Lets talk drones

[grumpytroll]

Drones getting in the way of emergency responders - WECT TV6-WECT.com:News, weather & sports Wilmington, NC (http://www.wect.com/story/29746508/drones-getting-in-the-way-of-emergency-responders)

It is coming. Death and destruction from a drone versus EMS or other emergency helo/airplane. ( or commercial aircraft)

I had a conversation with an ATC specialist about five years ago and he admitted to me that the tech was far outpacing the governments ability to handle it. I made some written proposals back then but of course they were ignored.

Here are some of my thoughts, some have evolved over the years.

1. Any drone that can travel 300 yards or more away from the controller will have a transponder squawking a code identifying it as a drone. The squawk will be able to be changed to i.d. the drone specifically to a particular operation.

2. Drone operators doing any operations outside of the 300 yard radius will contact ATC with a specific flight plan and will be either in constant communication with ATC or at least be immediately available to ATC via cell phone etc.

3. Prior to being allowed to purchase a drone of a certain size and or range, the purchaser will read and sign a contract guaranteeing that they and anyone employed by them will follow all rules and regulations set up for drone ops. They will have to sign a legal contract stating that fully understand the severe consequences of violating the rules.

4. Any photo/video/audio material attained by these long range drones will be required to have a digital tag attached to them that identifies the specific drone and owner/operator that took the images. It will be illegal for anyone to purchase any of this material for commercial publication that does not contain the digital tag.

5. Any drone operator caught operating in a TFR without prior permission from all pertinent agencies will be subject to a severe fine. Any damage, injury or death caused by the drone will make the owner/operator subject to severe penalties including murder charges in the event of a death.

6. Any owner/operator that flies within 2 miles of a emergency operation of any kind without prior permission of all pertinent agencies will be subject to severe fines.

In any and all cases, number 1 and 2 must be followed. There is no one size fits all solution but we have to start somewhere.

I don't see how it can be justified that a drone with good range and size can somehow be given a complete pass on any rules that would have to be followed by a one person helicopter or airplane. Yes, the operator is not there with the aircraft so they should have more rules and restrictions, not less. And, yes, I mean aircraft. Calling these drones does give a false sense that they are just fun little small things that can't hurt anyone. They are aircraft being operated by a (I use the term loosely) pilot. The industry will downplay calling the operators pilots because that means they don't need a license and therefore have no regs to follow. That translates into sales.

Ladies and gents, your thoughts, additions, criticisms.

Cheers

However there is this fantastic invention:
http://theamericangenius.com/tech-news/lily-camera-amazing-throw-and-go-drone-cam-follows-you-around/

[MarcK]

And you are going to enforce this,... how?

[Dash8driver1312]

Being charged with murder requires a demonstration that the suspect intended the death of the victim, good luck getting that one through for an "all cases" situation.

[Mechta]

6. Any owner/operator that flies within 2 miles of a emergency operation of any kind without prior permission of all pertinent agencies will be subject to severe fines.How the heck is anyone supposed to know everything that is happening within a two mile radius of them*? Emergency operations, unless they go on for days, are hardly likely to be NOTAMed.

*I suppose you could always send up a drone and have a look... :E:E:E


In the UK, the British Model Flying Association in conjunction with the Civil Aviation Authority have created a number of documents and schemes to regulate their members, professional drone users and those wishing to experiment with the, generally larger, commercial-type drones. What they have produced looks pretty well thought out. There will always be 'cowboys' who ignore these rules, however the existing Air Navigation Orders apply just as much to model aircraft and drones as they do to manned aircraft.

https://bmfa.org/Multi-Rotors

BMFA Multi-Rotor Achievement Scheme - DroneTrest (http://www.dronetrest.com/t/bmfa-multi-rotor-achievement-scheme/494)


grumpytroll, you have made the assumption that drones are bought as off-the-shelf entities, whereas at the larger end of the scale the exact opposite is more likely to be the case, with each part of the equipment being selected for the exact application.

[[email protected]]

These things are for voyeurs and oddballs and should be banned from the sky before they kill someone.

[nowherespecial]

Having had 2 near misses with drones in the past, I would add my thoughts on this in the same way I think about American members of the general public and their love for assault rifles/ grenades etc:

Why does anyone NEED one?

You can license and have legal deterrents etc until the cows come home but why the NEED to have one? Some things are better left as niche things which militaries use. This is one of them in my opinion.

[chopjock]

1. Any drone that can travel 300 yards or more away from the controller will have a transponder squawking a code identifying it as a drone. The squawk will be able to be changed to i.d. the drone specifically to a particular operation.

No thank you, added weight and expense reduces mission time. (A simple strobe will do).

2. Drone operators doing any operations outside of the 300 yard radius will contact ATC with a specific flight plan and will be either in constant communication with ATC or at least be immediately available to ATC via cell phone etc.

I would agree if operating within an aerodrome traffic zone, but when nowhere near an active airport? Not necessary.

