H Peacock:
Agree you'd need a new engine, but then you've just deleted the drone so well worth the tiny risk v massive disruption factor.
Aircraft windscreens and engines are tested against bird strikes, relatively soft and squishy things where impact is spread over a relatively wide area. The aircraft have NOT been tested against the small point loads perhaps encountered in hitting a drone, let alone a drone perhaps carrying a hard and dense payload.
It is utterly selfish of you to suggest that an airline should provide a USD300 million B777 or equivalent (and a full load of pax) to test how "tiny" the risk actually is. Bare minimum outcome: an aircraft out of service for months as Boeing or Airbus try to devise a repair scheme for a damaged windscreen frame or forward pressure bulkhead.
Better that muppets like you put up with a few hours disruption, unless of course you would like to stump up the money to indemnify the insurers, owners and passengers subjected to your "tiny' risk.
Similar muppets wanted the airlines to fly through Icelandic volcanic ash some years ago. Buy your own plane if you want to do any testing.