For filming a video, endanger the lives of others?

[Ravenflight]

I have a friend that was flying a Cessna 172 near Charlotte NC and he hit a goose that went through his windshield. His aircraft wouldn't maintain altitude because of the rush of air entering through the hole and the increased drag generated by interrupted airflow. He was headed for a field near Charlotte Douglas Airport and he unlatched his door as recommended before an off airport forced landing. The increased airflow "OUT" of the aircraft enabled him to maintain enough altitude to make the runway. He was seriously injured. NEVER underestimate the damage that could be caused by a drone strike. It all depends on "where" the drone "strikes".
Plus--- the damage to the airplane shown may well have exceeded $50,000 to $100,000 even if it didn't cause a crash.
A single broken windshield pane in a King Air, in which I was flying right seat, cost $11,000 and that was more than 20 years ago. I imagine it would be at least $15k now. It forced us to declare an emergency to descend below pressurization requirements and make an unscheduled landing at Harrisburg PA (we flew right over Three Mile Island) and being greeted by the fire trucks.) There was FAA paperwork and we had to arrange for another charter aircraft to come and pick up our passengers to take them the rest of the way to NJ. No one died, but a lot of extra stress was felt and a lot of extra money had to be spent.
Fly every flight like someone's life (or well being) could be endangered.

View attachment 258

View attachment 259

View attachment 260

Yes, I certainly didn't intend to make light of the situation. Monetary damages are not insignificant (do people insure planes against accidents the way they do cars?) and there is some real danger to people. I intended only to speak out against what I see as a common but grossly exaggerated narrative that drones are on the verge of killing people all over the world. Every time a new video surfaces or a pilot claims he saw one it seems to spark more irrational fear. If public perception is something we need to manage then the drone community joining the general public on the alarmism bandwagon is just making it worse.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

This we know only in November 2017. How many we'll never know.

--------------------
A drone hit a Boeing 737-800 from Aerolineas Argentinas, during its approach to Jorge Newbery Airport. The aircraft was on flight AR1283 from Santiago de Chile's International Airport, and during its final approach to land, the drone hit one of the engines, which suffered minor damage.

This is the second case involving a drone during the approach of an aircraft to Jorge Newbery Airport in less than a month and a half. On November 11, another airline aircraft hit one of these devices, resulting in minor damage to the left side of the cockpit window.
-------------------------

The image I've seen, I can't find again, was similar to the one you've put, but on the other side of the nose of the plane, and similar damage.

Now to conclude this matter, and make it clear that at no point has this been a personal attack on you, I will explain to you, in my opinion, why it is necessary for this media alarm to occur.

By watching this news and making it relevant, you can get no one to do such things. That even if it's just one of these brainless ones, we've all won a lot of.

I know the odds of an accident occurring are small, no matter. Just once is enough. It is to avoid it, by raising people's awareness, that is how best to avoid these situations.

Let us not wait until the disaster strikes to take action, which is what usually happens, until there are no more dead people, nothing changes. And if we talk about passenger planes, the number can be an unaffordable figure when you can do a previous job to avoid it. We are supposed to be professionals in this field. Giving voice to this news is part of it and the easiest way to understand it is to think that you yourself are a passenger in an airplane that can suffer an accident due to these causes.

As professionals we must condemn this type of facts without leaving any doubt about our opinion. We are not part of that, fortunately, small group of undesirables who are harming us all.

 

[Ravenflight]

This we know only in November 2017. How many we'll never know.

--------------------
A drone hit a Boeing 737-800 from Aerolineas Argentinas, during its approach to Jorge Newbery Airport. The aircraft was on flight AR1283 from Santiago de Chile's International Airport, and during its final approach to land, the drone hit one of the engines, which suffered minor damage.

This is the second case involving a drone during the approach of an aircraft to Jorge Newbery Airport in less than a month and a half. On November 11, another airline aircraft hit one of these devices, resulting in minor damage to the left side of the cockpit window.
-------------------------

The image I've seen, I can't find again, was similar to the one you've put, but on the other side of the nose of the plane, and similar damage.

Now to conclude this matter, and make it clear that at no point has this been a personal attack on you, I will explain to you, in my opinion, why it is necessary for this media alarm to occur.

By watching this news and making it relevant, you can get no one to do such things. That even if it's just one of these brainless ones, we've all won a lot of.

I know the odds of an accident occurring are small, no matter. Just once is enough. It is to avoid it, by raising people's awareness, that is how best to avoid these situations.

Let us not wait until the disaster strikes to take action, which is what usually happens, until there are no more dead people, nothing changes. And if we talk about passenger planes, the number can be an unaffordable figure when you can do a previous job to avoid it. We are supposed to be professionals in this field. Giving voice to this news is part of it and the easiest way to understand it is to think that you yourself are a passenger in an airplane that can suffer an accident due to these causes.