3. Prior to being allowed to purchase a drone of a certain size and or range, the purchaser will read and sign a contract guaranteeing that they and anyone employed by them will follow all rules and regulations set up for drone ops. They will have to sign a legal contract stating that fully understand the severe consequences of violating the rules.
4. Any photo/video/audio material attained by these long range drones will be required to have a digital tag attached to them that identifies the specific drone and owner/operator that took the images. It will be illegal for anyone to purchase any of this material for commercial publication that does not contain the digital tag.

5. Any drone operator caught operating in a TFR without prior permission from all pertinent agencies will be subject to a severe fine. Any damage, injury or death caused by the drone will make the owner/operator subject to severe penalties including murder charges in the event of a death.

6. Any owner/operator that flies within 2 miles of a emergency operation of any kind without prior permission of all pertinent agencies will be subject to severe fines.


Unenforceable therefore waste of time.

Drones are here to stay, there will be lots more of them so get used to it.

crab These things are for voyeurs and oddballs and should be banned from the sky before they kill someone.

There are a lot of professional outfits that operate legally and are not voyeurs etc and would therefore suffer if banned.

There have been many many collisions between full-size aircraft, resulting in hundreds of deaths. As far as I am aware, not so with these little drones eh?

[nowherespecial]

Chopjock,

I think Crab's point was why introduce a completely unregulated hazard into the sky when we do a reasonable enough job of crashing the regulated ones into each other already?

They don't have to be here to stay and while I agree that many professionals have them and use them perfectly safely, it's the ones like the goon in Istanbul last year which worry me. it only takes one.

Every time we fly with these around it reminds me of an old military phrase about enemy action: I have to be lucky every time, they only have to be lucky once. Sums up my sentiments of the risks of drones perfectly.

[[email protected]]

Nowherespecial:ok::ok:

[John R81]

I was talking to a chap just after he filed a MOR for a close call at 1800ft just West of Biggin, a drone around 1.5m diameter and an EC130 7-up. Following alert to ATC, Police Helicopter came to search for the operator but no luck. That was the second close encounter I heard of in the vicinity in a week.


Only a matter of time....

[Ian Corrigible]

And you are going to enforce this,... how?
M240. And a crapload of ammo. :E

SUUqthyNWV0

I/C

[whoknows idont]

Or maybe one of them kiwi deer hunters with a net gun in the backseat at all times.

Seriously: I do agree the drones should carry a transponder whenever flown out of the operators sight so they at least show up on the controllers screen, on TCAS, on PowerFlarm and whatever else is there in that department.

I predict that no drastic measures will be taken until an airliner is brought down by a drone followed by a public outcry. Apparently the incident in Warsaw with the Lufthansa Embraer was not enough for international consequences.

[mdovey]

There was a proposal last month to the FAA from Amazon to establish a "drone airspace" below 400 ft agl. plus an exclusion zone from 400 - 500ft agl to separate drone traffic from other air traffic (airports being excluded from this drone airspace for obvious reasons).

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2182311-amazon-revising-the-airspace-model-for-the-safe.html

Now, providing private airstrips were also excluded etc. I could see this being feasible for fix wing traffic which would be unlikely to be flying this low outside of an airfield - although it could make an off-airfield emergency landing even more "exciting" that it needs to be!

However, my immediate reaction was this wouldn't work well for rotary traffic which may have very legitimate reasons for being below 500ft agl. outside of an airfield.

Matthew

[nowherespecial]

And virtually all military traffic of course, incl jets doing 7nm a minute and troop carrying Support Helicopters. Let's not even go there on a C130 full of Paras.

But hey someone got some cool overhead photos on a go pro so the risk of killing hundreds of people was def worthwhile....

[bolkow]

I agree that they should be regulated through model flying clubs, thing is it took me five years to learn to fly a model helicopter, plenty of time to learn responsibility, but any idiot can buy and put a drone up due to the amount of gyros and gizmos they have

[Mechta]

But hey someone got some cool overhead photos on a go pro so the risk of killing hundreds of people was def worthwhile.... Nowherespecial, as you are talking about risk, the probability of a birdstrike with a goose or buzzard is far greater than with a drone, so maybe you should be insist the RSPB get them all fitted with FLARM and transponders?

Model flying sites are not specifically marked on any air map that I have seen, and the only fatal collision with a model that I am aware of was on a shared site (Hang glider & slope soarer, Devil's Dyke, 1987), so the risk from randomly colliding with a drone in uncontrolled airspace must be equally small.

There was a case recently of a full size aeroplane clipping a model (presumably a slope soarer) at Mill Hill, near Shoreham, this year, but to my mind anyone who does a low approach over a known popular slope soaring site needs their head examined.

Plane nearly crashed after model aircraft smashed into it at 1,000ft - Mirror Online (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/plane-nearly-crashed-after-model-5640680)

https://bmfa.org/News/News-Page/ArticleID/2243/Model-Flying-at-Mill-Hill-West-Sussex

[givdrvr]

In the US, drones are already being reported in NMAC situations even within Class B,C,D airspace. The US has a significant problem with laser illuminations, and drones are the next wave of risk creators on a much higher level.

