Drone Hysteria

Forums: Hysteria, Drones
Email this Topic • Print this Page

There have been hundreds, if not thousands of reports from pilots (mainly airlines) of "near misses" and "close calls" involving small drones of the consumer variety.

This has resulted for demands from the airlines for many more restrictions on drones, some as severe as tracking every drone flight, something that is impractical and would essentially ban them from operation .

A recent study of the reports revealed that virtually all of them were more accurately called drone sightings rather than near misses. Just the fact that they are new and pilots haven't seen them before recently seems to be alarming them beyond reason.

As I pilot myself the study makes sense. Drones by nature do not operate in the area where any commercial aircraft fly other than at the approach and departure ends of runways. Restrictions in those areas are already in place. If your drone is there, you are already in violation.

They are limited by available battery power to flights of about 10 minutes. I think the danger of drone strikes is no more than hysteria.

Birds on the other hand are orders of magnitude more numerous, fly all day and don't respect altitude and location restrictions around airports. I can't remember a flight when didn't see a bird within sight on takeoff or landing. I have had very near misses with them and birds cause Millions of dollars in damages every year to airliners (and brought that one flown by Capt. Sullenburger down in the Hudson river).

So the question is:
As a member of the flying public, are you afraid of drone strikes when flying on the airlines?

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 1,178 • Replies: 17

No top replies

A drone struck the nose of a British Airways A320 today as it approached London Heathrow. The plane was inspected and cleared for its next flight. Hopefully the dickhead owner will have captured cam footage which he/she will post and/or boast about on social media and thus lead the police to his/her address.

I am not qualified to speculate about what might happen in the event of ingestion by an engine.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36067591

1 Reply

@Tes yeux noirs,

I read the story. It said an inspection found no damage and was cleared for flight. I guarantee you that even the smallest drone hitting the radome on the nose of an airliner in flight would result in damage.

No report of finding the drone either. It wouldn't be going anywhere either after that collision if it happened. I would assume many people were scrambled to look for it. We'll see where the story goes.

And yes, if the drone operator was flying near the airport he was a dickhead and was breaking the law.

2 Replies

London music video drone footage draws criticism

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-36048181

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Recent report on bird strikes:

Quote:

The most recent full year of data is 2012, when O'Hare reported 251 strikes - up 111 percent over the previous five years. Midway reported a total of eighty bird strikes in 2012, staying relatively flat over the same five-year period. Nationwide, pilots report an average of 6,000 strikes a year with birds and other wildlife. Those reports have increased -- fivefold -- over the past twenty years.

Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/Birds-Striking-Airplanes-a-Common-Problem-224966122.html#ixzz467ORf6Qw

If you're going to worry, birds are a billion times more likely to cause a problem.

0 Replies

@Lordyaswas,

Yep, that guy was way out of the legal zone.

But I guarantee you people would have been craping their pants if an airliner had been in the same airspace. Problem with Helicopters- possible but not likely.

The narrator was upset because the operator had to be out of sight (also against the current rules) Drones are easily programmed to fly GPS guided routes though.

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

No report of finding the drone either. It wouldn't be going anywhere either after that collision if it happened. I would assume many people were scrambled to look for it. We'll see where the story goes.

That part of West London is very densely built up. Corpses of stowaways who have fallen out of wheel wells of aircraft on approach stay on roofs of buildings for weeks or months sometimes.

0 Replies

Birds also fly routes, not to say they are wrong, but they were there first. I do get the worry about birds and engines. I was sort of born (teethed next door to army air force base) being used to airplanes, so I tend to give them a pass. But, first come, first serve.

I'm a person who doesn't like various things in the sky. Balloon festivals are one of them. I know, I know, I'm a crank. I like my sky clear, if not always blue. The concept of Amazon sending stuff by drone annoys me. I also whined somewhere in early a2k against art in the sky over the Hudson River (I think it was). I consider that - trying to pick the right adjective: egregious, plus annoying. I flip flopped on other "landscape art" stuff, get some of it, appreciate it; crabby about some of it.

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/egregious (I've never been sure what that word means - I read it used differently by varied people)

1 Reply

here is the most credible analysis of the problem I've found.

http://fortune.com/2016/03/16/faa-overstating-risk-drones-pose-to-airliners/

Here's an excerpt about the conclusion:

Quote:

The study found that, based on existing data, an incident in which an aircraft is damaged by a drone weighing 4.5 pounds [or less] should happen once every 1.87 million years of drone flight time. An injury or fatality? About 100 times less likely than that.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

Quote:

I'm a person who doesn't like various things in the sky. Balloon festivals are one of them. I know, I know, I'm a crank.

I think I've met either you or your twin!

I was flying my ultralight airplane over Three Rooker Island which is no more than a large sand bar about a mile off the coast of Clearwater Fla. I landed on the shore and was immediately accosted by a woman who started screaming that I had killed a pelican. We walked to the bird in question and the corpse had been almost picked clean by crabs long ago. Nothing could convince her that I was not guilty though.

1 Reply

I presume balloons are no problemo for most planes. Or are they? maybe small planes. Still, they mess up the sky. My sky.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

I always enjoy it when I encounter a hot air balloon in flight. When flying my slower and more quiet planes I'll circle them and wave. Most of them smile and wave back. Not all appreciate the attention though. It's amazing how much you can tell about people from a couple of hundred feet away. If they don't wave back or look scared I go on my way and don't trouble them.

PS: Thanks for sharing your sky with me.

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

No, that's not me. I get pilots, I get artists, I even get balloonists (saw the original movie in a theater). I'm unlikely to yell at you.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

Oh good! I thought you were more friendly than that.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

I sent you an interesting (to me and perhaps you too) pm, but I guess I killed it.

Later.

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

The 'MIC' do not want drones in the public-sector.
TOUGH!
You got em, so have we.
Live with it.

1 Reply

@mark noble,

Yep, the airlines industry (and some others) opposes anything that gives anyone else rights to the sky.

They opposed the Sport Pilot initiative, Off shore wind farms and anything that makes it easier for a private citizen to get into the sky with anything.

I agree, Screw 'em.

0 Replies

And of course it really was hysteria...

Quote:

What unmanned object can fly 1,700 feet in the air and crash into planes? A hobbyist drone—or just a plastic bag, according to the United Kingdom’s minister of transport.

The mystery object that reportedly crashed into a British Airways plane last Sunday during its descent to Heathrow airport in London may have caused a false alarm, says the transport minister, Robert Goodwill. He says the initial report of a drone-plane crash came from a tweet from local law enforcement that turned out to be untrue after a weeklong investigation. Initial reports of a dent in the front of the plane were also untrue.

“There was no actual damage to the plane, and there's indeed some speculation that it may have even been a plastic bag or something,” Goodwill said.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/plane-crashing-drone-may-have-been-bag-official/ar-BBs85f5?ocid=spartandhp

0 Replies

Drone Hysteria

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know