The cure
 

To stop the hysteria ALL flying drones over 500g (a crow's weight) should have a mandatory baro sensor which prevents them to climb more than 400ft over start position . It's cheap ,5$ or so at the source , light (a couple of grams ) and has about 3-6 feet acuracy .I know what i'm saying it can be done cheaply .I would even mount them in triplicate in larger drones to guard against failure .DJI should take notice.

Probably fixed by adding a small piece of blutak to the sensor static port. :rolleyes:

It's a chip thinghie of some 2/2 mm . Will need a drop of glue to disable it but then 2 things will happen .One: the inertial system will be contradicted by the baro (accels and thr tells it that is going up , baro that is staying ) . Should generate autoland sequence if the divergence is too high.Second , the Baro will remain probably permanently disabled . Can be defeated by using a hacked firmware but the ideea was to eliminate the stupid casuals , the smart nuts will run one of these anyway :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBWAcNJf5pM

Radar developed to detect small drones - BBC News

will it also detect birds?

FAA Works With CNN, BNSF to Study Drone Flights
 

Pilots say poll shows public want strict curbs on flying drones in cities
 

Pilots say poll shows public want strict curbs on flying drones in cities | Technology | The Guardian


It's interesting to see how in Europe, the attitude about drones seems to be very defensive, very restrictive. In the US, on the other hand, it appears to be the start of a gold rush of drone development of all kinds, commercial and consumer.

I have a hard time with drones. A non complient drone hit one of my former company's aircraft and killed four crewmembers a couple of years back. The drone climbed through it's assigned alltitude into RVSM airspace. They are more expensive to operate than a manned aircraft and once they stop communicating with their owners, there is no stopping them. Every person on this forum that has flown for more than a day has lost communications with ATC before. When this happens with a drone, the lack of a brain causes real concern for safety because after loss of lock/comms, a drone climbs uncommanded to the MSA for their entire route of flight. Also, as worthless as ALPA is, I would think they would be fighting tooth and nail to keep drones out of the picture. You can't get 2% of someone's income if they are an inanimate object. You would think they would be fighting against drones as a matter of safety, but there isn't a single pilot union that gives a damn about safety... Once pilots are replaced by ground operators, the unions are going away...

Jumpindan

Can you post a link to this crash?

CRayner
Fatalities from model aircraft
Regrettably there have been numerous injuries and some deaths from operation of model aircraft. Admittedly I know of none from a collision between a model and a commercial passenger operation, but there certainly was a death of a hang glider pilot in southern England 20 or 30 years ago. We should not be complacent about this.

FYI almost all injuries are self inflicted by the model pilots. Ask me how I know.
The fatality you are referring to came about on a slope shared by hang gliders and model aircraft. By mutual agreement different ends of the slope were used and there was no conflict. Regrettably the hang glider pilot did not abide by this agreement and encroached on the model flying area. A model on approach to the landing spot collided with the hang glider, the metal wing joiner in the model severing a flying wire on the hang glider. The wing collapsed and the hang glider pilot fell to his death. The subsequent enquiry cleared the model aircraft pilot of any blame.

That will be a no then jumpindan?

Did you in fact invent the story?

An errant drone enters RVSM airspace and, presumably having then downed an aircraft, causes the deaths of 4 crew members - but the event fails to get a single mention in the mainstream or aviation press. Hmmm.

As one of the new breed of 'drone' operators, I have a vested interest in this thread. I would like to deal with some of the issues raised and respond with opinions based on operating in the UK.
Conflict with any other air user and especially commercial aircraft should never happen. Of course it does, and as sub 7kg drones are currently permitted to operate in controlled airspace without clearance, will continue to happen. Recent CAA rules, now allow sub 3.5 kg drones to operate at up to 1000 ft AGL flying FPV. In other words, the pilot is sitting on the ground with goggles on, flying with just the view ahead.
The threat then, is from untrained leisure flyers with little knowledge of the hazards and rules. Recent CAA action has been to ask anyone reporting an airprox to notify Police asap. Prosecutions are taking place and awareness of 'rogue' operators to the possibility of prosecution is growing.
Commercial operators such as ourselves must undergo training and flight assessment which whilst not as rigorous as a PPL, is similar in content. We must also produce an Operations Manual, which of course must be adhered to at all times.
We do operate occasionally in controlled airspace, but always with permission and contact with the relevant ATC. In any case, we are normally restricted to below 400ft AGL. Should any of the control systems fail, the drone must have a return to home capability. If the worse should happen, a fly away, we always have the contact details of the appropriate ATC.
Most of the work we carry out could not be undertaken by full sized aircraft. Some of it could, but a drone is often safer in these circumstances.
A previous post alluded to the fact that most injuries and fatalities associated with model flying are suffered by the participants. This is true though there has been at least one fatality to a third party. Traditionally, model flying has taken place at club sites. This has kept the public and other air users safe from the activity. There is a growing trend of 'park flyers', who are generally free of rules, instruction and insurance. This cannot be a good thing for anyone.
The future of drones depends on the development of a creditable sense and avoid system. This is not far away. Then it really will be a fight for space!