[[email protected]]

Except that the Cessna was at about 1000' and the site is only cleared for use up to 50' with unpowered aircraft.

That is the big problem, people will kick the a*se out of any permissions granted to fly these thing and, on the whole, the sort of people buying them are not the sort who worry too much about rules and regs anyway.

How is the CAA going to get transponders on these when they are not even mandated on gliders or paragliders - both of which I and my colleagues have had near misses with this year as they don't show up on TCAS and are very difficult to see until you are right on top of them.

The big sky theory only works for so long!

[Mechta]

[email protected], Having researched this incident a bit further, it is apparent that the non thermic weather conditions and the type of model involved make the stated collision height of 1000ft highly unlikely.

http://slopesoaringsussex.bl*gspot.co.uk/2015/05/mill-hill-comment-from-regular-flyer.html

replace the * with an o

[grumpytroll]

Pilot reports of close calls with drones soar in 2015 | Vertical Magazine - The Pulse of the Helicopter Industry (http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/32423)

I guess there are some ways to enforce rules regarding drones. The FAA is going to come down hard on anyone found violating the rules. As someone else stated, there will be serious rule changes when an airliner is brought down or an EMS aircraft with a patient on board. I also predict that when fire fighting aircraft are grounded due to drone activity and a mansion or two in California owned by Spielberg, Winfrey et al is lying in ashes, suddenly this will become a big deal to politicians.

Realistically, these things are going to become a dangerous nuisance, like a swarm of mosquitoes. In big cities especially, when an accident happens, news helicopters are dispatched. Now it will be drones. Not only drones with responsible operators but anyone with a police scanner and a desire to get a shot of the tragedy. Currently when responding to a scene and there are news helos in the area, we TALK to each other. Directly. I can tell them which way I will be departing and when. News helos are squawking so the local ATC can coordinate traffic as necessary. ATC can let other EMS aircraft inbound know who and what is around the scene. If drones were at least squawking a code they would be visible on TCAS and radar and if they have a unique squawk, others can be warned that drones are indeed operating in the area. I believe that responsible drone operators would participate in communications efforts with ATC. First, I don't think they are cavalier about having a multi-thousand dollar drone destroyed by a multi-million dollar helicopter. Second, they don't want this situation to become so bad so quick that regulations come down that essentially ban them completely. Third, the local news organization that operates a drone that brings down an EMS or police helicopter...can you say bad publicity? Finally, there is a requirement for aircraft operation in class B and C to have two way radio comms and a transponder with mode C. Additionally, a 30 mile mode C veil from surface to 10,000 for Class B. So how is a drone allowed to operate in direct conflict with these rules that are required for all other aircraft?

Can't enforce the rules, seriously. Yeah, ask the fools who are caught shining lasers at aircraft if they have been dealt with. 10 years in some cases. Of course you can't stop everyone, just like you can't stop drunk drivers. You can sure enforce the rules with a firm hand and slow the thing down considerably. Or we could just say its all unenforceable, throw up our hands and stomp away.

[whoknows idont]

How is the CAA going to get transponders on these when they are not even mandated on gliders or paragliders - both of which I and my colleagues have had near misses with this year as they don't show up on TCAS and are very difficult to see until you are right on top of them.


Fair point. Would certainly make sense to make transponders mandatory for all aircraft in all airspaces. But I think there is an additional risk when it comes to unmanned aircraft: They are just that, unmanned, so nobody sitting in there risking his own bum (which usually does the trick to make you a bit more motivated not to crash). Instead the jolly drone operator sits somewhere, detached from what's going on, piloting the thing around. Or even better, he just typed in some coordinates and sends the damn thing off into the skies, trusting the old gods and the new that his shiny toy will return eventually.

[Flyting]

And you are going to enforce this,... how? https://youtu.be/UU8sJ8aeyC4

with more of these....:E

[MarcK]

Privateers. Maybe we can issue Eagles and other raptors letters of marque.:)

[Thomas coupling]

Are you guys serious or just "old". Drones are coming - big style. They will completely swamp our airspace in every shape and form, be it Amazon delivering parcels, to sheep rearing, to aerial assessment of crop health, to filming individuals as they go about their sports and interests, to law enforcement, spying, journalism, selling houses, assessing building repairs, on and on and on.

Nothing will stop this tsunami of activity and the CAA are caught completely on the hop. There are even companies devising systems which knock drones out by interfering with their transmissions so that airfields can be protected, convoys etc etc.

get real.

This is most certainly the future. Commercial aircraft will become pilotless, certain manned helicopter activity redundant.

Be prepared

[heli1]

I can agree that things are changing and drones are here to stay but am more concerned with the here and now. It isn't just drones,I've had experiences with paramotors flying at low level over our FATO and even using it out of hours without asking and with no radio,no advance warning,and apparently unregulated by the CAA.

[Mechta]

Thomas Coupling :D

The solution to this problem is to have drones limited to 4mph and preceded by a smaller drone carrying a red flag.

