Drone Collision with helicopter = tail rotor failure
 

"During the Baja 500 while chasing from a helicopter a fellow race team was struck by drone. The helicopters tail rotor started to fail and with quick reactions the pilot was able to safely maneuver the helicopter to the ground without any injuries. Being that the helicopter couldn't fly now we had winch it on to a what normally is a car trailer"

I'm not allowed to embed link hopefully someone else will

Regards

CO

What would that cost to fix?

$100k minimum.

So the helicopter pilot failed to maintain an adequate lookout while chasing cars on the ground in VMC?

How high, how fast, what kind of airspace etc?

PDR

Surely you’re taking the piss??

Was the helicopter struck by the drone? So the helicopter was hovering and the drone flew in to it? Unlikely. More like the drone was struck by the helicopter!

...... :ugh:

I'm just looking at the images and applying my analytical skills (having previously found that hurrumphing bluster is not of much value in accident investigation).

The damage is to the side of the tailboom fairing, the leading edge of the fin and the tail rotor, all indicating that the drone was in front of the helicopter and the direction of collision was from the front. For the damage to have carried on that far down the side of the helicopter the relative velocity must have been quite high - drone large enough to cause that sort of damage don't fly that fast, so it is more likely that the helicopter was flying fast when it hit the drone than it is for the drone to have been flying fast when it hit the helicopter.

The news item suggests that the helicopter was "chasing" a cross-country race car at the time, so presumably it was quite low and almost certainly VFR (ie where it is the pilot's obligation to see and avoid). Had the helicopter been given exclusive use of "sanitised" airspace above thr race or were there other aircraft operating in the area? Had the pilot been explicitly told that there wouled be no other air vehicles operating over the race? Even if he/she had would that absolve the pilot in command of his/her responsibility to see and avoid in VMC?

The drone could just have easly have been a large bird, an ultralight or another helicopter. I don't see any clear-cut case that the drone was in error here. We need to see the details before concluding that this was anything more than a pilot whose sight and brain were not in a piece of airspace before his helicopter got there IMHO.

€0.0005 supplied (YMMV),

PDR

Hahahaha what a piece of drivel.

Tell us all how the drone can "see and avoid" once again or don't those rules apply to the drone?

Helicopters were there first and UAV's are the new kids on the block - as far as I am aware they are the ones that need the "restricted airspace" and normally do.
How come you never see NOTAMS for helicopters flying around yet the NOTAMS are thick with DROTAMS?

There are reasons for UAV rules that are far more restrictive than for normal aircraft - any driverless cars in Surrey yet or only the one belonging to the village idiot?

PS Baja is in the California Peninsula in Mexico.

Mexican drone laws -

And I thought they were going to add to that repair bill by the way they were hauling on those forward cross-tubes.

RVDT posted the gold right there.
Drone operators have an obligation to be just as safe in the skies. Many places have laws for such conduct
Drones inherantly are hard to see, and can move faster than your eyes can pick up on them. All shapes and sizes. from palm sized to small car sized.

The Baja races have been using helicopters for a very long time so I doubt that a drone operator could plead that he did not know he was flying in a known aircraft space.
the reality is with millions of these toys gracing the skies, piloted by numbnuts, the problem will increasingly have serious and tragic results for someone

I thinks that PDR1 has a drone, he has that vibe to his posts.

I see that anyone who has the temerity to seek facts rather than knee-jerk is immediately accused of being a drone-owner (I'm not) or a village idiot (not that either).

Mods - I take it that Mr RVDT will now get a ban for abusing another member? After all, those are supposed to be the rules aren't they?

PDR

Those are the facts - which one did I get wrong?

I’m with RVDT .

I seem to recall Airplane folks think that about Helicopters too.....with the same bias.

Drones are damn hard to see....but then so are Birds.....and for some helicopter pilots....Wires, Trees, Masts, Crane Booms, Helicopters, and Airplanes and good old Mother Earth at times.....just saying.

At least some of the birds have some semblance of self preservation built in. Birds have sensors - sight and sound. Birds are an increased risk to modern quiet machines. Ask an EC 135 pilot. Drones - not so much.

TCAS requirement for drones anyone? Cant be that hard - they got this far and apparently they are very smart depending on who you talk to.

And also dangerous and invasive. If they want to hang with the big dogs they need to be a lot smarter. Let them do the adapting.

Probably won't happen until there is a "major" which is only a matter of time.

I see someone touched a nerve with a snowflake then....

:p:D


It's unfortunate that there seems a preponderance of UK based Rotorheads who seem unable to understand that there is a whole world outside the restrictions of the CAA where helicopter drivers can actually operate under their own control!


The Baja 500 is a well known annual event which always has helicopter coverage at low level; drone intrusions cannot always be planned for. Experienced low level film pilots will attest that.