A civilian drone collided with a firefighting airplane flying over the Palisades fire in California on Thursday, prompting the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to launch an investigation. While the airplane in question, the Quebec 1, landed safely with no injuries reported, the collision resulted in a large hole in its wing, leaving it grounded and out of commission at a time when all resources are needed.

Image credit: L.A. County Fire Department

The strike also resulted in all planes being grounded for nearly a half hour on Thursday while officials ensured skies were clear, as Christopher Thomas, a spokesperson with the California state firefighting agency, Cal Fire, told CBC. “We all know how fast a fire can travel in half an hour. So this is a seriously dangerous situation because now that fire is able to go a little more unchecked,” he said.

The Quebec 1 is a Canadian CL-415 “Super Scooper,” an aircraft specifically designed to scoop up more than 1,500 gallons of water to drop on fires. The drone that struck the Quebec 1 was flying illegally in restricted airspace and was destroyed in the collision. As of yet, there are no details about who was flying the drone, but the FAA is investigating.

The FAA issued a statement about the incident, warning of consequences for flying drones in such situations. “It’s a federal crime, punishable by up to 12 months in prison, to interfere with firefighting efforts on public lands,” the statement said. “Additionally, the FAA can impose a civil penalty of up to $75,000 against any drone pilot who interferes with wildfire suppression, law enforcement or emergency response operations” during a temporary flight restriction.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Los Angeles County Fire Dept. (@lacountyfd)

To prevent further incidents, L.A. County Fire Chief Anthony Marrone said the FBI is planning to come to the area with “aerial armor.” The FAA also noted that there are several Temporary Flight Restrictions (TFRs) in the Los Angeles area to protect firefighting aircraft. Its statement reiterated that “all other aircraft, including drones, are prohibited from flying in TFRs unless they receive authorization.”

Source link

While wireless microphones have been getting smaller over the years, all thus far still have used transmitter microphones of rather noticeable size. The Hollyland Lark M2S bucks that tradition and offers a tiny solution for more discreet audio recording. Coming in at just seven grams (0.25 ounces) with a logo-free design, it promises to be a nearly invisible mic, as the Mission Invisible launch announcement suggests.

The Lark M2S marks the sixth generation of the Lark Series from Hollyland. It consists of two transmitter microphones, a wireless receiver. The mics use a titanium clip to easily and securely attach to clothing, with the bulky portion of the mic (which is still quite small) sitting on the back side. The tiny mic portion is the only bit that’s visible, making it very discreet. The mic capsule is only 1.3cm x 0.63cm (0.5in x 0.25in) and weighs just 7g (0.25oz).

The Hollyland logo is found on the back of the mic, which is tucked away when in use. Image: Hollyland

The tiny size doesn’t mean limited power or functionality, though. It captures 24-bit 48 kHz audio with a 70dB signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). It also features Hollyland’s Environmental Noise Cancellation (ENC) to automatically minimize background noise, making it easier to record audio in busy locations. It uses a 2.4GHz transmission and promises a range of up to 300m (984ft), though that will of course depend on the specific environment you are recording in. However, Hollyland specifically mentions that it crafted the Lark M2S with a RF interference-resistant circuit, which should improve connectivity in signal-dense environments.

One receiver option is intended for cameras and features a dial for easier access to controls. Image: Hollyland

Hollyland promises up to nine hours of battery life per charge for each transmitter. The included charging case extends that battery life to up to 30 hours total. The receiver offers both USB-C and 3.5mm outputs. It can be attached to a camera (the Combo version) or a smartphone (via USB-C or Lightning connection), with plug-and-play functionality for easy recording on any device.

One receiver option uses a USB-C connection to connect to smartphones. Image: Hollyland

The Lark M2S comes in three versions. The Combo includes two transmitters, both the camera and USB-C receiver, USB-C to Lightning cable, USB-C cable and a charging case for $149. The Mini Combo includes everything in the Combo kit but without the USB-C to Lightning cable for $139. Lastly, the USB-C kit includes the two transmitters and USB-C receiver for $119.

Source link

If you have a Sandisk SD card in your Canon EOS R5 II, you may want to check that it’s compatible. Canon recently put out a warning, reported by The Digital Picture, that “certain SanDisk Extreme PRO SDXC UHS-II 64GB, 128GB and 256GB V60 cards” may cause still images taken with the camera to be “recorded as corrupted/abnormal.”

The exact model number of the cards will vary by region, but Sandisk’s support site lays out which cards are and aren’t compatible with the EOS R5 II. The cards in question have a big red “Not Compatible” stamp next to them, so they should be hard to miss. Broadly, though, the affected models are:

• SanDisk Extreme PRO SDXC UHS-II V60 64GB
• SanDisk Extreme PRO SDXC UHS-II V60 128GB
• SanDisk Extreme PRO SDXC UHS-II V60 256GB

If you have an EOS R5 II and use one of these cards with it, your best bet is to switch to something else. Sandisk has an article titled “Steps to Resolve SanDisk Extreme PRO SDXC UHS-II V60 64, 128, and 256GB Still Image Problem with a Canon EOS R5 Mark II,” but the resolution section is empty.

Neither Canon nor Sandisk say what makes these specific cards incompatible with the EOS R5 II. It’s especially baffling since Sandisk’s compatibiltiy list shows other cards in the exact same Extreme PRO SDXC UHS-II V60 line as being compatible – what is it that makes the 256GB incompatible with the EOS R5 II that doesn’t affect the 512GB or 1TB version? Why is a 128GB V90 card okay? We’ve reached out to Sandisk for more information, and will update the article if we hear back.

Source link