Drone hits British Airways plane near Heathrow
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny that the US insists on registered drones etc but not registered guns....
They have not really thought this through logically.
They have not really thought this through logically.
Funny that the US insists on registered drones etc but not registered guns....
They have not really thought this through logically.
They have not really thought this through logically.
Back to drones....
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Do you have any experience to arrive at this conclusion?
Simulation of 8 lb drone being ingested by a jet engine - DIY Drones
8 pounds isn't all that big.
Simulation of 8 lb drone being ingested by a jet engine - DIY Drones
8 pounds isn't all that big.
While engines suck air in a larger target is wings and fuselage.
While 8 lbs may qualify as small, many small affordable drones weigh far less. One I looked at weighs around 14 ounces
Another UK site sells large drones weighing in the order of 6 lbs. This suggests the more numerous drone will be lighter than 6 lbs. So do you test 6-8 lbs for engine ingestion or one pound drones that might be blown off.
Last edited by Pontius Navigator; 19th Apr 2016 at 19:41.
Seriously? The right to bear arms was written into our national Constitution (2nd Amendment) before most of us were born, and before most of us foresaw the emergence of aircraft, let alone drones. Too bad we didn't think that through, but you know. In any case, many jurisdictions within the US do require gun registration, just not all.
Back to drones....
Back to drones....
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both involve objects flying through the air.
Both have the potential in the wrong hands to cause damage to aircraft.
Only one has any semblance of regulation in the US
Can't apologise enough for drifting off topic but once again the selctive quoting of the Constitution is not a defence. It says
The key part being "well regulated Militia". A blanket "right to bear arms" does not exist and is not a defence for any of the numerous Sandy Points that occured and continue to occur.
The key part being "well regulated Militia". A blanket "right to bear arms" does not exist and is not a defence for any of the numerous Sandy Points that occured and continue to occur.
Back to drones....
One connection between guns and drones in recent media accounts is that it is illegal in the US, per the FAA, to take your lawfully owned gun and use it to shoot down someone else's drone, no matter what it's doing. A few people have done it, more probably will and many more than that tempted.
I would argue that the registration of 'drones' will not stop those that wish to use the platform maliciously, neither will it stop those that are just stupid and fly them where they shouldn't. It will, however, if any parts remain after the impact or ingestion allow a subsequent prosecution of the individual and act as a deterrent to others. With regards to the weight and impact effects, I would have thought it is the density of key parts that will do the damage to either the ac structure or engine?
Just I guess more people have been killed in the US by gun accidents than drone accidents, and as to malicious shootings..............
So what do we do, wait until 50,000 deaths can be attributed to drones? I don't think drone registration or regulation of any sort will completely stop accidents nor deliberate acts of malice. They can help control and manage it though, and help enforcement, too, if necessary, but there are no silver bullets (so to speak). For thousands of years mankind has outlawed murder, yet somehow murders still occur. So, should we just repeal all laws? A question I dare not ask Donald Trump.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tedious that this discussion could be easily hijacked by irrelevance.
The CAA notes two weight breaks in terms of the way that drone operations are regulated. They are 7kg and 20kg. At 7kg, the drone may not be flown in A, C, D or E airspace without ATC permission. (It's all here, by the way https://www.caa.co.uk/Commercial-ind...nned-aircraft/ )
Whilst illegal operators will do whatever they want to do, it might be prudent to set the lower weight limit to one that is unlikely to cause an engine shutdown, so that a legally operated drone (in the hands of someone with less-than the required amount of common sense, obviously) is much less likely to cause an IFSD through negligence.
The CAA notes two weight breaks in terms of the way that drone operations are regulated. They are 7kg and 20kg. At 7kg, the drone may not be flown in A, C, D or E airspace without ATC permission. (It's all here, by the way https://www.caa.co.uk/Commercial-ind...nned-aircraft/ )
Whilst illegal operators will do whatever they want to do, it might be prudent to set the lower weight limit to one that is unlikely to cause an engine shutdown, so that a legally operated drone (in the hands of someone with less-than the required amount of common sense, obviously) is much less likely to cause an IFSD through negligence.
These weight breaks are the same as those for all model aeroplanes - they date back to when the ANO defined anything over 7kg (itself an update from the original "11lbs") as an aeroplane which needed to comply with BCAR23 (etc) unless it had an "exemption certificate". Essentially the current rules have no design requirements or operating limitations (other than remaining in direct visual contact and the general requirement to not endanger stuff) for the under 7kg category, requirements for failsafe devices and a 400 foot height limit for those between 7 and 20kg, and above 20kg each individual item requires design approval, construction surveillance, an agreed test-programme and a defined set of operating limits & procedures which are agreed for the particular "model" AND ITS PILOT.