[McDoo]

Guys, do your research please. In the UK the CAA are far from being behind the curve. They are actually leading the field in regulating commercial drone operation. You need a 'permission to work' before being allowed to operate commercially. This involves ground school and a written exam, writing an OM-A and B and getting it approved and successfully passing a flight test with an examiner, carrying specialist insurance, providing a written risk assessment for every job, keeping log books for the machine and pilot and charging records for every battery. It's not something that everyone is going to put themselves through. Most of the more commonly used drones have software that prevents them from flying too close to airports, flying above 400 feet or more than 500 meters from the operator (these are the legally established limits which also include not flying in vis below 5k, within 50 mtrs laterally and vertically of persons, vessels, vehicles and structures not under your direct control etc ).
The main problem is that anyone can buy one. The best regulation would probably be to prevent purchase of a machine unless the buyer can prove that they are suitably qualified.
There is vast potential for valid commercial use of drones and they are definitely here to stay but maybe there are a lot of operators on here who are against them because they will surely take a lot of work from helicopters? ;). And just to put my head right above the parapets, I am a fixed wing ATPL who also operates a drone business.....

[Mechta]

The main problem is that anyone can buy one.

In exactly the same way that anyone can go and buy an airworthy aeroplane or helicopter.

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Thank you McDoo for a very good exposition of the situation. Best declare my interest here: my big bruvva (ex-RAF pilot) has just completed the licensing process described by McDoo, and is every bit as professional in his (and his observer's) approach to the task as any AOC holder should be. If I was only sharing the low-level airspace (and you don't get much closer to the ground than following 11kv wires much of the day) with operators like him I would be extremely comfortable and confident.

I am not particularly worried about them taking over my job; the range and versatility of a heli still beats UAS at least 98% of the time in our work, although there ARE specialised instances where a drone can achieve better imagery.

As for operating them at airfields - if you subscribe to CAA bulletins you'll see that one of the most recent INs concerns UAS ops at airfields. Who would want to? How about operators of large aircraft who want to carry out pre-flight/ post-flight inspections... I for one would not enjoy clambering over a Beluga to achieve the kind of look-see that I can give my EC135. Give me access to a good UAS and a competent operating team and I'd be delighted with the results.

Drones are here to stay - get them (and pocket l@sers...) out of the hands of the untrained and they'll be no more hazardous than anything else we have to deal with.

[McDoo]

In exactly the same way that anyone can go and buy an airworthy aeroplane or helicopter.

Agreed, or a few dozen Chinese Lantern flying fire hazards!

[McDoo]

Thank you McDoo for a very good exposition of the situation. Best declare my interest here: my big bruvva (ex-RAF pilot) has just completed the licensing process described by McDoo, and is every bit as professional in his (and his observer's) approach to the task as any AOC holder should be. If I was only sharing the low-level airspace (and you don't get much closer to the ground than following 11kv wires much of the day) with operators like him I would be extremely comfortable and confident.

I am not particularly worried about them taking over my job; the range and versatility of a heli still beats UAS at least 98% of the time in our work, although there ARE specialised instances where a drone can achieve better imagery.

As for operating them at airfields - if you subscribe to CAA bulletins you'll see that one of the most recent INs concerns UAS ops at airfields. Who would want to? How about operators of large aircraft who want to carry out pre-flight/ post-flight inspections... I for one would not enjoy clambering over a Beluga to achieve the kind of look-see that I can give my EC135. Give me access to a good UAS and a competent operating team and I'd be delighted with the results.

Drones are here to stay - get them (and pocket l@sers...) out of the hands of the untrained and they'll be no more hazardous than anything else we have to deal with.
Hey T&B, don't worry about your job, the Achilles heel of the drone is the same as iPhones, great technology but rubbish battery life. I don't see any huge improvements on the horizon but maybe the battery manufacturers should talk to Tesla who are leading the field in electric cars with sensible range.
I live close to an airport and know a lot of the folk there. I would love to do some publicity work for them but within the protected zone around the airport my drone won't even allow me to start the motors! There are some dodgy methods to possibly get around this but like your Bro, I'm far too professional to even consider attempting to do so as I can't make the risk assessment viable....

[McDoo]

Regarding enforcement of drone misuse, there are many licensed operators now whose businesses could be threatened by irresponsible users.
I can say that although the CAA can't be omnipotent, any such operator will not hesitate to report the bad guys if they come across them. At the moment the CAA are better at responding to this than they are at enforcing the rules on dodgy charters by non AOC operators....

[McDoo]

Thomas Coupling :D

The solution to this problem is to have drones limited to 4mph and preceded by a smaller drone carrying a red flag.
...and you'll never get approval for single engined turboprop commercial fixed wing operations.....oh, hang on a minute....Luddite alert!

[McDoo]

...and you'll never get approval for single engined turboprop commercial fixed wing operations.....oh, hang on a minute....Luddite alert!
NOT aimed at you TC or Mechta, Irony mode engaged....

