingly business-focussed one sided viewpoints.
Happy (not wobbly) flying!!
I myself, by reading flying4rhino's post, could not seem to establish who wrote what. My message was aimed and whoever was trying to slam the use of, let's call it "conventional aircraft", being WCM, CCM, Gyros, fixed wing heavier plane, helicopters etc. If flying4rhino was quoting Jean Marie, then this message was aimed at her, and I hope now that he sees this and does not take offence by what I say!
You are absolutely correct in stating that we need all the help we can get, and I most definitely would welcome any foreign help in aid of curbing the growing problem here. This sounds like I speak from a position of authority which I definitely do not, I'm just a WCM pilot who wants to do his bit
In terms of the allowable altitudes flown, I'm pretty sure there is some leeway in terms of how hi the guys fly over the Kruger. I know one of the section rangers who flies a Bantam, and every now and again whilst in the park, we would see him zipping along, most definitely not at 1500'agl!
Apologies if you took offence by my reply, I was ranting over the seemingly business-focussed one sided viewpoints.
Happy (not wobbly) flying!!
ZU-DMB -> Worlds hottest Raptor 582
A powerline never hits an aircraft, except in self-defence.
Gavin Kukard
A powerline never hits an aircraft, except in self-defence.
Gavin Kukard
Re: How does air deterrent work? 99.8% of poachers
Beefmaster I didn't take any offence by your post and have to admit that even though I knew what flying4rhino was meaning I found his message disjointed. I will colour code the transcript for reading clarity
Jean Marie said: How does air deterrent work? 99.8% of poachers go out at night when land is cool. They rarely work at night. So your going to have to fit your machinery with night vision such as IR however as your flying in the sky an noise travels more at night then your not deterring them your just allowing them to watch YOU of which they will then go to other grounds. You need to learn how the poacher works, how he and she acts, what methods they use, people they speak to. A microlight is just as good as a helicopter it "makes noise" only useful in the morning when paroling the higher you go the less you see. If a poaching incident was to take place you then have to call in ground units. This is not Desert Storm, these are sophisticated well armed, intelligent poachers. There are technologies that are being put to the DEA however a microlight in the air is about as useful as a chocolate teapot. I apologise for being rude but we have 10 APU in Africa alone, and microlights are useless. HeliUAV's that emit less noise, can stay on the spot, beam back imagery to you as well as landing on a moving wagon are the best. They can be deployed with a multitude of weaponry, are able to use three alternative fuel cells and recharge. Drop the microlight as it fails. It's good for air surveillance and acting as a day deterrent that is all though.
flying4rhino repliedJean Marie That's fine we all have our opinions I have 40 years of conservation experience and no matter how high your in the air you not going to cease poaching by flying a microlight or fixed wing. Your dealing with highly sophisticated poachers of which we deal with on the ground. They can hear you, see you, and will only move to another location to even coming out in the day time and acting as tourists.Jean Marie I speak with "knowledge" not knowledge from a book or a tour guide or by looking on the internet or APU sites. To beat them then the war has to be fought on the ground like it has be done. You are covering large areas of land, how can one determine if a poaching unit is a unit? how can one land if they take a shot? if they go poaching in the day how do you see them? think before setting ideas like this up as it takes valuable resources away from those that need it and have been educated for years on the issues. We have all stroked and patted a few Rhinoceros, have you caught the poachers though and been to the root of the problem CHINA and VIETNAM where the demand is and needs to be ceased.
Jean Marie said The conservation burden is not being shifted as such onto the government, and those that so are, are simply wasting their time and their breath as the government believe that there are still around 16,900 Rhinoceros in South Africa out of the 18,800 that the Department of Environmental Affairs announced this year and last. The government must though take more steps proactively and rapidly or their million year old dinosaur is going to vanish. Helicopters and fixed wing Planes have been and are being used in Africa daily to combat poaching however they are ineffective in actually ceasing it even at a silent cruising altitude.
If one could get a microlight at over 30,000 feet then were talking bushiness but in reality all you are achieving is acting as a seen deterrent which will just push the enemy to another area and not cease it. Doters, Rangers, veterinary staff, SAPs, and more are all watched by the poaching gangs. Tourists are watched hence why all the signs where removed pinpointing where the Rhinoceros is. Airports are watched and planes and helicopters timed daily by syndicate gangs that are using technologically advanced weaponry are communications telecoms.
