top | item 16401314

What May Be U.S.’s First Drone-Linked Aircraft Crash Is Being Investigated

60 points| cdcro | 8 years ago |bloomberg.com

71 comments

order
[+] bri3d|8 years ago|reply
Summary: Flight instructor saw a drone during low-altitude hovering exercises with a student, tried to land, and hit a bush. Much like lasers I suspect the psychological role of drones as a pilot distraction could be as great or greater than the actual risk to an airframe. Article has good links to various drone collisions (all resulting in limited damage to the larger vehicle) as well as FAA study showing drones could be more dangerous to airframes than birds because of harder materials.
[+] woofyman|8 years ago|reply
>Flight instructor saw a drone during low-altitude hovering exercises with a student, panicked, tried to land, and hit a bush

The pilot didn’t panic. The drone was directly in front of the helicopter.

[+] nraynaud|8 years ago|reply
The trick is that there has never been any confirmed dangerous collision with a quadcopter, all the tests have shown them less dangerous than geese, and accidents in the wild have never impacted the air-worthiness of the aircraft.

We will probably end up with the 400 feet AGL banned for aviation, and 300 feet AGL limit for recreational flying, and 100 feet of buffer.

General aviation pilots violate regulations all the time without being disciplined, and kill people once in a while, and it's a bit hard to put all the burden on the recreational remote controlled aircraft pilots.

here is a guy with a cool head on the situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0gOxuyr438

[+] ryanmarsh|8 years ago|reply
I get the feeling the pilots (recreational) in my area really don’t like drones. I file my flight plans electronically and, maybe this is coincidental but, every time I file a flight plan a small aircraft will apear right overhead flying low within a few minutes. It happens every time. Sometimes multiple aircraft will arrive and buzz me.

I of course have to stay under 400 feet but get this, those pilots are often flying at right around 400. I don’t know what’s going on but it’s weird. I plan to monitor the radio traffic in the area next time if I can find a way to do that.

[+] jsjohnst|8 years ago|reply
Would love to chat more about this privately. My contact info is in my profile.
[+] cmurf|8 years ago|reply
Can a drone stay in level flight in the downwash of a helicopter's main rotor? I'm not sure what their relative velocities are.
[+] jsjohnst|8 years ago|reply
Depends on the drone and also which helicopter and how close the helicopter is to the drone (and also the ground, because of vortex ring state).

Give me criteria for the later part and I’ll be happy to calculate the likelihood.

[+] GiorgioG|8 years ago|reply
They were flying in a remote area, low to the ground. If it wasn't by an airport and below 400 feet, I'm not sure there was any wrong-doing on the drone's part. Sometimes they're called 'accidents' aka s* happens.
[+] cmurf|8 years ago|reply
That's deeply ignorant. Instead of speculating and arriving at the ridiculous idea that the only regulation is staying below 400 feet and away from airports and then anything goes, how about finding the regulation?

§107.23 Hazardous operation. No person may: (a) Operate a small unmanned aircraft system in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another;

§107.37 Operation near aircraft; right-of-way rules. (a) Each small unmanned aircraft must yield the right of way to all aircraft, airborne vehicles, and launch and reentry vehicles. Yielding the right of way means that the small unmanned aircraft must give way to the aircraft or vehicle and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless well clear. (b) No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft so close to another aircraft as to create a collision hazard.

I mean come on. If there is an accident someone made a mistake. And if the regulations don't make clear who did what wrong, then the regulations have a mistake in them and need to be extended or clarified.

[+] cma|8 years ago|reply
They weren't flying in a remote area. It was a small island with a big residential development.
[+] newdayrising|8 years ago|reply
I've been wondering this for a long time - what's to stop a terrorist from flying and attaching a drone with an explosive payload to a large commercial flight? Especially at night while the plane is taxiing?
[+] trothamel|8 years ago|reply
The NSA and other intelligence services tapping the communications between the terrorists and ensuring that they're arrested before the plan starts.
[+] jsjohnst|8 years ago|reply
The fact most drones have a very small lift capacity is the biggest issue.

As to how to stop it, it’s just like any other terrorist attack. SIGINT is the main tool.

[+] craftyguy|8 years ago|reply
Nothing, apparently. I wonder though if it would be large enough to be picked up by the radar used at most airports to track planes on the ground.
[+] wvenable|8 years ago|reply
The weight of the payload.
[+] mpetrovich|8 years ago|reply
I wonder why the pilot didn’t attempt to go straight up.
[+] raverbashing|8 years ago|reply
Helicopters are hard. It might not have had enough time to do that (before hitting the drone)
[+] huffpopo|8 years ago|reply
Helicopters are slow, and they probably didn't have the rotor speed needed to yank the collective.

Hitting a 2kg drone would result in expensive repairs, e.g. $30K for replacement rotor blades and you still might crash.

I probably would have taken the hit but I'm much better off than the average R22 pilot who often operate or razor thin margins.

That said; my bet is that there was no drone. My guess is the student made a small mistake, the teacher took over and made a bigger mistake, and both want to keep their jobs/future carers. Drones make an easy target to lie about and are hated anyway. Not to say there are no irresponsible drone pilots, just currently I think it's more likely heli-pilot error at this stage. My hope is the GPS tracking in the phantom well let us know for sure.

[+] taneq|8 years ago|reply
Or just realise that a 1.9kg toy should be ignored rather than evaded. What happens if a goose or swan or pelican flies near a helicopter?
[+] axau|8 years ago|reply
I hope one day drones are regulated similarly to guns, i.e. de facto banned unless some exception applies, such as:

- you're in the middle of nowhere

- you're doing it exclusively on a property you own (and the property is large enough)

- the use case is in the public good (e.g.: police can use guns)

In other cases, the downsides are large given potential for abuse/voyeurism/sabotage, and upsides seem nil.

[+] bennesvig|8 years ago|reply
That seems very excessive, though regulation so far has been positive. Not that this is you, but fear of "voyeurism" is often said by people who aren't familiar with drones. I've owned multiple drones and would never consider them a spying tool since they aren't discrete/sound like a flying lawnmower. Additionally, most drones are equipped with wide-angle lenses which means you'd have to get pretty close to spy.

My main worry about drones comes from terrorists using them where crowds of people are gathered (concerts, events, etc), as other people have mentioned.

[+] wvenable|8 years ago|reply
> I hope one day drones are regulated similarly to guns

What country are you in?