[Gordy]

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j35/helokat/CKJkMIaVEAEXlmG_zpspry6uzdr.jpg

[Thomas coupling]

McDoo - Three big difference compared to the rest of the flying world, here in la la land.
Drones are cheaper than push bikes.
Drones can be flown by anyone with a modicum of co-ordination.
Drones will proliferate in their hundreds if not thousands.

All of this will leave the CAA on the back foot - big time. They are massively understaffed currently and looking at further cutbacks. They are reducing their audit frequency's. They don't have a department that is proactive. They 'react' weeks if not months after the event.
Something very very sinister is going to happen before the Authorities wake up to the problems associated with drone ops.
Rules and regs are for ethical operators remember.

The CAA really have absolutely NO idea how to handle this new threat.......and it will become a threat.

[newfieboy]

I worked along side a drone for the last month up at Detour gold mine in N.Ontario. It was doing survey work of the pit. Was a tad concerned originally when I got the email advising this. All my ops work @500 AGL on a longline due to short distances hauling heavy loads. Said drone was going to operate @ 600 AGL. At the end of the day, caused me no problems. Drone Pilot very professional, emailed me their flight plan and times every morning and kept in touch on FM. Security also advised on FM when it was going to fly.

Pesky things hard to spot, I didn't see it once in a month, but the drone crew did understand that every 5-10 minute turn would be out a longline window for a couple. Gave me my airspace and we made it work.....Now Joe Bloggs and his super duper all lights and gadget drones.....Mmmm pleased I fly in the bush...we got bugs the size of drones!!

[Gordy]

Hope fire season is treating you well up North....we got our ass handed to us on a plate down here in CA......

Problem with the drones down here is that anyone can afford one and they are all trying to get the CNN shot to sell to the news stations and do not understand or care that we are flying low level over the fires.....

[Thomas coupling]

The future has already arrived:

https://www.airdog.com/

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/lily-drone-flying-selfie-camera-follows-you-around-as-you-ski-or-run-10250471.html

[JerryG]

Are we not making a basic error in thinking of a universally available (and priced) drone in the same terms as a commercial sized (and priced) helicopter, just because they both fly and occupy airspace?

Doesn't a small shift in head space provide some better perspective? For example; if I want to buy a gun, ANY gun (In Australia) I have to submit a licence application, wait a few weeks for the process, attend a course, pass a test and then register (attach myself) to the serial number of any subsequent guns I buy. If I go out with my gun and kill somebody I will be locked up. If I even frighten somebody with my gun there's a good chance that I will also get prosecuted, I will certainly have my gun and my licence confiscated.

I and many of my farming neighbours have guns for perfectly legitimate purposes but there is a universal respect for the fact that they are dangerous. Fathers teach their sons great respect for that danger at a very early age. The licence course reinforces that. Peers consistently reinforce it. Ignorance of those dangers is no defence when a gun is used irresponsibly. In other words there is an established and universal social culture, allied to harsh and unforgiving laws.

Shouldn't a drone (based on cost, size, availability and danger factor) be regarded, and therefore dealt with, as more like a gun than an aircraft?

In those terms where would the main danger still lie? ... autonomy. Would you ever licence, or even allowed to be sold, an autonomous gun. I don't think so!

Asking a cut-back aviation regulatory body to be responsible for policing drones (below a certain size) isn't ever going to work. But there are plenty of options available for restricting the sale, the purchase and the use of any commodity that has the potential to kill.

[MarcK]

But there are plenty of options available for restricting the sale, the purchase and the use of any commodity that has the potential to kill.Sure. Let's add these (http://www.douglasquikut.com/ginsu-knives-s/1891.htm) to the list of licensed items...

[newfieboy]

Hi Gordy
Yep fire season kicking ass out West here also. Drones causing problems on fires here in Canada.

Drone operators blast 'irresponsible and selfish' flight that grounded firefighters

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/drone-operators-blast-irresponsible-and-selfish-flight-that-grounded-firefighters-1.3193540

Anyways be safe Bud,and good luck in CA. I'm off for a change, going aerial spraying for forestry tomorrow.

[[email protected]]

Jerry - the problem with the argument is that the punishment is always retrospective. If you shoot 20 people with your gun you will go to prison but 20 people will have lost their lives - if you hadn't been allowed the gun in the first place that would be far less likely to occur.

if a di*khead with a drone takes out a helo or an airliner, he will be traced and prosecuted but those crews/pax will still be dead.

[Mechta]

[email protected], your logic can be applied to any activity that humans do which carries an element of risk to others. Where do you stop?

[chopjock]

crab
if you hadn't been allowed the gun in the first place that would be far less likely to occur.

Are you suggesting no one should be allowed a drone in the first place?

