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.

My understanding is that the heli and drone were working together on a planned shoot. great that the pilot was able to land safely.

This combined operation is becoming more and more common.

I love it! :D Let's just stop calling it bird-strike and say it's a plane-strike from now on! What about lightning, though...? :confused:

Obviously you're not a golfer.

Best not to feed the troll, Bell_Ringer.
@DronDog: thanks for that insight.
Good job getting that bird down so that it was "walked away from that one" deal.

As we have now learned that the helicopter and the drone were working together, probably for the same organisation, that puts the incident in a different light. The helicopter pilot was aware of the drone operating in the area and was supposedly working with it. So given that the helicopter pilot was aware of, and presumably consenting to, the drone proximity that surely gives him/her equal responsibility for maintaining separation. The two operators had presumably established procedures and operating plans for the joint operation - if they hadn't then both operators fell short of any reasonable definition of safe practice.

But even if we ignore that, as SASless says the drone could just have easily been a bird, a pylon, a power cable or other obstacle. If the helicopter pilot was flying in such a manner that such obstacles couldn't be seen in time to avoid them then I suggest he/she was flying too low, too fast or both for the tasking and the ambient conditions. That's a pilot responsibility to determine, of course.

We don't know the full circumstances of the actual collision, but minds should at least be open to the possibility that this was a CFID (controlled flight into drone) incident.

PDR

I don't care whether he agrees with me or not - he's entitled to an opinion. The operators of this forum hand out "Time away" penalties to people who post abusively - calling people "village idiots" would get others given penalties so I simply ask that the abusive post should get a similar response (as should calling people "snowflakes" and "trolls"). That's all.

PDR

WTF has golf got to do with anything?

PDR

When someone is abusive they will, if necessary, be moderated.

Most Rotorheads know the difference between what was said and what is abusive; snowflakes, trolls, etc in context are hardly abusive terms even in these times of the overly sensitive.

Im glad you stepped up to the podium to accept your award as the snowflake in question.

It's a movie reference, never mind.

So I can suggest someone is a village idiot without risk of sanction?

I just want to be clear on this, because in the past I have been sanctioned for much less. Perhaps you could discuss it with Rob and give an answer that can be taken to be the formal Pprune position on such things?

PDR

I'm glad you feel that helicopter pilots don't need to look where they are going. It just leaves the mystery as to why they bother fitting all those front windows at all...

PDR

No, to the discussion, as there are too many variables involved. If you want to take it up with Rob via PM or email please do so. Your infringement was two years ago on Jet Blast, where you seem to spend most of your time. Maybe that’s more suited for your style of posting than Rotorheads.

No more discussion here, thanks.

Drones threatening commercial a/c?

R22 vs Drone

Drone strike



No further questions.

I fly RC models, not drones. There is a difference both in the things themselves and the way in which they are operated.

PDR

how do you know he wasn't looking?
the angles, the speeds, thay all have factors that even the best reaction times wont solve.

you're grasping at straws to convince yourself there is only one person at fault here and you know absolutely nothing more than there was clearly a collision

Rotorheads has always enjoyed a very fair, objective, even handed standard of moderator oversight....and continues to do so.

Other Forums mentioned and other persons mentioned....can not make that claim with any credibility.

Be glad we enjoy the exceptional service we do by the Mod's here at Rotorheads.

It is unfortunate that drone hobbyists feel the need to lecture pilots about how they are at fault and how they should be more accommodating.
Many of these guys have never been in a helicopter nor understand the environment and risks, yet they feel qualified to opine.
Resorting to the typical cliche's of drones are no different to birds. They are quite different, though can have a similar end result.
Your appreciation of risk changes when you realise that the worst that happens with a broken drone is buying a new one, where the consequences are slightly more serious for those operating further and faster above terra firma.
It's a pity more don't take the opportunity to learn about the environment rather than constantly defending poor discipline and flouting of regulations.