NATS keep issuing incorrect information on this subject for the under 7kg category - they keep saying that this category are limited to 400 feet altitude and 500m distance, with a separation from people and stuff of 150m (I think). Most of this is just utterly wrong, because it's clear they haven't actually READ the regulation. Some of it is confusing the alternative regulations that only kickj in where the model has a camera or other electronic surveillance device - well over 99% of RC models have no cameras or surveillance devices.
That might be problematic given that there are plenty of historical examples of engine shutdowns being caused by a single nut, bolt or washer weighing only a few grammes!
PDR
NATS keep issuing incorrect information on this subject for the under 7kg category - they keep saying that this category are limited to 400 feet altitude and 500m distance, with a separation from people and stuff of 150m (I think). Most of this is just utterly wrong, because it's clear they haven't actually READ the regulation. Some of it is confusing the alternative regulations that only kickj in where the model has a camera or other electronic surveillance device - well over 99% of RC models have no cameras or surveillance devices.
it might be prudent to set the lower weight limit to one that is unlikely to cause an engine shutdown, so that a legally operated drone (in the hands of someone with less-than the required amount of common sense, obviously) is much less likely to cause an IFSD through negligence.
PDR
Of course it can be difficult for a busy pilot to identify the drone they flew into, but an accurate identification will help the police track down its operator. So the CAA have produced this hand identification chart to help pilots:
PDR
PDR
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
PDR, the one I found, weighing less than one pound could stream live video. I would say given the money anything . . . but these can be bought at bicycle money prices, scary really.
My AD safe firing arc is 165-S-230 up to 80 deg elevation. Should I have the danger area notamed? My neighbour has a similar safety arc extended to 250 deg if mine is closed
My AD safe firing arc is 165-S-230 up to 80 deg elevation. Should I have the danger area notamed? My neighbour has a similar safety arc extended to 250 deg if mine is closed
I have a quadcopter that can record (not stream) video. It is 40mm across, has 12mm props and weighs under 20g. Cost me £11 on the interwebs. It has lighting to allow night-VFR operation.
To date it has has a serious mid-air with the bedroom ceiling fan (requiring depot-level maintenance), air-misses with both of my dogs (turns out it CAN do a flat-out vertical climb faster than they can jump) and a threatened ASBO from my neighbour's wife (well if she WILL sunbathe nude that's her problem...).
The genie is out of the bottle.
PDR
To date it has has a serious mid-air with the bedroom ceiling fan (requiring depot-level maintenance), air-misses with both of my dogs (turns out it CAN do a flat-out vertical climb faster than they can jump) and a threatened ASBO from my neighbour's wife (well if she WILL sunbathe nude that's her problem...).
The genie is out of the bottle.
PDR
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
PDR, my son in law also had a potentially reportable accident caused, I think, by a rotor failure and a vertical descent into one of the crowd.
His 4 year old was unimpressed being hit on the nose.
His 4 year old was unimpressed being hit on the nose.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The key part being "well regulated Militia". A blanket "right to bear arms" does not exist...
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Besides the clear wording which you conveniently ignored, the Supreme Court has ruled that the 2nd amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right which has NOTHING to do with belonging to a militia.
Why do folks across an ocean who are utterly ignorant of US law persistently and obsessively try to tell us what our laws state? What is the source of your unhealthy obsession that it crops up even on a thread about drones??!!
If you honestly can't see the link between regulation of drones and guns, then I worry for you.
Both involve objects flying through the air.
Both have the potential in the wrong hands to cause damage to aircraft.
Both involve objects flying through the air.
Both have the potential in the wrong hands to cause damage to aircraft.
I got called to the office for a "friendly chat" with the CP over that one...
PDR
* We're talking big-iron here - this leviathan has a ramp weight of nearly 60g, and a max VTO weight of over 80g
PDR
* You might notice a certain coincidental familiarity in the initials of one of the people mentioned in this history...
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who cares what the law says?
It's a law.
Change it.
The British laws used to have various insane things too. (Still have a few)
We changed most of them when we grew up.
p.s. unhealthy obsessions are the ones which kill huge numbers of school children.
It's a law.
Change it.
The British laws used to have various insane things too. (Still have a few)
We changed most of them when we grew up.
p.s. unhealthy obsessions are the ones which kill huge numbers of school children.