As professionals we must condemn this type of facts without leaving any doubt about our opinion. We are not part of that, fortunately, small group of undesirables who are harming us all.

I have not at all felt personally attacked by you or anyone else here and I hope no one feels that I have attacked them either. Thank you for saying that.

Here's the Argentinian incident: Incident: Argentinas B738 at Buenos Aires on Nov 11th 2017, drone strike

The damage was so minor that there are people debating where in the photo it actually is. Also, it has not been confirmed as a drone strike but my understanding is that the pilot did report it that way and it seems likely.

I agree with what you're saying about the importance of raising awareness and clearly condemning these acts but I think we should be educating people about the real facts and dangers. Spreading sensationalism and misinformation is counterproductive to the cause (I mean this generally and am not accusing any particular person of doing so). We don't want to encourage people to be afraid of drones. Quite the opposite. We want them to understand that drones are not a serious threat to their safety. Exaggerating the dangers might scare a couple people (definitely not all) out of flying in dangerous places but it also scares the public and politicians out of supporting us.

I'd say that's my two cents but it's probably worth less than that.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

but I think we should be educating people about the real facts and dangers. Spreading sensationalism and misinformation is counterproductive to the cause

This is the last thing I am going to say on this subject, I'm afraid the only one who is collaborating to misinformation here is you saying that the misuse of drones is not dangerous for civil aviation. To say that a drone poses no danger to an aircraft in the event of a collision is completely false. The brainless person who shot the video is a real danger to others. No one has talked about scaring people, I repeat, we are in a forum for drone professionals. I haven't attacked the drone sector either, quite the opposite. If others do not see that professionals are against these behaviors, it is when they may think that we all do the same. And in my modest opinion anyone who does not condemn such acts should never fly a drone.

As I am not an aviation expert, civil or military expert, I trust what the experts are talking about. I am going to give you a few fragments from one of the many reports about the accidents caused by birds on airplanes, those reports about drones, I imagine that they do not yet exist for the short time they have been flying. If we simply add the fact that a drone has a LIPO battery, the danger increases. Before making statements about danger you should use that great tool that is Google's search engine, or whatever you prefer.

The excerpts are from a US report that I have taken from a media specialized in commercial flights.

--------------------------------------------------

Collisions with birds in flight

The relationship between aircraft and birds is considered an important cause of air crash by experts.

Impacts caused by birds can create serious accidents such as falls from flight or occasionally generate failures in the fuselage, in the cockpit or in other areas that are not considered of great importance. At the speed at which airplanes operate a bird can become a projectile, the impact of birds on an engine can obstruct the operation of the aircraft.

There have been recorded 195 deaths from this type of collision since 1988.

---------------------------------------------------

In 30 years almost 200 dead. With one, I think it's enough and talking about a problem of difficult solution like controlling birds. When we talk about drones, we are talking about something completely different considering that rational animals are piloting them, people who should have common sense. .

Are poorly piloted drones dangerous for airplanes? YES

Those who engage in criminal conduct must be prosecuted, I repeat criminal? YES

When you endanger the lives of others, it's criminal conduct. I go further, in this case not only the FAA had to pursue him, the courts as well. Disseminating it in a private group shows that he knew he was doing wrong.

In the same way that it is done with a brainless person who plays the leading role in those fleeing at full speed in a vehicle, so famous on television in your country. It endangers the lives of others? YES. Do he have to go to jail? YES.

I'm so clear about that......

 

[xspwhite]

You guys, a 2 pound drone would be like a 2 pound bullit. Not the same as a bird. Birds we bad, but drones are worse.

 

[Ravenflight]

This is the last thing I am going to say on this subject, I'm afraid the only one who is collaborating to misinformation here is you saying that the misuse of drones is not dangerous for civil aviation. To say that a drone poses no danger to an aircraft in the event of a collision is completely false. The brainless person who shot the video is a real danger to others. No one has talked about scaring people, I repeat, we are in a forum for drone professionals. I haven't attacked the drone sector either, quite the opposite. If others do not see that professionals are against these behaviors, it is when they may think that we all do the same. And in my modest opinion anyone who does not condemn such acts should never fly a drone.

As I am not an aviation expert, civil or military expert, I trust what the experts are talking about. I am going to give you a few fragments from one of the many reports about the accidents caused by birds on airplanes, those reports about drones, I imagine that they do not yet exist for the short time they have been flying. If we simply add the fact that a drone has a LIPO battery, the danger increases. Before making statements about danger you should use that great tool that is Google's search engine, or whatever you prefer.

The excerpts are from a US report that I have taken from a media specialized in commercial flights.

--------------------------------------------------

Collisions with birds in flight

The relationship between aircraft and birds is considered an important cause of air crash by experts.