At 1000ft AGL with only a remote camera view ahead and busy framing your shot how do maintain an effective scan for other aircraft? You only appear to see untrained leisure flyers as a threat to aviation.

That was my point. You cannot. The CAA exception requires an observer but a 3.5kg drone at 1000ft!
Yes, I do think that nearly all these issues are caused by hobbyists. Professional operators work to strict rules and to an operation manual.

Well , the manufacturers of consumer "drones" seem to be heading to the right direction .
Parrot Bebop Drone. Lightweight yet robust quadricopter - 14 megapixel Full HD 1080p Fisheye Camera - Skycontroller - 3-axes image stabilization
450 grams is a lot safer than the 1.2 kg's of the phantom and the video results are same if not better .

Another thing to keep in mind - aircrafts are making themselves heard from kilometers via sound. Everybody sane flying FPV drops to the deck if he hears an aircraft - any type of aircraft . That's why the spotters are pretty much redundant .

'Spotters are pretty much redundant'.

No, they are essential. It is extremely beneficial to have two people doing pre flight checks, fast jets are not always located by sound, there may be more than one aircraft, plenty of other air users make little sound, the drone pilot may be concentrating on a monitor, people may encroach on the landing area, and the sound of the drone itself may mask other sounds.

If flying in a controlled environment such as a model airfield, it may be acceptable to fly solo, but in my opinion flying solo in any area accessed by the public is not safe.

First , i'm talking about the "standard nut's " drone , everybody is scared about . The others are regulated , registrated , a police officer is looking over the shoulder of the operator every flight - no problem .

" It is extremely beneficial to have two people doing pre flight checks"

Meh - 2 man preflight on a Phantom ? Or parrot ? Or a hubsan X4 ?

" fast jets are not always located by sound"
Fast jets are looking for trouble at 1000 feet , before getting hit by a drone they will hit 20 crows , 100 sparrows , 30 pidgeons and a stork .

" there may be more than one aircraft"
One is enought to get me to put down the thing till he is gone .

" plenty of other air users make little sound"
Ninja paraglider on a empty country field would surprise the hell out of me too . Ok , spotters are good (mandatory ) near such agrement fields .

" the drone pilot may be concentrating on a monitor"
That does not make me deaf

" people may encroach on the landing area, and the sound of the drone itself may mask other sounds."
Agree , near noisy places spotters are good .But the drone itself at 50 meters is barely audible , at 100m is already silent .

If flying in a controlled environment such as a model airfield, it may be acceptable to fly solo, but in my opinion flying solo in any area accessed by the public is not safe.

Agree - flying over people with anything over 500g is potentially dangerous .That include full scale things too . But at least the drones can avoid this situation -so i agree - no flying near people

Hexhome - my apologies, I misread your post.

As an airline pilot and drone hobbyist I would like to share my thoughts.

1. A lot of drone flyers are irresponsible and go looking for trouble.

2. Drones pose much less threat to air safety than the public thinks; the vast majority are smaller and lighter than many RC planes that have been around for decades. I have seen RC twin jets weighing over 200 lbs travelling over 250 mph topping out of a loop at 1500' NEXT to a busy airport and NOBODY thought that was a safety risk. Then out came my little DJI phantom and everyone panicked!!!!

3. The story about the airliner in the US last week pulling up to avoid a drone is probably bogus.

4. The fear authorities have about drones is not safety so much as security. And it’s not a fear of drones being used to drop bombs or smash into Government offices; it’s a fear that they will be used to spy on law enforcement and the Government when they are doing illegal or immoral acts. The last thing the Government wants during marshal law, civilian crackdown, rioting or general civil unrest is the wider community seeing hi def first hand aerial shots of police beatings as happened in Turkey recently.

5. Drones are here to stay and the applications for which they can be used are endless.

ATC system for drones?
 