I am not disagreeing with what your doing although I do disagree with more eyes in the sky pumping out more carbon fumes into the air along with noise pollution. Although this is not an issue as such yet and the machinery you use can be changed over to green fuel to even powered by solar light. The United Kingdom police force have been using a new modern state of the art HeliUAV now that we have been watching for now some two years. The HeliUAV that we use has quadruple rotary blades, (spider) as its mainly refereed to and its also fitted with three fuel cells. Solar, vegetable used oil that we have now fitted all 8 with as we didn't like the thought of releasing more Carbon in to the environment over protected conservation areas. The HeilUAV is also fitted with an small versatile battery that is linked linked to the solar device thus charging the battery.
The HeliUAV does comes at an expense and are NOT fitted with these three cells or other adaptions that we have fitted using the brains of skilled mechanical and electrical engineers from Cambridge, United Kingdom and our own that worked for a KLM and Boeing that now work for ourselves. HeliUAV or the spider as we prefer to call it is not like any normal unmanned Ariel Vehicle as it has as quoted been built up then adaptions added that are all light weight. Sound emittance is little to nothing, they can stay in flight and "enroute" with a APU for 6.7 hours (that's the most we have managed to keep one in the air) using all three adapted fuel cells. IR and Global Positioning System is standard but the best usage of these are the fact they can stay fixed in the air, pinpointing and sending back in real time to a hand held device what is on going on in the bush to at sea up to 20+ miles away.
Flying at night, in winds, or high temperatures is not an issue all HeliUAVs that we posses where put to use in the United Kingdom during the Autumn and Winter as we wanted to see more how well we could obtain solar energy in such poor day light times. The zone we picked where the east of the England and within the North of Scotland. They passed an array of tests that continued to push to it's limitations even in 70km winds to battering hail storms.
Versatile and light they can also land on a moving vehicle but the most important issues here is the element of surprise which intimidates the poachers to farmers knowing their land is protected. We are now working on purchasing 10 more for APU units along with free training. The price without adaptions is $13,000 each then with adaptions another $4,000 that has a life time guarantee. Is it worth the money? yes in the long run as the farmer is paying you that eventually then pays for it'self, fuel is also "very very cheap"
We have now been working with new security that we are keeping tight lipped on, which the DEA are more than aware of. We are also working with three security firms with regards to these 2 high grade ex-military technologically advanced pieces of equipment that again are completely environmentally friendly of which one "similar piece of equipment" has already been put to use in the aviation industry and the other in the marine and security industry.
Once are given the go ahead then we will trial this for one year in 4-5 farms in Africa that has already been tried and tested in the United Kingdom, working with marvelous results. The devices communicate to the UAV or other aircraft and can detain a poacher if fitted to a UAV using high grade ex-military weaponry a well as being placed "ensite". Problem is, working with others comes at a cost as of the vast amount of inside corruption hence why we only work with and those that are 100% pro bono and have gone through a polygraph test and 1 year of basic and intensive training. We have already reported 5 offences along with veterinary medicines still being sold under the counter that being Etorphine which only veterinary staff or zoologists can use now. When the hunter wants to become best friends then we see that as very suspicious. With the correct training and correct employment selective process then one can project the same quality thinking of the hunter.
Peter Milton and his organisations SPOT's along with ProTrack are the only two NGO' APU's that we trust although have never worked with they do seem to have positive results and feedback. The government must be held accountable for their failings and corruption within South Africa. The fact that President Zuma was seen in a meeting with South African hunters and the Prince of Dubai last year when all others where REFUSED a meeting to discuss poaching, the then Rhinoceros horn trade being lifted and more just explains what we are all as conservationists and guardians are up against.
SWAT PATROL UK said: Thank you for your concern and interest. I guess the 650 rhinos killed number tells me you are coping very well with the systems you have in place!
