I'm not clear why it is assumed this is a "drone." From the article, it sounds like all that could be identified was a single green light. This seems like a classic UFO/UAP. Maybe it was a drone, but I don't see the evidence to make that conclusion based on this article.
The article links a number of other sources. The device was described as a 5 ft x 3 ft quad copter -- standard drone arrangement, but larger. But too small to be manned.
By the contemporary, common use of the word, drone fits. Someone made a large scale version if the story is accurate.
Where did you get 5x3 ft quadcopter? I only found an FBI interviewee saying it was 4-6 feet diameter and unknown if it was quad or hex configuration. If they couldn't count the propellers, I wouldn't be confident they saw any propellers at all. Maybe it was fixed wing, for instance.
I mean, it's an unmanned aircraft of some sort, and unmanned aircraft are typically called drones. What difference are you suggesting between "drone" and "UFO/UAP" in this context?
Drone pretty clearly implies to me "a craft piloted remotely by a human." A UFO/UAP is an aerial phenomenon we can't currently identify. It could be a human piloted craft, it could be something else yet to be determined.
People seeing UFOs are notorious for imposing their prejudices onto what they think they see. If they don't give an objective description of their observation but rather a conclusion like "drone" or "6 feet" (how did they estimate size without knowing speed or distance?), then it's not worth much.
I think it's because people simply don't believe there are non-human build "ufo's" flying around out there. This leads to the military being the most likely source if locals can't explain.