[GlenQuagmire]

I don't understand all this talk of death and destruction. I fly a decent sized plane for a living and I just don't see how this is a problem. Birds are a much more significant threat than a drone and nobody is campaigning for the abolition of birds. Multirotors, model helicopters, model planes etc don't fly in swarms or flocks so the maximum risk is only the same as a bird strike. Bird strike is a risk we factor and attempt to mitigate so why is there such a focus on multirotors? Stop calling them drones by the way - they are not generally autonomous and if they are they are covered by CAP722 or similar in other countries. If you're really bothered about it why not fingerprint models with smart water or something similar so that owners can be traced if something goes wrong. Our industry has got bigger problems than RC models - psychos in the cockpit, nutters in the back, pay to fly issues, declining skills..

I'm more afraid of thunderstorms - ban them!

[tistisnot]

Eagle Takes Down Drone And Reclaims The Skies For Itself - Digg (http://digg.com/video/eagle-destroys-drone)

[Thracian]

Glen,

in contrast to birds, mutlicopters don't have any instinct of avoiding selfdistructive encounters with other aircraft.
And there are possibilities to predict at least the probability of a bird strike depending on the weather, the times and the surrounding environment. You can almost be sure, that multicopters don't adhere to these schemes.

And yes, they ARE (at least some of them) autonomous. The producers are advertising the ability of programming a path for them at home and then flying it without any further control inputs.
And they ARE (many of them) able to "return home" autonomously when battery starts getting low.

And especially helicopters (when firefighting, when doing MEDEVAC, EMS or any other low level airwork they're used for) are flying at or at least often at the same altitude levels.

The first mid-air is waiting to happen...

We pilots have to learn a bunch of rules, a load of procedures and payed a good part of a fortune only to be allowed using our airspace. And there are those owners of multicopters who bought them at some internet store for a few bucks, didn't have to learn anything, just plug a cam to those things and start flying in the same airspace without even knowing that there ARE rules that apply.

I don't want to propose to forbid multicopters, but the buyers at least have to learn a little bit about the rules that apply, the danger their toys may become for others and the consequences that may occur if something happens.

Thracian

[JerryG]

Thracian :D :D I don't want to propose to forbid multicopters, but the buyers at least have to learn a little bit about the rules that apply, the danger their toys may become for others and the consequences that may occur if something happens. My point entirely with reference to guns.

Glen I fly a decent sized plane for a living Come and join us down at low level to discover the birds (who do indeed try to avoid us) and the drones/multicopters/whatever who actively seek to be in the same airspace as us because of what's going on below e.g. fire, accident etc.

Crab the problem with the argument is that the punishment is always retrospective. While that's true the key lies in KNOWING that there will be retrospective punishment, which most do not as Thracian has said.

MarcK - If you want to talk about knives then you entirely make my case. I'm not an expert on this but isn't it still illegal to sell, carry or use a flick knife? Why? ... because on balance that particular branch of knives is more likely than not to be used in a way that we (the rest of us) don't want it to be used ... because it's dangerous.

[MarcK]

MarcK - If you want to talk about knives then you entirely make my case. I'm not an expert on this but isn't it still illegal to sell, carry or use a flick knife? Why? ... because on balance that particular branch of knives is more likely than not to be used in a way that we (the rest of us) don't want it to be used ... because it's dangerous.
Well, in turn, that makes MY case. I disagree that multicopters are more likely than not to be used in a dangerous way.

[Thracian]

I disagree that multicopters are more likely than not to be used in a dangerous wayMore likely than not, multicopter "operators" don't even know, which action could result in dangerous situations, or which rules in general apply for airspace.

For guns, in most countries you need training and certification. For drivers licenses (i.e. using public roadspace) and pilot licenses (i.e. using public airspace), in all countries you need training and certification, even for model flying.
For multicopters you only need a few bucks and nothing more.

That's where the danger arises. It's all about knowledge and responsibility.

Tell multicopter buyers a few pages about airlaw, the possible situations "up there", the consquences that can occur based on their doings, let them sign a paper that they read this, register each buyer with the model-id and this signed letter, and they - most likely - will act more careful with their toys.

Until then, the risk rises with "drone"-sells

Thracian

[[email protected]]

Maplin -(an electronics chain store in UK) has reported a quadrupling in sales of drones in the last year.

How many of those purchasers give a t*ss about air-law, safety or even privacy?

[Flying Binghi]

Yep, as others have commented. Very easy to fly. Took me about a minute to learn to fly me new drone. Sent it off into the wild blue, (geo fenced up to 400' and out to 600') left it there a while, and then selected auto return and it flew itself back to within 5 odd metres of me and landed itself.
Wait until them terrorist chaps work out how to reverse program them drones and send a hand grenade pay-load out to a preset GPS co-ordinate..:(

[JerryG]

FIVE HOURS of grounded fire-fighters for one drone ...

Drone flies above B.C. wildfire, forcing helicopter fleet to stop fighting blaze for five hours | National Post (http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/drone-flies-above-b-c-wildfire-forcing-helicopter-fleet-to-stop-fighting-blaze-for-five-hours)

"The RCMP worked to find the drone late Sunday afternoon, but had not found it or its operator".

[chopjock]

"Drone forces helicopter fleet to stop fighting blaze for five hours"

Or was it the authorities over reacting because of a 5 minute flight with a small drone?

