Another drone related aircraft incident

[colinjfischer]

This is where a transponder on the drone will help. People could stop pointing at all drones and focus on the lone idiot drone operators.

I tend to agree - transponders on drones have a lot of benefits to include tracking with ADS-B equipped aircraft, and the ability for ATC to 'see' them and track their progress. Transponders have even become pretty darn small over the last few years.

The one issue with transponders is that there needs to be a closed-loop, non-hijackable way to change the code. The transponder code is what is assigned to you by ATC in order for them to better identify you. The codes can also signal things like emergency, communications failure, hijacking, or even just flying under "VFR" or visual flight rules.

Lets use the VFR example for drones: in theory all drones could squawk on a code, lets call it 0600. This code would tell ATC "drone aircraft, altitude, heading, type" and that would be immensely helpful for most of the country. But what happens when you receive a new code to squawk as part of an airspace authorization? I suppose in this case, you have to change it before the flight either with a manual input or by hard-wiring in with your computer.

But squawks are often changed in-flight. Lets say you have a drone in distress. You should squawk the emergency code so that ATC knows to vector aircraft around you (if needed because you're flying high or there are low-flying aircraft). This is where the current regulations start to interfere with transponders. Although they make transponders with a remote-changeable code, they aren't currently legal in the US because of security reasons. These reasons are that a bad guy or malicious actor could hijack the code for the aircraft and change it in some way as to cause harm to surrounding aircraft.

Until this issue is solved, either through regulation, technology, or some combination thereof, drones and transponders won't happen. Its only a matter of time though....and it will be a good day.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

I'm not going to open another thread because news like this is going to happen all the time.

Narrow escape for 278 passengers as drone nearly hits plane

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

I'm not going to open another thread because news like this is going to happen all the time.

Narrow escape for 278 passengers as drone nearly hits plane

" 16.4 feet from their Boeing 777-200..." LOL. What a crock! I flew Cessnas and Pipers and all I could tell you was Whiz Bam! something just flew by my airplane. A bird, a plastic bag, a flying saucer, etc. If I was lucky I may have guessed a color. You going to tell me these pilots identified a drone at anywhere from 150 to 200 knots (if they were on final). I call BS.

 

[Moosewax]

" 16.4 feet from their Boeing 777-200..." LOL. What a crock! I flew Cessnas and Pipers and all I could tell you was Whiz Bam! something just flew by my airplane. A bird, a plastic bag, a flying saucer, etc. If I was lucky I may have guessed a color. You going to tell me these pilots identified a drone at anywhere from 150 to 200 knots (if they were on final). I call BS.
View attachment 439

Seems like drones are the new UFO.

Pilots see something for a brief moment, had to be a drone.

Unless more information develops the helicopter incident that started this thread seems like it could have just as easily been a training mistake and both are trying to cover themselves from blame on wrecking a helo. Not saying that is the case, but I do wonder.

 

[R.Perry]

The FAA said they haven't been able to confirm the drone involvement. Sounds to me like the instructors situational awareness may been a little lacking sense he put his tail rotor into the trees or brush.
The rotor wash would have most likely blown a small drone well away from the helicopter, I'm just wondering if the CFI may have overreacted.
The CFI is a professional pilot, we have all seen professional pilots make mistakes.
Many CFIs are low hour pilots attempting to build time on their commercial ticket.
We can speculate all day long, but we weren't there.

 

[R.Perry]

" 16.4 feet from their Boeing 777-200..." LOL. What a crock! I flew Cessnas and Pipers and all I could tell you was Whiz Bam! something just flew by my airplane. A bird, a plastic bag, a flying saucer, etc. If I was lucky I may have guessed a color. You going to tell me these pilots identified a drone at anywhere from 150 to 200 knots (if they were on final). I call BS.
View attachment 439

Mr. Martinez, excellent point.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

The FAA said they haven't been able to confirm the drone involvement. Sounds to me like the instructors situational awareness may been a little lacking sense he put his tail rotor into the trees or brush.
The rotor wash would have most likely blown a small drone well away from the helicopter, I'm just wondering if the CFI may have overreacted.
The CFI is a professional pilot, we have all seen professional pilots make mistakes.
Many CFIs are low hour pilots attempting to build time on their commercial ticket.
We can speculate all day long, but we weren't there.

"professional pilots make mistakes." Bite your tongue you heathen, no they don't!

 

[BigAl07]

.....
Many CFIs are low hour pilots attempting to build time on their commercial ticket.
.....

Shhhhhh that's an industry secret LOL! I think most people would be shocked at the low hours of many younge CFI in the industry.