SWAT is in phase 1 setting up infrastructure and raising awareness . phase 2 working with accredited rhino originations providing assistants using whatever funds and technology is available to us. Phase 3 provide ongoing support and continue raising awareness. Problem is that there is often not enough personnel to patrol the entire vast area and we need to give any initiative the the best chance of success. Safeguarding rhinos is to specifically support rhino protection organisations,hence SWAT-SWAT is registered with Companies House UK as a private limited company (not for profit) company number 8283778, on the 7th November 2012. Companies House publish audits of accounts which will be available online, as SWAT only set up a few months ago, this information will not be ready until end of tax year. We have set up http://www.gofundme.com/1lhng8 meanwhile. SWAT has no intention taking work away from SA residents rather than, hopefully provide training and hopefully jobs for the local community specialising in anti poaching
I hope this clears up who "said" what ? and yes it would seem apparent your remark is aimed at Jean Marine and not at flying4rhino
Jean Marie said: How does air deterrent work? 99.8% of poachers go out at night when land is cool. They rarely work at night. So your going to have to fit your machinery with night vision such as IR however as your flying in the sky an noise travels more at night then your not deterring them your just allowing them to watch YOU of which they will then go to other grounds. You need to learn how the poacher works, how he and she acts, what methods they use, people they speak to. A microlight is just as good as a helicopter it "makes noise" only useful in the morning when paroling the higher you go the less you see. If a poaching incident was to take place you then have to call in ground units. This is not Desert Storm, these are sophisticated well armed, intelligent poachers. There are technologies that are being put to the DEA however a microlight in the air is about as useful as a chocolate teapot. I apologise for being rude but we have 10 APU in Africa alone, and microlights are useless. HeliUAV's that emit less noise, can stay on the spot, beam back imagery to you as well as landing on a moving wagon are the best. They can be deployed with a multitude of weaponry, are able to use three alternative fuel cells and recharge. Drop the microlight as it fails. It's good for air surveillance and acting as a day deterrent that is all though.
flying4rhino repliedJean Marie That's fine we all have our opinions I have 40 years of conservation experience and no matter how high your in the air you not going to cease poaching by flying a microlight or fixed wing. Your dealing with highly sophisticated poachers of which we deal with on the ground. They can hear you, see you, and will only move to another location to even coming out in the day time and acting as tourists.Jean Marie I speak with "knowledge" not knowledge from a book or a tour guide or by looking on the internet or APU sites. To beat them then the war has to be fought on the ground like it has be done. You are covering large areas of land, how can one determine if a poaching unit is a unit? how can one land if they take a shot? if they go poaching in the day how do you see them? think before setting ideas like this up as it takes valuable resources away from those that need it and have been educated for years on the issues. We have all stroked and patted a few Rhinoceros, have you caught the poachers though and been to the root of the problem CHINA and VIETNAM where the demand is and needs to be ceased.
Jean Marie said The conservation burden is not being shifted as such onto the government, and those that so are, are simply wasting their time and their breath as the government believe that there are still around 16,900 Rhinoceros in South Africa out of the 18,800 that the Department of Environmental Affairs announced this year and last. The government must though take more steps proactively and rapidly or their million year old dinosaur is going to vanish. Helicopters and fixed wing Planes have been and are being used in Africa daily to combat poaching however they are ineffective in actually ceasing it even at a silent cruising altitude.
If one could get a microlight at over 30,000 feet then were talking bushiness but in reality all you are achieving is acting as a seen deterrent which will just push the enemy to another area and not cease it. Doters, Rangers, veterinary staff, SAPs, and more are all watched by the poaching gangs. Tourists are watched hence why all the signs where removed pinpointing where the Rhinoceros is. Airports are watched and planes and helicopters timed daily by syndicate gangs that are using technologically advanced weaponry are communications telecoms.
I am not disagreeing with what your doing although I do disagree with more eyes in the sky pumping out more carbon fumes into the air along with noise pollution. Although this is not an issue as such yet and the machinery you use can be changed over to green fuel to even powered by solar light. The United Kingdom police force have been using a new modern state of the art HeliUAV now that we have been watching for now some two years. The HeliUAV that we use has quadruple rotary blades, (spider) as its mainly refereed to and its also fitted with three fuel cells. Solar, vegetable used oil that we have now fitted all 8 with as we didn't like the thought of releasing more Carbon in to the environment over protected conservation areas. The HeilUAV is also fitted with an small versatile battery that is linked linked to the solar device thus charging the battery.