Impacts caused by birds can create serious accidents such as falls from flight or occasionally generate failures in the fuselage, in the cockpit or in other areas that are not considered of great importance. At the speed at which airplanes operate a bird can become a projectile, the impact of birds on an engine can obstruct the operation of the aircraft.

There have been recorded 195 deaths from this type of collision since 1988.

---------------------------------------------------

In 30 years almost 200 dead. With one, I think it's enough and talking about a problem of difficult solution like controlling birds. When we talk about drones, we are talking about something completely different considering that rational animals are piloting them, people who should have common sense. .

Are poorly piloted drones dangerous for airplanes? YES

Those who engage in criminal conduct must be prosecuted, I repeat criminal? YES

When you endanger the lives of others, it's criminal conduct. I go further, in this case not only the FAA had to pursue him, the courts as well. Disseminating it in a private group shows that he knew he was doing wrong.

In the same way that it is done with a brainless person who plays the leading role in those fleeing at full speed in a vehicle, so famous on television in your country. It endangers the lives of others? YES. Do he have to go to jail? YES.

I'm so clear about that......

If you'll look closer you'll see that most if not all of the fatal accidents caused by bird strikes involved multiple strikes from a flock of birds (usually geese, which typically weigh between 10 and 20 pounds--much larger than most drones). Flocks of 15-lbs drones aren't a thing as far as I'm aware and if they are I'm sure they're not owned and operated by rogue miscreants (at least not in the US; I hear the case is different in Syria). I don't think the LiPo battery being able to catch fire is a significant difference as that would happen after the collision when the unit was no longer in contact with the plane. If it got sucked into an engine I would think that engine is going down and probably catching fire regardless of whether the battery in the drone does. If it managed to get lodged somewhere it could be a bigger problem but I don't think it would mean certain death.

With all due respect, I think you have completely misunderstood me. Perhaps there is a language barrier between us making communication more difficult. Perhaps I'm not explaining myself as clearly as I think I am.

Are poorly piloted drones dangerous for airplanes? YES

Those who engage in criminal conduct must be prosecuted, I repeat criminal? YES

When you endanger the lives of others, it's criminal conduct. I go further, in this case not only the FAA had to pursue him, the courts as well. Disseminating it in a private group shows that he knew he was doing wrong.

In the same way that it is done with a brainless person who plays the leading role in those fleeing at full speed in a vehicle, so famous on television in your country. It endangers the lives of others? YES. Do he have to go to jail? YES.

I'm so clear about that......

So to try and be clearer, I agree with all of these points and am in no way trying to dispute them. What I disagree with is talking about the subject like people are a hair's breadth from dying every time it happens. My point is there is a danger but it's no different and less serious than the danger people risk every single time they fly. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to prevent people from doing it. We should absolutely condemn this behavior. But we shouldn't be hyperbolic doing it. It's bad optics for the whole community.

 

[Dave Pitman]

the Internet will become the most important means of communication to know what is happening in the world. It is a global medium, without the restrictions that newspapers have and will probably soon surpass all television channels in terms of people's preferences for get information.

I don't mean to derail the discussion, which by the way has been respectful in my opinion.

But unfortunately, the internet is now for sale in the US. Corporations are now free to influence what and how fast or slow information is available. I don't know how well this was covered internationally.

How the loss of net neutrality could change the internet

 

[ArrUnTuS]

I don't mean to derail the discussion, which by the way has been respectful in my opinion.

But unfortunately, the internet is now for sale in the US. Corporations are now free to influence what and how fast or slow information is available. I don't know how well this was covered internationally.

How the loss of net neutrality could change the internet

Unfortunately, you're right I'm not going to comment on anything so I won't lead in a political discussion. We're talking about drones.

Although in this case the news has arisen from a complaint from a group of users and not a communication company and therefore has taken longer to arrive. It's funny how even It has made it to the TV news because of its gravity. Ideally, the news comes back with an exemplary punishment "drone pilot severely punished for doing this."

By the time this happens, if it happen, the news will have lost importance and it will be more difficult for the general public to find out, except in specialized media like this one. We'll see about that.

 

[R.Perry]

I'm not buying it. Is there a drone that can basically roll on its back then pull out (basically an Immelmann) like that?

That jet must be traveling around 200 kts for that segment of its flight, so I'm guessing it was slowed down in post?

Why is the video shakey until the jet shows up then gets smooth?

Well if the drone did get behind and airliner the drone operator could learn about vortexes, (turbulence caused by the airliner) and it is brutal. I was going in to San Jose one afternoon in a 182 and got put behind a 727 and hit it's turbulence and it wasn't pretty, didn't do that again.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

A curious piece of news. I don't know if I'm happy or confused. They have increased but not as much as expected?

Drone incidents rise less than expected in Germany in 2017