The cost of the hardware was covered by a federal (UASI?) grant IIRC. There were actually two Draganflyers purchased....

I agree with your other points about SPD. However every now and then unusual situations come up. A decent UAS could have helped find the guy in the north bend bunker, with no risk to pilots. Of course Guardian 1 was able to do the job. But why risk two trained pilots and a $2M or whatever helicopter?

not true with regards the imaging.. a friend of mine has an electric drone (rc controlled) that can carry a full size DSLR camera that was set to record in HD... and a remote video transmitter so he could see what the camera was doing.. through a ground based monitor...

the drone was a few thousand dollars.. and flight time is about 15mins or so.. this was specifically built for surveying and works really great for that purpose.. but just as easily could look into windows...

it wasn't quiet, but if your windows are closed, it would sound just like a strong wind is blowing outside..

you could see the details very clearly... and it had a servo articulation system that allowed him to move the camera angle 360 degrees..

they just need a infrared particle scanner . than they can search the house without stepping in

Yes, I have a similar setup, but with a GoPro. Cost < $1000. I don't believe 15 mins with a DSLR. Even with a 5000mAH 4S battery, I'm lucky to get 12 mins with a very light camera. Weight is everything. And if you double the battery size, you don't get double the flight time because of the weight.

So he used it to hover and look through a window? Please send the footage. Like I said, right now, with what the police are using, they'd be lucky to not hit a tree and I doubt you could see much through a window (reflections, lighting etc.) Probably the best case would be a lit room and dark outside, but flying a multicopter near a house or trees at night is very tricky.

I bet the helicopter half a mile away could see the same or more with the FLIR camera.

I agree they are both open to abuses, but I still contend there is no more risk than from a helicopter and no one seems to care about.

he never used them to look into windows, but if you have a DSLR and can shoot a picture of somebody inside a window it's the same process..

as for flight time, it may be a bit less than 15 mins as that's what he told me, but this thing was huge.. and I'm sure he has a timer to make sure it doesn't drop out of the air and I don't think he even goes close to the limit of the flight time..

I looked in his FB account and this is an aerial shot he took recently... I'll post a pic if I can find his setup later..

Is North Bend in Seattle? No. Therefore - Seattle has zero use for one of these. And with 15 minutes of flight time and limited range from the controller - could it really have been used in that situation?

This is so dumb...just like TSA...flashy technology - no purpose.

Yes and no. You have to stabilize it, you have to aim it, you have to zoom it...

Most people are using the high end point and shoot cameras like the Sony NEX-3/5/7. They have nice lenses but weigh a lot less than a DSLR.

the unit he has that pulled a DSLR has 6 rotors.. and it is very stable.. it can hover in tight spots if there is no wind... and being bigger wind was not as much an issue... I think it was about 3 or so feet across and rotors were about a foot in diameter each or slightly less. I know it barely fit in the back of his SUV (bmw x5)

frame was carbon fiber if I recall.. LiPo battery but don't know how many mAH.

he also has the smaller quads with go pros and uses them more just because it's cheaper if he damages the camera...

but I saw the 6 rotor fly 2 years ago when I was there (he is not in the USA) and it was impressive... this was before the mass market drones you find out there...

anyway, you can insist it's difficult if you want, but I've seen it to where I know it can be done..

Sometimes I think he just argues for the sake of arguing (or ignores the actual argument at hand and pivots to something else).

Go back and watch Blue Thunder again.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085255/
Let's see if anyone wants to change their opinions of drones.

HaHa, you beat me to it.
Blue Thunder was the first thing I thought of when the whole drone issue started locally.

Ignore him, it's what I do nowadays.

Actually SPD SWAT did assist with that case or was on standby. I can't go into all the details but there was already an area of interest, so it might have worked, except it doesn't have FLIR. But to search a wider area, not so useful. I can see some situations where it would be very useful (hostage standoff) - but they also have the throw-bots now.

You guys are funny. Instead of focusing on the issue at hand, you have to question the poster.

So let me join you in that...

I have a home built quad-copter that I fly and working on a larger hexacopter. How many flying hours do you have? What type of copters?
I'm pretty familiar with the equipment and capabilities in the county helicopters (407/206/UH1H) How much time have you spent in or around these or similar helicopters?
And I know the officers who were trained and have put my hands on (but not flown) one of the Draganflyer X6s that SPD had.

A hexacopter that "looks stable" isn't stable for imaging unless you have a very wide FOV on the camera. You need a stabilized camera gimbal platform, especially if you are going to zoom in to get any amount of detail. Unless of course you want to be 15 feet away and wake the neighbors. You can buy them, but it adds weight and complexity. A gimbal for a DSLR would be HEAVY, because DSLRs are HEAVY. I'm not saying it can't be done, but to zoom in with any appreciable detail you have to have a very stable camera platform. It is no different than a scoped rifle, trying holding it with one hand and aiming.

But prove me wrong, post some images!