The HeliUAV does comes at an expense and are NOT fitted with these three cells or other adaptions that we have fitted using the brains of skilled mechanical and electrical engineers from Cambridge, United Kingdom and our own that worked for a KLM and Boeing that now work for ourselves. HeliUAV or the spider as we prefer to call it is not like any normal unmanned Ariel Vehicle as it has as quoted been built up then adaptions added that are all light weight. Sound emittance is little to nothing, they can stay in flight and "enroute" with a APU for 6.7 hours (that's the most we have managed to keep one in the air) using all three adapted fuel cells. IR and Global Positioning System is standard but the best usage of these are the fact they can stay fixed in the air, pinpointing and sending back in real time to a hand held device what is on going on in the bush to at sea up to 20+ miles away.
Flying at night, in winds, or high temperatures is not an issue all HeliUAVs that we posses where put to use in the United Kingdom during the Autumn and Winter as we wanted to see more how well we could obtain solar energy in such poor day light times. The zone we picked where the east of the England and within the North of Scotland. They passed an array of tests that continued to push to it's limitations even in 70km winds to battering hail storms.
Versatile and light they can also land on a moving vehicle but the most important issues here is the element of surprise which intimidates the poachers to farmers knowing their land is protected. We are now working on purchasing 10 more for APU units along with free training. The price without adaptions is $13,000 each then with adaptions another $4,000 that has a life time guarantee. Is it worth the money? yes in the long run as the farmer is paying you that eventually then pays for it'self, fuel is also "very very cheap"
We have now been working with new security that we are keeping tight lipped on, which the DEA are more than aware of. We are also working with three security firms with regards to these 2 high grade ex-military technologically advanced pieces of equipment that again are completely environmentally friendly of which one "similar piece of equipment" has already been put to use in the aviation industry and the other in the marine and security industry.
Once are given the go ahead then we will trial this for one year in 4-5 farms in Africa that has already been tried and tested in the United Kingdom, working with marvelous results. The devices communicate to the UAV or other aircraft and can detain a poacher if fitted to a UAV using high grade ex-military weaponry a well as being placed "ensite". Problem is, working with others comes at a cost as of the vast amount of inside corruption hence why we only work with and those that are 100% pro bono and have gone through a polygraph test and 1 year of basic and intensive training. We have already reported 5 offences along with veterinary medicines still being sold under the counter that being Etorphine which only veterinary staff or zoologists can use now. When the hunter wants to become best friends then we see that as very suspicious. With the correct training and correct employment selective process then one can project the same quality thinking of the hunter.
Peter Milton and his organisations SPOT's along with ProTrack are the only two NGO' APU's that we trust although have never worked with they do seem to have positive results and feedback. The government must be held accountable for their failings and corruption within South Africa. The fact that President Zuma was seen in a meeting with South African hunters and the Prince of Dubai last year when all others where REFUSED a meeting to discuss poaching, the then Rhinoceros horn trade being lifted and more just explains what we are all as conservationists and guardians are up against.
SWAT PATROL UK said: Thank you for your concern and interest. I guess the 650 rhinos killed number tells me you are coping very well with the systems you have in place!
SWAT is in phase 1 setting up infrastructure and raising awareness . phase 2 working with accredited rhino originations providing assistants using whatever funds and technology is available to us. Phase 3 provide ongoing support and continue raising awareness. Problem is that there is often not enough personnel to patrol the entire vast area and we need to give any initiative the the best chance of success. Safeguarding rhinos is to specifically support rhino protection organisations,hence SWAT-SWAT is registered with Companies House UK as a private limited company (not for profit) company number 8283778, on the 7th November 2012. Companies House publish audits of accounts which will be available online, as SWAT only set up a few months ago, this information will not be ready until end of tax year. We have set up http://www.gofundme.com/1lhng8 meanwhile. SWAT has no intention taking work away from SA residents rather than, hopefully provide training and hopefully jobs for the local community specialising in anti poaching
I hope this clears up who "said" what ? and yes it would seem apparent your remark is aimed at Jean Marine and not at flying4rhino
DISCLAIMER : The opinions and views expressed throughout my post are the opinions of myself and do not reflect the opinions or views of ZAPAS or of their clients or law firms or the opinions or views of any other individual.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests