drones.. good or bad?

[BalooAirService]

So how long before the first drone "pilot" causes an incident with an airliner?? (or any airplane), aren't bird strikes enough?.
I would not want a drone within 3 miles of my 172 I know that much, at any altitude.

 

[EdFred]

An inanimate object can be neither good nor bad.

 

[F01LA]

So how long before the first drone "pilot" causes an incident with an airliner?? (or any airplane), aren't bird strikes enough?.
I would not want a drone within 3 miles of my 172 I know that much, at any altitude.

Really? If you're cruising over a house at 3,000 feet, you have a problem with someone taking photos of their backyard barbecue with a drone hovering at 50 feet? Certainly drones need to be used responsibly. But be careful about what you want to ban. There's quite a few people out there who don't want your noisy, dangerous airplane within 3 miles of their house either.

 

[BalooAirService]

lol.. wow. I wont even comment on the first reply. To the second reply, it is a question..
take it easy captain happy. Def dont want a hot head like you within 10 miles of me. Also no one mentioned "ban". This is all the time I will waste on you.

 

[Shawn]

In boating world especially in wakeboarding and and water skiing Jet Skis are often referred to as "Lake Roaches" and are held in VERY low regard and are frowned upon by many...not because of the skis themselves, but often times folks riding them are inexperienced and uneducated to basic water etiquette as they are an easy and cheap way to get on the water for those with little experience.

Same things with Drones...I think they are a great idea...it is all the yahoos with easy access to them that I worry about.

I had a Sea Doo that was the fastest production ski on the market at the time...it came with a "learner key" that I could put in to limit its speed for the less experienced. They will need to incorporate limiting technology like that into drones for this not to be a complete mess with aviation.

I still stand by my notion that a "Drone" is a something the military flies with a Hellfire missile attached...what we are talking about are simple RC Quad Copters for the most part!

 

[MAKG1]

A 2 lb piece of plastic isn't going to cause instant fiery death in a 172.

It's gonna make a dent. It will suck. But it won't kill.

 

[Velocity173]

I've been noticing the increase in commercial UAS NOTAMs for sure. At or below 400 ft in the areas listed, really isn't a factor for FW. For RW, probably start to see some midairs. I was flying into a hospital in CHA on the 4th of July and was warned about "multiple drones" over the downtown area. Kinda hard to stay above 400 ft when making an approach to land in the middle of a city. Don't think the drone would take us out but it would definitely ground it for a couple of days.

There's a popular misconception about the rules governing "drones." These new rules and certs everyone is talking about , apply to commercial UAS activity. They don't apply to model aircraft operating recreationally under an approved program (AMA). So, you very well may see an aircraft operating above 400 ft in excess of 100 mph. You may also see both UAS and model aircraft operating within 5 miles of an airport.

The problems with these aircraft won't be from the RPA cert guys or the AMA guys. It'll be from the yahoos who buy some quadcopter and are clueless about any rule. They're the ones I worry about.

 

[F01LA]

lol.. wow. I wont even comment on the first reply. To the second reply, it is a question..
take it easy captain happy. Def dont want a hot head like you within 10 miles of me. Also no one mentioned "ban". This is all the time I will waste on you.

Well, to answer your question, it's possible that it might happen. It's getting harder, though. Industry leader DJI has some built-in no-fly zones around the largest airports; Your drone won't even take off. They are also implementing a new system where you have to request authorization to fly within a few miles of all but the smallest airports. I wouldn't be too concerned if I were an airline pilot. Now, a crop duster or low level helicopter pilot is at a higher risk in my opinion.

EdFred's answer sounds a little flippant, but is largely correct. The drone itself is a tool that can do some wonderful things, but can be a real problem in hands of a bad (or ignorant) person.

I've never been called a hot head before. Read my first post again. I'm asking if you're really uncomfortable with drones at treetop level while you're at cruising altitude in your 172. If everyone behaves responsibly, risks are going to be fairly low. Unfortunately, since there are so many drones out there, like Shawn says there will be some yahoos.

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

A 2 lb piece of plastic isn't going to cause instant fiery death in a 172.

It's gonna make a dent. It will suck. But it won't kill.