It's a start, anyway.

Nasa and Verizon plan to monitor US drone network from phone towers | Technology | The Guardian

Drone flies within "a few hundred feet" of descending Southwest flight
 

Non-event at Dallas Love Field, but still...

Drone flies within "a few hundred feet" of descending Southwest flight

EASA Con Ops for Drones
 

European Aviation Safety Agency have published "Concept of Operations for Drones - a risk based approach to regulation of unmanned aircraft"


Concept of Operations for Drones | EASA

Here's the story behind the fake drone clip.

No a drone didn't strike a plane leaving New York, it's a hoax

The most dangerous Drone is that coming from your colleagues! :E

Lake fire grew after private drone flights disrupted air drops
 

Fire bomber stopped by one drone?
 

Would a flock of geese stop all operations too? Who makes decisions like this when lives and property are at stake?

The difference being that the geese would presumably get out of the way, from a sense of self-preservation.

As both a pilot and a model aircraft pilot, I can honestly say the people who interfere with full scale operations are idiots. I fly my RC planes at the local airport (with permission) but I carry my handheld radio with me so if somone is comming in I'll land immediately. So real planes and models can coexist in the same environment. The proposed rules the FAA has in mind are pretty limiting,ie the speed and altitude limitations. I have an RC jet that will fly well above the 100mph speed limit and in a loop will bust the 500 foot ceiling they want to put on us. I think training is the answer have an required but easy to get small UAS pilot permit based off a cheap online course. That way these idiots will have to know some basic airspace rules.

I guess Captain Sully thought that too.

Actually a flock of birds is orders of magnitude more dangerous for an aircraft than a drone .It's orders of magnitude bigger so it's harder to avoid /easier to hit and can do what no drone can - shut down multiple engines .

As for hysteria - look here :
Unusual Aviation Pictures

But there was no evidence for a birdstrike - the pilots were extra jumpy about birds because there was a fatal birdstrike accident on the same type just a couple of months before .

More on the drone incidents (2) over SoCal forest fire.

Drone flying over forest fire diverts planes, costs US Forest Service $10K

I recently got a phantom 3 drone from DJI and they are very clear on the 400 ft altitude restriction and with the on board GPS will not fly into any restricted areas for drone operation. It will not even take off if it is in unauthorized airspace.

Almost all drone operators are responsible flyers and respect the privacy of their neighbors. No recreational drone to my knowledge has ever hit an aircraft in flight. Model RC aircraft much larger have been flying for decades with no problem. There should not be any concern for these much more sophisticated drones with GPS flying with existing restrictions.

Unless DJI have tightened up their act considerably over the last few months, I think you'd be surprised at how few airports are programmed by them as exclusion zones - as of January this year, fewer than 20% of airports with scheduled flights worldwide.

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ml#post8837062

DJI Hires Drone Lawyer
 

DJI, the world’s largest drone company, has hired lawyer Brendan Schulman as its vice president of policy and legal affairs.

DJI brings on leading drone lawyer Brendan Schulman - The Washington Post

Thanks for the post, Mark. We need a rational approach to drones and not let Dianne and the politicians with absolutely no agenda other than making more unnecessary laws to hinder a growing and necessary field with so many beneficial possibilities.

These drones operate on batteries with a 25 minute endurance so are quiet. They weigh less than 3 lbs with 4 plastic rotors so are much smaller than a lot of RC models with gas engines. With GPS they are easy to fly and will stop and hold altitude whenever the controls are released so the out of control crashes of RC's sometimes have should not happen. If you lose sight of it you simply press a button and it returns and lands itself within 3 ft of where you took off.

Some folks posting here have not had to fly around any modern larger drones in the US. They are capable of FL 180 plus and need good arms to be lifted off the ground.
Although some have effective strobes and transponders, their owners often do not have insurance and the pilots don't even seem to know about CAS.

I'm in the ban them all camp, unless the Police or Fire dept folks need them. The toy ones should be fully certified and incapable of flying above 100ft etc.
Camera crews should use a certified tethered balloon or a real chopper.

I'm confident nothing will happen until one brings a big aircraft down in a permanent manner!

Some of you need to check Google, as there have been several collisions with both drones and RC aircraft.
Even a Goodyear blimp got hit and forced down some years ago by a suicidal US citizen.
The new GPS locks and altitude inhibit programs can be deleted by any half wit!

I'm with you on that. If I could un-invent them then I would.