[Gordy]

chopjock:

Or was it the authorities over reacting because of a 5 minute flight with a small drone?

We fly around often with only half to one mile viz....the problem is that once a drone is spotted, we cannot guarantee it is on the ground until the owner is located. It would be a brave person to tell us to go fly again without confirming the status of the drone. Just like wires....it is not the one you see thaat gets you---it will be the one you don't.

[chopjock]

.the problem is that once a drone is spotted, we cannot guarantee it is on the ground until the owner is located.

There appears to be a self perpetuating problem then, because the drone being so small and it's pilot may be not wanting to be found and all the helicopters are grounded?
The authorities prefer to let the fires burn based on lack of information???
Yet there has never been a case of a drone collision with a full size aircraft? That's Hysteria.

[Gordy]

Yet there has never been a case of a drone collision with a full size aircraft? That's Hysteria

And I would rather not be the first.... I for one will sit on the ground until the drone is confirmed on the ground. It is hard enough keeping track of the of the other helicopters you know are in line with you let alone a drone.

[fatmanmedia]

here is a crazy idea.

why not rig up a Ec145, a R22, R44 for remote controlled flight and fly them in to a DJi and see what the results are, that way we will know for sure what the results will be.

I'm using them for example but it any other helicopters.

have one drone flying in to the blades and on a different heli have it fly head on.

It's the only way that this could be resolved.

fats

[chopjock]

Gordy,

Just like wires....it is not the one you see thaat gets you

What do you do if there are unseen wires around ??? :hmm:

Wait on the ground until they are found?

[Gordy]

Chopjock

You know what I meant. Just looked at your profile---now I know why you are arguing. You do not have the same large fires in the UK as what we deal with out here. Come fly an unauthorized drone near a fire here and you WILL be arrested.

And wires can be somewhat predictable. We get updates from the power companies, and at least wires stay in one place.

[Thracian]

why not rig up a Ec145, a R22, R44 for remote controlled flight and fly them in to a DJi and see what the results are, that way we will know for sure what the results will be.And of course you are willing to
- pay enough of these helis (at least you will need 4)
- pay the rigging for RC-flight of these
- pay for the testing and certification of this rigging (otherwise the are not allowed to get into air)
- pay the DJis
- plan and execute all the necessary test scenarios (impact from above, front, tail rotor, side)
?

Why should the heli-industry bother?
There are rules in the airspace.
Every new participant has to obey to these rules. And they include aircraft certification and pilot certification.

Who are the "new kids on the block"? Guess what? The "multicopter guys".
If the like to play with others in the same airspace, well, easy: Get those rules into your brains!

As some others stated: I would definitely not want to be the first heli pilot getting to know how a "multicopter strike" feels like.

Thracian

[newfieboy]

Gordy
Here here my friend. Was on a fire few years ago out west turned into 167,000Ha fire. 100+rotary and Air Tanker groups. If you had a mile vis was luxury. It's a shame when values and properties burn because of some idiot launching a drone, when you work so hard to save them. It has happened this year in Canada. Everyone is on frequency, keeps us somewhat safe from running into each other, flying planned routes and altitudes. Be bit of a shocker to come head to head with a drone out of the smoke. Be safe Gordy, talk soon mate.

Like I said on an earlier post, I worked along side a professionally operated drone last month. Nearly impossible to see, especially if your head is out a longline window or in low vis.

[JerryG]

To the drone supporters who somehow think that their new gear should be allowed unfettered access to protected airspace around disaster zones ...

Please understand that those of us who trust our flying machines enough to commit our own bottoms to being within them have the following task list, usually in ever-changing priorities:-

a) Keep our own machine flying and working the task.
b) Avoid running into other machines who are similarly occupied.
c) Battle the viz that Gordy describes, or the high winds and other met' extremes that probably caused the disaster in the first place.
d) Operate at very low levels while avoiding running into wires and all the other ground obstructions.
e) Sometimes control a long line with a bucket or a person suspended.
f) Give maximum spare attention (review the list above to see if you've got any!) to the ground scenario we are there to assist with.
g) SAVE LIVES.

If you want to help, go offer yourself and your equipment to the controller of the airspace. If he doesn't need you then retire gracefully.

If you ignore all that and still launch your shiny new toy into that airspace you are considerably adding to the task list above. Can you justify any possible reason why you should be allowed to do that?

Regardless of any laws or regulations an act of deliberately hindering life saving efforts is a moral CRIME and should be dealt with in that vein.

Drones may indeed have a positive role to play in many scenarios in years to come but as any new kid will tell you it's best to learn the rules, etiquette, morals and peer hierarchy before flexing your elbows in the playground. The alternative is a punch in the gob and eternal ejection from the playground.

BTW ... Hats off to all those who were airborne over New Orleans ten years ago today. The spirit of mutual respect and co-operation between consummate professionals saved many lives ... because we could TALK to each other.

[chopjock]

Obviously a drone should not be in the air when full size are around.

But, when all the choppers were grounded, what's the problem with flying a drone then?

