Category: Drones in the News

Smartphone Remote Control Drone – Parrot


Used condition and has been in a few small crashes resulting only in very small scuff marks and dirt marks on the propellors. Apart from that, it flies perfectly indoors and outdoors, and is a lot of fun!

what’s included in the box?

– 1 Parrot Mambo Drone

– 1 USB Cable

– 1 Battery

– 1 Quick Start Guide

Extras I have thrown in:

– 3 extra batteries

– 2 battery chargers

Unfortuneatly in one of the crashes the bumper broke and won’t be included with this product.

I am also selling a physical remote control in a seperate gumtree ad to pilot the Parrot!

I am looking to sell ASAP.

Civilian Drones Market Size, Share, Development by 2025 – QYResearch, Inc.

Los Angeles, United States, August 20, 2018/QY Research, Inc.
This study focuses on the production side and consumption side of Civilian Drones, presents the global Civilian Drones market size by manufacturers, regions, type and application, history breakdown data from 2013 to 2018, and forecast to 2025.

Click to view the full report TOC, figure and tables:

Email us with your all Requirements,
Request A Sample and Brochure or Request For Custom Research (price, discount, regional reports, and chapters only, analyst talk and etc.) 
Please Email US:

E-mail: [email protected]

Follow Us LinkedIn:

Benefits of Purchasing QY Research Research Report

  • Analyst SupportGet you queries resolved from our expert analysts before and after purchasing the report
  • Customer’s SatisfactionOur expert team will assist with all your research needs and customize the report
  • Inimitable ExpertiseAnalysts will provide deep insights about the reports
  • Assured QualityWe focus on the quality and accuracy of the report

In terms of production side, this report researches the Civilian Drones capacity, production, value, ex-factory price, growth rate, market share for major manufacturers, regions (or countries) and product type.

In terms of consumption side, this report focuses on the consumption of Civilian Drones by regions and application. The key regions like North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Central & South America, Middle East and Africa etc.

A civilian drone or unmanned aerial vehicle is an airplane that can be flown using a remote. It is controlled either by a ground-based pilot using a remote control device or flies autonomously using onboard computers. Civilian drones are used in numerous applications such as wildlife conservation, environment monitoring, search and rescue operations, inspection of oil and gas pipelines, aerial photography, filming, geological surveys, crop monitoring, law enforcement, and border patrol. They are cost-effective compared to manned aircraft. Also, they do not risk human lives as they do not require onboard pilots.

Drones can offer various advantages, not only in terms of potential economic savings but also environmental benefits less fuel consumption, fewer CO2 emissions, and reduced noise. The increased use of drones for civilian applications has presented many countries with regulatory challenges.

The Civilian Drones market was valued at xx Million US$ in 2017 and is projected to reach xx Million US$ by 2025, at a CAGR of xx% during the forecast period. In this study, 2017 has been considered as the base year and 2018 to 2025 as the forecast period to estimate the market size for Civilian Drones.

This report includes the following manufacturers; we can also add the other companies as you want.

3d robotics









Aurora Flight Sciences


Drone Deploy


Precision Hawk


Trimble Navigation


Market Segment by Product Type

Recreationa Drones

Commercial Drones

Market Segment by Application


Agriculture And Fishery

Geological Survey

Key Regions split in this report:

North America

United States







South Korea













Central & South America


Rest of Central & South America

Middle East & Africa

The study objectives are:

To analyze and research the global Civilian Drones status and future forecast, involving capacity, production, value, consumption, growth rate (CAGR), market share, historical and forecast.

To present the key Civilian Drones manufacturers, capacity, production, revenue, market share, and recent development.

To split the breakdown data by regions, type, manufacturers and applications.

To analyze the global and key regions market potential and advantage, opportunity and challenge, restraints and risks.

To identify significant trends, drivers, influence factors in global and regions.

To analyze competitive developments such as expansions, agreements, new product launches, and acquisitions in the market.

In this study, the years considered to estimate the market size of Civilian Drones are as follows:

History Year: 2013-2018

Base Year: 2017

Estimated Year: 2018

Forecast Year 2018 to 2025

About us:

QYResearch, established in 2007, focuses on custom research, management consulting, IPO consulting, industry chain research, and data base &seminar services. The company owns large basic databases (such as National Bureau of Statistics Database, Customs Import and Export Database, Industry Association Database, etc.), expert resources (including industry experts who own more than 10 years experiences on marketing or R&D in industries of energy, automotive, chemicals, medical ICT consumer goods, etc.), professional survey team (the team members obtained more than 3 years market survey experience and more than 2 years deep expert interview experience), and excellent data analysis team (SPSS statistics and PPT graphics process team).

Custom Require

World Wide Location

For more information or any query mail at [email protected]Thank you for reading the eassy.
If you are interested in it or have any questions,please contact me.
QYResearch Inc.  |  More Than 120,000 Market Research Reports
Global Market Research Report Leading Publisher
QYResearch Los Angeles Research Center
US Phone: 00-1-626-341-9169
Email:  [email protected]
Address: 17890 Castleton Street Suite 218 City of Industry CA 91748 United States

Killer Angel On Your Shoulder: Army's Future Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft

Sikorsky S-97 Raider on its first flight. A “compound helicopter� with both rotor blades and a pusher propeller, the S-97 is widely seen as the leading candidate for the Army’s Future Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft (FARA).