But it could certainly could come through the windscreen and make a mark on your face that won't polish out, especially if the closing speed is 200 mph. Even with a talented plastic surgeon, best case is you'd be a Gary Busey look-alike.

After all, a chunk of foam took out the space shuttle. And a pea-sized piece of space detritus can take out the ISS, if hit in the right (wrong?) place.

As said before, it's the irresponsible noobs without a clue about the AMA rules who will take theses things to 2000' near an airport to get their coveted footage. So glad that software will prevent some of this.

 

[BalooAirService]

Exactly, I work on airplanes for a living and have personally seen the damage a 1-2LB bird can do (atleast 20 times) Its not pretty, besides the obvious windshield danger, you have also the prop, intake, probes.. etc etc. basically anything on the plane.
But correctly stated above by couple posters its all about who is flying the machines. It takes only one dumba$$.

 

[James331]

R/C airplanes have been around for quite some time, flying faster and with more weight than the little "drones" never been a issue before.

The sky, once again isn't falling

 

[MAKG1]

But it could certainly could come through the windscreen and make a mark on your face that won't polish out, especially if the closing speed is 200 mph. Even with a talented plastic surgeon, best case is you'd be a Gary Busey look-alike.

After all, a chunk of foam took out the space shuttle. And a pea-sized piece of space detritus can take out the ISS, if hit in the right (wrong?) place.

As said before, it's the irresponsible noobs without a clue about the AMA rules who will take theses things to 2000' near an airport to get their coveted footage. So glad that software will prevent some of this.

Are you REALLY comparing a 2 lb flimsy plastic "rock" moving at 100 MPH with a piece of orbital debris moving at 17,000?

A pea size piece of crap will make a pea size hole in ISS. That's much less than "taking it out." It will cause damage, but do you really think it wasn't designed to deal with that? And it's totally irrelevant in an unpressurized 172.

For your space shuttle thing, you might have to worry about putting a hole in your carbon fiber leading edge as you blew into it at several times the speed of sound. But it wouldn't be a significant concern until you reentered. Yup, those 172s see really nasty reentry stresses.

So yes, I guess you have to worry about decompression risk and reentry stresses and hypersonic heating from these "drones." If your 172 is a spacecraft.

Jeez.

 

[Shawn]

R/C airplanes have been around for quite some time, flying faster and with more weight than the little "drones" never been a issue before.

The sky, once again isn't falling

Agreed. There does needs to be some thinking looking forward as the technology progresses but everything I have seen so far is mostly a solution in search of a problem.

Yes, they are a POTENTIAL problem...but like laser strikes...how many true "problems" have they really caused.

 

[jsstevens]

R/C airplanes have been around for quite some time, flying faster and with more weight than the little "drones" never been a issue before.

The sky, once again isn't falling

And I flew some of those R/C planes once upon a time. It actually took skill. An auto stabilized drone with a camera built in attracts a whole different, significantly more casual, user. Also, there wasn't much reason to fly the R/C plane out of your sight, since you couldn't see it. Again the camera adds a new dimension. "Hey! Let me fly this up through the clouds and see what's up there!"

I'm not saying the sky is falling, but there is much more potential because of the vastly expanded audience and the non-line of sight operation.

John

 

[EdFred]

Require them to have a transponder with ADS-B.

 

[MAKG1]

Require them to have a transponder with ADS-B.

That would do it, but you would get a LOT of noise for traffic below 400 AGL. ADSB is already ****ing me off due to false alarms in the pattern from taxiing aircraft. And I REALLY don't like the traffic alarm going off on short final as another airplane takes off from the parallel runway.

It would also get the cost of ADSB-out WAY down if the units were mass produced.

 

[dottat]

I've been noticing the increase in commercial UAS NOTAMs for sure. At or below 400 ft in the areas listed, really isn't a factor for FW. For RW, probably start to see some midairs. I was flying into a hospital in CHA on the 4th of July and was warned about "multiple drones" over the downtown area. Kinda hard to stay above 400 ft when making an approach to land in the middle of a city. Don't think the drone would take us out but it would definitely ground it for a couple of days.

There's a popular misconception about the rules governing "drones." These new rules and certs everyone is talking about , apply to commercial UAS activity. They don't apply to model aircraft operating recreationally under an approved program (AMA). So, you very well may see an aircraft operating above 400 ft in excess of 100 mph. You may also see both UAS and model aircraft operating within 5 miles of an airport.

The problems with these aircraft won't be from the RPA cert guys or the AMA guys. It'll be from the yahoos who buy some quadcopter and are clueless about any rule. They're the ones I worry about.

And as a private with who recently added part 107 to my license this is what I worry about most. I am very conscious of the rw traffic over my neighborhood and luckily can hear them coming in time to get out of the way.

I know the local med crew and we've even talked about. Some of these other drone pilots....man. We have them in ga too. They are the same type to fold the wings up doing high performance takeoffs in a 172.

Safe travels my friend and be careful going into the hospitals!

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

 

[Sundancer]

Toys for the most part, like CB radios in back the day. Hard core geeks will stick with 'em, but the novelty will wear off for those just playing with them, and the ones in professional use will be operated more responsibly. Flying a RC fixed or rotary wing probably takes some skill, so there is a "reward" in sticking with it, getting more proficient. But after looking at the ground a few dozen times, the short attention span bozos will be iff on the next big thing. . .

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

And I flew some of those R/C planes once upon a time. It actually took skill. An auto stabilized drone with a camera built in attracts a whole different, significantly more casual, user. Also, there wasn't much reason to fly the R/C plane out of your sight, since you couldn't see it. Again the camera adds a new dimension. "Hey! Let me fly this up through the clouds and see what's up there!"

I'm not saying the sky is falling, but there is much more potential because of the vastly expanded audience and the non-line of sight operation.

You make an excellent point, John. I fly, and have flown, rc planes for 30 years, am a member of the AMA and responsibly operate my planes below 400 feet.

It takes next to no talent to fly these drones, and the noobs...either unfamiliar with the AMA rules or purposely spiting them with a reckless mind set...get so carried away with the view that they immediately need to "see how high she'll go"--right into the operating altitudes of our GA fleet.

There are enough safety hazards out there already; add drones to the list.

 

[dottat]

You make an excellent point, John. I fly, and have flown, rc planes for 30 years, am a member of the AMA and responsibly operate my planes below 400 feet.

It takes next to no talent to fly these drones, and the noobs...either unfamiliar with the AMA rules or purposely spiting them with a reckless mind set...get so carried away with the view that they immediately need to "see how high she'll go"--right into the operating altitudes of our GA fleet.

There are enough safety hazards out there already; add drones to the list.

How high is the least we should be worried about. I wish the idiots would all fly straight up. They keep them in sight that way and eat way more battery too.

The WORST behavior I see on the drone pilot forums is "how FAR can I fly it?"

Guys and gals, mine does 2-3 miles stock. I would never fly mine that far because I can't see it. I can see the display coming back to me but not the bird itself. So I can't see birds, helos, other aircraft near it. These guys not only fly that far but they also modify their antenna to go much much farther. A non-licensed uas pilot can push 5-6 miles out on a light wind day. Those are the scary ones.

Sent from my HTC6545LVW using Tapatalk

 

[CC268]

R/C airplanes have been around for quite some time, flying faster and with more weight than the little "drones" never been a issue before.

The sky, once again isn't falling

Thank you!!! I am part of a RC flying club that is less than a mile from Deer Valley Airport. Been there for years and never had an issue. In fact a lot of my buddies who fly there fly commercial! (Southwest, Virgin, etc)

Oh and we fly huge 120" wingspan planes with 200cc motors in them.

 

[denverpilot]

Toys for the most part, like CB radios in back the day. Hard core geeks will stick with 'em, but the novelty will wear off for those just playing with them, and the ones in professional use will be operated more responsibly. Flying a RC fixed or rotary wing probably takes some skill, so there is a "reward" in sticking with it, getting more proficient. But after looking at the ground a few dozen times, the short attention span bozos will be iff on the next big thing. . .

Technically CB started out as a licensed service, and only became a cesspool after it was deregulated... But anyway...

Dad was KYP-4123.

And if you want to hear a two way radio " commercial operator" that isn't operated "responsibly", just tune in your local cab company. LOL.

Horrible analogy.

 

[Silvaire]

R/C airplanes have been around for quite some time, flying faster and with more weight than the little "drones" never been a issue before.

The sky, once again isn't falling

RC aircraft have always been the hobby of enthusiasts requiring a modicum of skill to operate and even with that you'd be more likely to crack up your own rig than have some old lady shoot it out of the sky over her back yard with a shotgun. As I said in the other thread on this subject the biggest problem with drones is the somewhat disproportionate number of idiots who buy them. The other aspect of the drones is the onboard FPV camera that entices operators to do nutty things like go up completely out of sight to the likes of 3,000 feet or to snoop around over other people's private property. This is something you never saw with traditional RC aircraft.

 

[luvflyin]

So how long before the first drone "pilot" causes an incident with an airliner?? (or any airplane), aren't bird strikes enough?.
I would not want a drone within 3 miles of my 172 I know that much, at any altitude.

It'll probably happen sooner or later. I'm wondering when the first "air rage" incident is going to happen. Dominos escort drone takes out Pizza Hut delivery drone, film on the 11 o'clock eyewtness news.. They're already being being shot down from the ground, when is the airwar going to begin. Hey, this could give paintball a run for it's money. Airborn Battlebots????

 

[James331]

RC aircraft have always been the hobby of enthusiasts requiring a modicum of skill to operate and even with that you'd be more likely to crack up your own rig than have some old lady shoot it out of the sky over her back yard with a shotgun. As I said in the other thread on this subject the biggest problem with drones is the somewhat disproportionate number of idiots who buy them. The other aspect of the drones is the onboard FPV camera that entices operators to do nutty things like go up completely out of sight to the likes of 3,000 feet or to snoop around over other people's private property. This is something you never saw with traditional RC aircraft.

All this wasn't a issue until the media told you folks it was a issue.

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

All this wasn't a issue until the media told you folks it was a issue.

For me, it was an issue when I saw some idiots at our Great Park flying site take their drones well above 1000' in an area where GA pilots are coming down low for ground reference maneuvers. Yes, I yelled at them.

 

[Silvaire]

All this wasn't a issue until the media told you folks it was a issue.

Well it wasn't an issue before roughly one and a half million of them were sold and the media isn't telling us what it is they're just reporting what's been going on. If they have to call off air ops firefighters because of a swarm of drones piloted by idiots, if there's a near miss reported by an airliner on final or if some grandma blows one out of the sky because she's tired of it buzzing around her back porch those aren't things the media is fabricating. They really are "issues"

 

[James331]

Well it wasn't an issue before roughly one and a half million of them were sold and the media isn't telling us what it is they're just reporting what's been going on. If they have to call off air ops firefighters because of a swarm of drones piloted by idiots, if there's a near miss reported by an airliner on final or if some grandma blows one out of the sky because she's tired of it buzzing around her back porch those aren't things the media is fabricating. They really are "issues"

A swarm of drones eh? Lol


I've yet to see a issue, plenty of RC airplanes have been buzzing around and no one has had a issue, but if you want a windmill to charge, guess drones are as good as any

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

A swarm of drones eh? Lol

Maybe not a swarm, but Silvaire has a valid point.

There have been issues with r/c planes getting too near commercial airliners, but the problem is an order of magnitude greater with drones because 1) their numbers are exploding, and 2) anyone who can fog a mirror can fly one. Perhaps if one were to join you in the cockpit via a shattered windscreen, you'd think differently.

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

Thank you!!! I am part of a RC flying club that is less than a mile from Deer Valley Airport. Been there for years and never had an issue. In fact a lot of my buddies who fly there fly commercial! (Southwest, Virgin, etc)

Oh and we fly huge 120" wingspan planes with 200cc motors in them.

And I'm sure you fly them responsibly and follow AMA rules. I've got a 100" span Top-Flite Stinson Reliant myself.

 

[James331]

Maybe not a swarm, but Silvaire has a valid point.

There have been issues with r/c planes getting too near commercial airliners, but the problem is an order of magnitude greater with drones because 1) their numbers are exploding, and 2) anyone who can fog a mirror can fly one. Perhaps if one were to join you in the cockpit via a shattered windscreen, you'd think differently.

