Plane Hits Drone

Headline should be, "Plane hit something that might or might not have been a drone." If it was a drone, the dead drone should be found right below where it hit the plane. Do they have registration over there?
 
I'd like to see pics to get an idea of the impact force. I think most would agree the lightweight drones would bounce off most airliner structures. Just wondering about the fan, perspex too. (I see they are planning tests as well)
My browser showed only a stock photo in that link.
 
One of these days a jet is going to take one into the engine or windscreen.
 
GlennAB1, that's a photoshopped fake movie that's been around a while. BTW, my 11AC Chief was built in

Vandalia, OH when Aeronca ran out of room in 1945-47 in MIddletown.
 
See now if they only had to register them with the government that would fix the problem. :confused::p
 
Who cares? We won't be able to prevent this. I know guys flying quad copters as high as they can. There are rules, people don't know them. Its only the beginning and there is nothing we can do about it.
 
Can't say I'm surprised. The "regulations" here don't work and I belive the regulations across the pond are even less effective if they even exist.
It's really too bad that a few idiots who fly drones where they shouldn't (around airports, Washington DC...) ruin it for the millions who dont.
 
And apparently it did not damage the plane.
"A British Airways spokesman said: "Our aircraft landed safely, was fully examined by our engineers and it was cleared to operate its next flight."" (I'm never sure how to do nested quotes.)

I'm concerned about drones flying around airports. But I wonder how big the drone has to be to actually damage a plane?

John
 
Probably didn't even scratch the paint. Not sure it's a world ending catastrophe.
 
There has to be a way to limit these drones to xxx feet AGL. I mean by design (in cooperation with manufacturers) not FAA rule since that is clearly being ignored.
 
jsstevens said:
And apparently it did not damage the plane.
"A British Airways spokesman said: "Our aircraft landed safely, was fully examined by our engineers and it was cleared to operate its next flight."" (I'm never sure how to do nested quotes.)

I'm concerned about drones flying around airports. But I wonder how big the drone has to be to actually damage a plane?
Click to expand...

bullwinkle said:
Probably didn't even scratch the paint. Not sure it's a world ending catastrophe.
Click to expand...
I think the only fear is going into an engine.
 
I went to a car show a few weeks ago in an open lot and there were two of these drones flying around and hovering occasionally up to it looked like 500 feet at times. I had this evil idea of how fun it would be to develop a "killer" drone with some kind of weapon and chase and damage/destroy them. :mad::D
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
I'd like to see pics to get an idea of the impact force. I think most would agree the lightweight drones would bounce off most airliner structures. Just wondering about the fan, perspex too. (I see they are planning tests as well)
My browser showed only a stock photo in that link.
Click to expand...

NASA never thought a piece of foam could cause so much damage, either. Ignorance is bliss!
 
Note that a 60 lb turkey vulture can also do a number on an airplane.
 
I'm a bit perplexed about why quadracopters seem to attract so many more idiots than more conventional model aircraft. RC pilots are, as a group, an exceptionally responsible bunch. So what is it about quadracopters that they seem to attract so many people who are the polar opposite? It's basically the same activity.

Rich
 
RJM62 said:
I'm a bit perplexed about why quadracopters seem to attract so many more idiots than more conventional model aircraft. RC pilots are, as a group, an exceptionally responsible bunch. So what is it about quadracopters that they seem to attract so many people who are the polar opposite? It's basically the same activity.

Rich
Click to expand...

I think the main reasons are 1) They are really easy to fly, essentially automatic, 2) the cameras give you first person view/cool video. When I was engaged in model airplanes, neither of those were, well, ubiquitous.
 
jsstevens said:
I think the main reasons are 1) They are really easy to fly, essentially automatic, 2) the cameras give you first person view/cool video. When I was engaged in model airplanes, neither of those were, well, ubiquitous.
Click to expand...

In addition to the points you mentioned, things got affordable and integrated. Used to be if you wanted VTOL and FPV, you needed a $1000 helicopter, a $1000 FPV rig, and the skills to build/fly/repair it. Now you're in business for a few benjamins at best buy.
 
orange said:
There has to be a way to limit these drones to xxx feet AGL. I mean by design (in cooperation with manufacturers) not FAA rule since that is clearly being ignored.
Click to expand...
If they can program the altitude limit in, somebody can program it out. It's the nature of the technology.
I built a custom chip set for my quadcopter to automatically limit the altitude to abide by the AMA rules. BTW: It's extremely hard to gauge the altitude of any of these drones when you are standing on the ground looking up. Also, most "hobby" drones don't have any built in technology for determining altitude.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
Yikes, even in Texas I have never seen one that big!! Maybe you dropped a decimal.
Click to expand...

Back when I was in fifth grade in the mid-70s they were everywhere. Back then everyone referred to their classmates as turkeys. ah, the good ol days.
 
RJM62 said:
I'm a bit perplexed about why quadracopters seem to attract so many more idiots than more conventional model aircraft. RC pilots are, as a group, an exceptionally responsible bunch. So what is it about quadracopters that they seem to attract so many people who are the polar opposite? It's basically the same activity.

Rich
Click to expand...

Not even close. Multirotor copters are all chips and pc boards and electronic stabilization. Any dumb-dumb can buy and fly. RC airplanes require at least a bit of skill, some require crazy good skills. Quadcopters = only a wallet required. Fly themselves right out of the box. Dumbed down do they're almost as easy to operate as a tv remote.
 
Gerhardt said:
Back when I was in fifth grade in the mid-70s they were everywhere. Back then everyone referred to their classmates as turkeys. ah, the good ol days.
Click to expand...
Jive turkey? Wasn't that the worst thing you can call somebody at that time?

 
NJP_MAN said:
Who cares? We won't be able to prevent this. I know guys flying quad copters as high as they can. There are rules, people don't know them. Its only the beginning and there is nothing we can do about it.
Click to expand...
Who cares????

Maybe I'm missing something?
 
Shouldn't the title of the post be "Drone hits plane"? :)

Wait, which aircraft was to the right of the other? :) :) :)
 
jsstevens said:
...(I'm never sure how to do nested quotes.)...
Click to expand...

The inside quotes change to single quotation marks, like this:

"A British Airways spokesman said, 'Our aircraft landed safely, was fully examined by our engineers and it was cleared to operate its next flight.' "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top