REDSTONE ARSENAL: The Army wants its Future Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft to stick close to the ground troops, Brig. Gen. Wally Rugen told me here, and operate “over the shoulder� of friendly grunts. Manned air and ground forces would work together and protect each other along the front line, while relatively expendable drones and missiles go deep into enemy airspace.

Bell photo

Bell V-280 Valor tiltrotor in level flight with rotors facing forward. The V-280 is widely considered the leading candidate for the Future Vertical Lift assault aircraft but would need to be scaled down for FARA.

After this multi-domain attack has fractured the enemy’s defensive system, the Army’s Future Vertical Lift (FVL) assault aircraft carry troops deep into hostile territory. While FARA itself might be a fairly normal-looking helicopter — its current speed requirement is right on the edge of what current designs can achieve — the FVL assault craft will have to use revolutionary technology to move twice as fast as conventional helicopters to get to the target and back before the enemy repairs his defenses.

That concept’s very much in keeping with the Pentagon’s emerging doctrine of multi-domain operations, which calls for close cooperation between ground and air, manned and unmanned, visible and cyber/electromagnetic, to shatter the defensive layers of long-range precision weapons known as Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD).

The FARA concept also contrasts starkly with the Army’s cancelled RAH-66 Comanche helicopter. The Comanche, an earlier attempt at a scout aircraft, was shaped by the then-current doctrine of “deep attack� (more on that below) and included expensive stealth features to help it penetrate enemy airspace.

“It’s different than the Comanche approach,� in multiple ways, said Rugen, director of the Army’s Future Vertical Lift Cross Functional Team (FVL CFT). How different? In a 30-minute interview, I didn’t hear Rugen didn’t say the words “stealth� or “low observable� once. Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS), however, came up over and over. The new approach holds out hope that the Army can finally thread the needle between the Comanche, cancelled because of its complexity and great expense, and subsequent attempts to buy an off-the-shelf scout copter, which didn’t offer much of an advance over the venerable Kiowa Warrior it was to replace.

Army photo

The Army retired the OH-58 Kiowa scout without a replacement.

How FARA Fights

While radar stealth isn’t on the menu for the Future Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft, survivability is central. Indeed, if anything, it’s more important in a world where Russia, China and an increasing number of their arms-sale customers have sophisticated radars, anti-aircraft missiles, and networked air defenses specifically designed to keep US airpower at bay.

FARA will probably build on Comanche’s advances in acoustic stealth, since it’s the noise of the rotors, not radar, that historically gives away an approaching helicopter. But the way FARA will survive this future battlefield is different from the vision for Comanche, less dependent on the technology in the aircraft itself and more on how it’s operated to exploit terrain and cooperate with other forces.

Army photo

The cancelled RAH-66 Comanche

First, the FARA aircraft itself will be small, agile, and adept at hiding behind obstacles such as hills and buildings. With a maximum width of 40 feet from the tip of one rotor to another, it could even fly down some city streets. That may seem needlessly hair-raising, but it’s better than hovering in plain sight above the rooftops, waiting to be whacked like a piñata.

For comparison, while the Comanche was only 42 feet long — just a bit too big for the FARA requirement — it was never designed for urban canyons and weighed over five tons. That’s almost twice as much as the OH-58D Kiowa scout it was supposed to replace (or the later ARH-70 Arapaho, also cancelled) and about two-thirds as much as a heavily armored AH-64 Apache gunship.

In other words, instead of trying to make a big aircraft with stealthy coatings and shaping that radar can’t pick up, the Army will make the aircraft small enough to hide behind objects that block radar. Built-in stealth has the advantage that it protects you all the time, while it’s not always possible to stay behind cover — but arguably the most cost-effective radar-blocking material is six stories of concrete and steel that somebody else paid to build.

Army Predator variant (MQ-1C Grey Eagle) armed with Hellfire missiles

Second, the FARA will act as a “conductor� for drones, Rugen said. While it will be capable of flying itself with no human aboard (making it optionally manned), it will normally carry one or two crew who can add their trained intuition and curiosity to a variety of drones (UAS):

  • Expendable air-launched mini-drones that can carry sensors, decoys, jammers, explosive warheads, or potentially still other payloads. This is a category of drone that doesn’t exist in today’s Army.
  • A compact, “runway-independentâ€� Tactical UAS to replace the current RQ-7B Shadow used by Army brigades. The Shadow requires a runway to land and is too big to fit inside the standard CH-47 Chinook transport helicopter, both tactical shortfalls the Army wants to correct.
  • A larger and more survivable Advanced UAS to replace the MQ-1C Grey Eagle, used by Army divisions, which is a variant of the now quarter-century-old Predator. While revolutionary in its day, the Predator requires two human crew flying it by remote control at all times and was never designed to penetrate advanced air defenses.