So clearly a drone should not be a problem until full size arrive on scene, right?

So when was the drone first seen in the area, before or after the helicopters arrived?

I can just imagine it, some observer on the ground reports a drone and the fire control officer sounds the alarm before the helicopters even arrive and grounds them.
Hysteria like I said...

[newfieboy]

Err Chopjock
The assets in the BC cases were in the air when drones arrived on all occasions, hence aircraft grounded because of drones. Do you fly fire? I do. Would you carry on with your mission with drones buzzing around, probably not. Or are you a drone 'pilot'?

[chopjock]

Or are you a drone 'pilot'?

I fly both drones and full size, responsibly. I understand both and If flying a drone I will absolutely give way to the full size any time my spotter or I hear one coming.
Likewise if I am flying the full size, I expect any drone operators to keep out of our way as I know that they know we can not see them.

[helimutt]

so you really dont want to watch what this idiot does with his drone then. I was astounded that anyone could be so stupid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfxdeRx2fLA

[KiwiNedNZ]

Its not just the fire ground where drones are causing problems. I was visiting Geisinger Life Flight in rural PA couple of weeks ago and they told me they nearly hit a drone at about 1000ft over rural PA on their way back from a call.

Its only a matter of time before one comes into contact with the other.

[Sir Niall Dementia]

Helimut;

What annoyed me other than his astonishing arogance and stupidity was the threat about "rage comments" from YouTube.

What a c##k

SND

[helimutt]

I did wonder why he thought he wouldnt get any. It was obviously going to attract negative comments. The only good thing about that video is that his drone gets trashed beyond repair. :D

[ETOPS]

Take a look at the video...

Sony?s new camera drone flies like a plane with vertical takeoff | Technology | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/aug/25/sonys-camera-drone-flies-like-plane-aerosense-zmp)

Now how about a scaled up 2 seater version?

[fatmanmedia]

BBC has a interesting article on the use of tech to keep our sky clear

Can technology keep our skies safe from nuisance drones? - BBC News (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33989289)

fats

[[email protected]]

I don't think any of that technology will do anything to stop self-obsessed and selfish idiots, like the Swedish YouTuber, from buying a new toy and playing flying it with no forethought or regard for others, especially airspace users.

Ban the frickin' lot!

[chopjock]

crab
Ban the frickin' lot!

I'm sure someone must have thought that when the motor car was invented

as they were scaring horses!

[helimutt]

as a new user of drones, becoming licensed for aerial work, its like everything. Some people will abuse the priviledge, but those of us who have spent the money getting licensed, will be like those aoc holders watching the 'private' pilots do it cheaper without restrictions imposed like a commercial op.
The CAA are coming down hard on the people who take the p*ss, and so they should. There hasnt been a collision between a drone and aircraft yet in the UK that im aware of, and if everyone was sensible then it should never happen. Idiots like the youtuber will always exist. Unfortunately we cant selectively control the gene pool.

But rest assured Crab, there are those of us out there who are doing all we can to ensure our drones are flown safely, LOS and within our ops manuals limitations. Yes, you really do need an ops manual! :ok:


ps, not sure if youre aware but most new drones with gps functionality wont get airborne if they detect themselves in class A airspace (near airports etc) and you need a patch for the software.It's an inbuilt safety function, (easily overidden by covering gps aerial in tin foil!!!) Users should get permission from Air traffic or at the least, let them know what you're doing.

[[email protected]]

I'm sure someone must have thought that when the motor car was invented and look how many people they have killed!!!:E

Helimutt - I work with a chap who is into his drones and very professional about it but he is an ex-mil pilot so that shouldn't be a surprise.

They can be operated safely by those who care but the majority really don't fall into that category and things like geofencing are easily bypassed, as you mention.

[grumpytroll]

Drone intercepted near Maryland prison, officials say - Baltimore Sun (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/blog/bs-md-prison-drone-20150824-story.html)

[Self loading bear]

Airbus offers first stationary solutions.
Airbus Defence (http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/CounterUAVSystemfromAirbusDefenceandSpaceprotectsagainstilli )

Now we will have to wait for mobile application to secure forest fires, HEMS sites, etc.

SLB

[bolkow]

voyeurs and oddballs Crab???
Just wait til they start painting the yellow?
To be honest large model helicopters have been flying for years but the thing is it took people years to learn how to fly them properly, and they needed clubs input and expertise to learn, that gave clubs time to ingrain a sense of responsibility and respect of self and others and the hobby. Drones on the other hand have so many gyros removing the need for developed skills any jack the lad with a £1000 can buy a fairly decent piece of equipment and fly it out of the box, convincing himself he is flying it, the latter group are to be found hanging around runways ends at heathrow and the like simply because they can flick a switch and need no other aid to fly the thing

[Gregg]

This link shows testing being done to see how professional operators with reliable systems can integrate successfully in the airspace.

Drone provides insight on Tepee Springs Fire (http://www.ktvb.com/videos/news/local/2015/09/23/drone-provides-insight-on-tepee-springs-fire/72712476/)