It's just an easy way to let "Someone else" pay for your flight hours to help you work your way up the ladder.

 

[R.Perry]

"professional pilots make mistakes." Bite your tongue you heathen, no they don't!

LOL, I seen that, and the list goes on. How about the two guys that just overflew their destination by 150 miles, your not suppose to sleep while auto is flying.

 

[R.Perry]

Shhhhhh that's an industry secret LOL! I think most people would be shocked at the low hours of many younge CFI in the industry.

It's just an easy way to let "Someone else" pay for your flight hours to help you work your way up the ladder.

It works, you must put real numbers in that log book if you want to get a job, and that is a good way to do it. There is no money in being a CFI, but it looks good on a resume and it builds time if ones nerves can take the abuse.
I did a charter one time, had a very obnoxious passenger sitting in the right seat. About ten minutes after we took off he asked me how many hours I had in the 310, I looked down at my watch, said ten minutes. Then he asked total time, I looked over at him, ten minutes. Kept his mouth shut the remainder of the trip. Truth was, I had just got my multi engine rating.

 

[BigAl07]

It works, you must put real numbers in that log book if you want to get a job, and that is a good way to do it. There is no money in being a CFI, but it looks good on a resume and it builds time if ones nerves can take the abuse.
I did a charter one time, had a very obnoxious passenger sitting in the right seat. About ten minutes after we took off he asked me how many hours I had in the 310, I looked down at my watch, said ten minutes. Then he asked total time, I looked over at him, ten minutes. Kept his mouth shut the remainder of the trip. Truth was, I had just got my multi engine rating.

LOL I love that one

 

[ArrUnTuS]

Drone collides with helicopter over the Verzasca Dam in Switzerland

https://dronedj.com/2018/05/26/drone-collides-with-helicopter-over-the-verzasca-dam-in-switzerland/

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

1,630 feet and too close to airport? Dope.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

This serves as a reminder to us all. Although we are all supposed to be professionals in this forum, I am sure that a high percentage of us do not comply with the law to the letter. But it is clear that from a maximum height of 120m, to be at 500m is to go too far, and even more so inside the ATZ of an airport, and he is a professional drone operator¿?

 

[Rob Hodges]

It shouldn't be hard to find the operator. When I went to the DJI store, they told me that DJI collects GPS coordinates of every drone of theirs that flies. I asked why and they said it was because the FAA asked them to...you know, in case of an accident. I'm sure the NTSB already has the operator...he says with sarcasm.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

One more. I don't understand the purpose, to get a good shot? which it isn't even, and to publish it on the internet? Once again it is clear that letting many fly a drone is like giving a monkey a box full of grenades...........................

Viral drone VIDEO slammed over dangerously close flyby to superjumbo jet

 

[R.Perry]

This serves as a reminder to us all. Although we are all supposed to be professionals in this forum, I am sure that a high percentage of us do not comply with the law to the letter. But it is clear that from a maximum height of 120m, to be at 500m is to go too far, and even more so inside the ATZ of an airport, and he is a professional drone operator¿?

All you need to tack on the word professional is to get paid for what you do, beyond that it means very little. Letter of the law, I think most responsible people attempt to stay pretty close to the letter. It's kind of like driving, the speed limit is 70 and everyone is doing 80, but no responsible person is doing a 100 plus.
To me the issue is to operate in a safe and sane manner.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

All you need to tack on the word professional is to get paid for what you do, beyond that it means very little. Letter of the law, I think most responsible people attempt to stay pretty close to the letter. It's kind of like driving, the speed limit is 70 and everyone is doing 80, but no responsible person is doing a 100 plus.
To me the issue is to operate in a safe and sane manner.

I totally agree, mate.

 

[Weaponized]

I hope there's way more to this story than what is reported in that link. I wouldn't want to encounter one in my windshield, but clipping a tree to avoid one is like crashing your car to avoid a squirrel.

The first step of any inflight emergency is...fly the aircraft. Not panic and fly the aircraft into a tree. If present, the drone surely was a contributing factor but this has some pilot error in it.

 

[mdurbanek]

Apologies for high-jacking this thread back to the OP, but...in the case of the helicopter/instructor/student incident, I'm curious that I didn't see a reference in the article as to the airspace classification. Did I miss it?

I have flown many fixed-wing photography missions out of an airport with flight schools for helicopter instruction, and have observed the activity and listened to the squawk. For low-altitude flying and hovering they seemed to use a open area 90º off of the runways but not that far away - maybe a mile away from the airport.

So, I guess I'm wondering, wouldn't most of these schools practice low-altitude maneuvers with a student fairly close to the airport? Probably in airspace prohibited to drones?