Modern drones, by contrast, are increasingly autonomous, able to fly themselves to human-designated objectives without the constant remote control required for the Predator. But they still depend on human guidance, which requires some kind of long-range data link. Having the humans in a highly mobile aircraft close to the front line, instead of back in a static command post, keeps that link tighter, with lower latency, less vulnerability to jamming, and less dependence on communications satellites.

This may sound similar to how, 15 years ago, the Comanche was advertised as the “digital quarterback� of the battlefield, connecting air and ground forces. But Comanche’s origins in the 1990s didn’t make much allowance for drones — which, by contrast, are central to FARA.

Army photo

US Army M1 Abrams tanks train in Bulgaria

Finally, FARA will keep close to friendly ground troops, that “over the shoulder� symbiosis. Infantry and armor can destroy air defenses on the ground. Nothing takes an enemy’s mind off shooting your aircraft like running him over with a tank. In return, the FARA will use its elevated vantage and attendant drones to see further than the ground troops can. For example, the aircraft will pinpoint threats so US long-range artillery can take them out before they kill Americans. While the FARA will direct the drones, their data will be available via a robust wireless network to the rest of the force.

The context for this concept is multi-domain warfare — but the core concept of combined-arms cooperation has long been fundamental to the Army. In fact, it dates back to the first warlord to combine spearmen, archers, and charioteers in the ancient Middle East. But at times the seduction of new technology can lead commanders astray.

AH-64E Apache

Beyond the Karbala Gap

In Army aviation in the 1980s and 1990s, the introduction of the formidable AH-64 Apache helicopter helped inspire a doctrine of “deep attack,� hitting targets at distances comparable to Army ATACMS missiles or even Air Force fighters. When such long-range raids were well-planned and well-coordinated with other forces, they could be battle-winners. The first shots of the 1991 Gulf War were actually fired by Apaches, staging a surprise attack on Iraqi forward radars to let the Air Force pour through undetected. But such coordination takes a lot of effort, and some Army wargames simply assumed away the problem of enemy anti-aircraft defenses.

Army photo

An AH-64 Apache gunship flies over Warsaw. In combat, such a high altitude would make it an easy target for every enemy in sight.

Then, in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, 32 Apaches staged a deep attack through the Karbala Gap, near Najaf, without adequate intelligence on the target, artillery support to suppress anti-aircraft sites or fighter backup. Iraqi spotters with binoculars and cellphones warned their comrades of the incoming helicopters, Iraqi authorities staged a brief power blackout as a signal to start firing, and every Iraqi with a weapon opened fire. While only one Apache was shot down (another had crashed on takeoff), but most of the rest were damaged and the mission was aborted.

The Karbala Gap debacle discredited unsupported deep attacks and drove the Army to better coordinated over-the-shoulder tactics. The Iraqis had shown that even a low-tech foe could ambush deep attackers, and high-tech anti-aircraft systems were rapidly proliferating worldwide, including shoulder-fired guided missiles that went missing in Libya. But the Comanche had been conceived in the heyday of the doctrine, and in exercises the prototypes “frequently operated 200 kilometers (125 miles) into enemy territory.� It was designed for the wrong world.

The Army’s emerging multi-domain doctrine has a place for deep attack, but mostly by unmanned assets like drones and artillery missiles, not manned aircraft. As for FARA, Rugen told me, “we don’t really feel like it’s going to be forward of the line of troops (i.e. the front line). It’s not a deep attack.� So, I asked, no more Karbala Gap 2003-type strikes? “Correct.�

The future Army aviation force will have much greater reach across the battlefield, Rugen said, but it doesn’t have to do that with a single super-aircraft. Instead, he said, “we are focused (on) not on just one thing, but an ecosystem� of specialized drones will provide wide-ranging reconnaissance and strike, waging both kinetic and electronic warfare, while the humans hang back to provide direction without dying.

Vitaly V. Kuzmin

Tracked variant of the Russian Pantsir S1 anti-aircraft missile system (NATO reporting name SA-22 Greyhound)

What’s more, that airborne ecosystem will be in symbiosis with Army ground forces and with long-range strike assets from all the services, be it a cyber attack, jet fighter, extend-range cannon artillery, or missile. Like the Apaches in 1991, Army aviation in the future may end up opening the way for airstrikes, not just for land operations. “We don’t claim to be the one thing that’s going to do it all for everybody,� Rugen said. The objective is to always threaten the enemy from multiple directions, from multiple domains, with multiple methods to impose “multiple dilemmas� to which the adversary has no low-cost counter.

That doesn’t mean the stakes are low for the Future Armed Reconnaissance Aircraft, however. Army aviators are already conducting simulations, playing wargames, and even flying in simulators to test out the FARA concept, with Army Secretary Mark Esper and Chief of Staff Mark Milley keeping a close eye through briefings every two months or so.

“The rigor is important. The rigor is very important,� Rugen said. “We cannot afford….to have a failed program in Army aviation.