PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Drone pilot sees helicopter and flies straight to its flight path.
Old 19th Aug 2018, 15:22
  #21 (permalink)  
aa777888
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by PDR1
Recklessly endangering an aircraft?

PDR
Not at all. Giving the operator the benefit of the doubt, it appears that the UAV was below 400ft AGL, just barely outside the Class C, and in LOS to the operator, i.e. operating in accordance with US rules and reg's. This event could just as easily happened if the other aircraft was a Cessna 150. (It may also be worth noting that the recent UAV collision with the Israeli ag. helicopter also involved two aircraft both being operated completely within the letter of the law.)

Looking at the core issues, don't be confused by this event's proximity to Class C. If it had happened a 5 miles outside of the Class C boundary along the coast, it would have happened just the same way. And don't be confused about the 1000ft distance to the operator. I don't care if the UAV was directly above him, any effort to reduce the UAVs altitude on hearing the helicopter might have resulted in a collision since the helicopter was below the UAV (and it was a 407 so we know he heard it a mile away )

I hold a FAA PPASEL, PPH and remote pilot cert's. I'm a low time "hobby pilot" (although planning on a CPH checkride next month ) My day job has me working with UAS technology, among other things. This video, more than anything else, really illustrated the challenges of the see and avoid problem for both UAS operators and manned aircraft.

We all know how hard it is to see and avoid another helicopter or light single engine aircraft using just a Mark 1 eyeball, particularly in head on encounters where time is of the essence. I've been flying with TIS-B since last September and that has powerfully illustrated the shortcomings of relying only on human eyesight. With a UAV it is damn near impossible. And for the UAV operator, is is damn hard to figure out what action to take to avoid a collision. Nevertheless, UAV technology, hate it or love it, is here to stay, and is a legitimate user of the airspace. So how do we fix the problem?

Here are some random thoughts:

1. In the US it is trivial for UAV operators to file a NOTAM. This might still seem onerous to some UAV operators, but given the near impossibility of seeing a UAV nevertheless seems like a reasonable compromise. skyvector.com already does a fabulous job of displaying what skyvector calls "DROTAMS", i.e. UAV related NOTAMS. If these started showing up as nicely in Foreflight, Garmin Pilot, etc., or were carried on the FIS-B data stream, that would help a lot.

2. Create a radio frequency or two specifically dedicated to UAV operations, and require UAV operators to have and monitor an aviation radio. Then comm's could be established by aircraft entering UAV NOTAM'd areas (US rules do not prohibit entry). Aircraft and UAV operators could self-announce in a manner similar to that used at uncontrolled airfields. Again, a cost and regulatory burden to the UAV operator, particularly hobby types, but the price for being effectively invisible. Perhaps provide also for NORDO op's below 100ft AGL only, as a SOP to the low end of the hobby.

3. It is always said that "helicopters should avoid the flow of fixed wing traffic". Perhaps the same should be said for "avoiding the flow of UAV traffic", i.e. stay above 400ft. Just a reminder: US helicopter operations are not under the same 500 and 1000 foot AGL restrictions as fixed wing aircraft are in the US, although it would seem to be common sense. This alone would have prevented the event in the video above.

I specifically left out ADS-B for UAVs. It would be cost and weight prohibitive for most UAV op's.

Also possibly worth noting: I have an FAA registered heliport on my property. Twice now I have received calls from UAV operators advising me that they would be operating within a 5NM radius and looking to coordinate for safety. So Part 107 is having an effect, people are starting to get the hang of things.

It's never an easy problem when introducing a new technology into society. I'm not ready to burn all UAV operators at the stake. But from a US perspective clearly Part 107 is not fully cooked and will remain a work in progress for some time. I hope it can evolve without any major catastrophes.
aa777888 is offline