Not sure I'd say that, plenty of busted up quad copters. Also your average few hundred buck buck rig ain't flying out miles past LOS and getting to major altitudes, that's going to be the higher end stuff with higher end operators, and often that isn't going to be some 12 year olds Xmas present, or a girlfriends impulse buy for her bud light pounding boyfriend.

Sorry, far be it for me to get between a man and his crusade against the, terrorists?... wait that was last month...Ebola, no that's SOO December, guessing were over Zika and making our rounds back to drones again eh?

It's so hard to keep up with what I'm sposed to be scared of this month, maybe Nancy Pelosi, or the "news" will tell me, let me go fire up the boob tube. In the mean time write your government official types, maybe they'll write yet another pointless feel good law and send you a safety blankie.

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

Also your average few hundred buck buck rig ain't flying out miles past LOS and getting to major altitudes, that's going to be the higher end stuff with higher end operators, and often that isn't going to be some 12 year olds Xmas present, or a girlfriends impulse buy for her bud light pounding boyfriend.

I'll concede that the professional rigs are operated by, well, professionals with some restraint and responsibility, but the $500 store-bought stuff flown by the lawless mouth-breathers can certainly reach altitudes that'll conflict. We're not talking FL210 here; 1500' will do. I've seen it, and yes, it's usually someone representing the Bud Light demographic at the controls.

Think about looking a friend in the eye who's lost his home and every worldly possession to a wildfire because Joe Dirt and his drone grounded the firefighting aircraft. That would suck.

Not a crusade; just common sense.

 

[CC268]

And I'm sure you fly them responsibly and follow AMA rules. I've got a 100" span Top-Flite Stinson Reliant myself.

Well depends who you ask...the old guys who fly in the morning with their warbirds freak out when the "3D" flyers come out...we hover over the runway, etc..and they go ballistic.

 

[F01LA]

See, this is the kind of clueless drone user that causes problems. 7.2 mile autonomous flight over Baltimore with DJI Phantom 3. Low enough that airliners and GA airplanes probably wouldn't be there, but if I flew helicopters I'd be mighty concerned.

 

[Velocity173]

Really don't get the FPV stuff. How many times can you view the world from above before it gets old? It's not like you're up there, the camera is.

I fly RC model aircraft because I like scale military warbirds and the challenge of flying them. This FPV quad stuff is mostly flown autonomously. Don't get the hype with the drone races either. Rather watch full size aircraft with human beings battle it out than a tiny, ugly, quadcopter.

 

[F01LA]

The drone used in the video sells for $409. Quite a price for a GPS guided quad with stabilized camera. And that's part of the reason that we see so many irresponsible fliers.

 

[ircphoenix]

For 900 bucks you can get a DJI phantom that'll go out 2 miles and up to ... hell I dunno, but you can see tons of YouTube videos of people doing all kinds of "scenic" things that are definitely not below 400 feet or within LOS of the operator.

I do like that DJI is starting to bake in limitations into their products. I don't know if you can go into the settings and disable those limitations like you could before, however.

 

[denverpilot]

All sorts of folks popping up on traditional electronics forums talking about how to make high gain antennas and extend their ranges on the things, too. They're obviously not interested in the LOS rules and not afraid to say so quite publicly.

They also aren't dumb people at all. Willfully not interested in the rules, as much as AMA and other groups want to say it's "only the dumb non-members" that do this stuff. Many are obviously long time modelers and flyers.

Some of it is education... They don't think about helicopters at all, for example. But some of it is just a crappy "I'll do whatever I want, what's the best way to model and build a really big cross polarized yagi?" type of attitude.

 

[James331]

Really don't get the FPV stuff. How many times can you view the world from above before it gets old? It's not like you're up there, the camera is.

I fly RC model aircraft because I like scale military warbirds and the challenge of flying them. This FPV quad stuff is mostly flown autonomously. Don't get the hype with the drone races either. Rather watch full size aircraft with human beings battle it out than a tiny, ugly, quadcopter.

Some could say the same about aviation, long and short is FPV is as close as some can afford to flying and there are some things you can do with it that endanger no one and you couldn't do with any maned aircraft, which are quite fun.

 

[James331]

See, this is the kind of clueless drone user that causes problems. 7.2 mile autonomous flight over Baltimore with DJI Phantom 3. Low enough that airliners and GA airplanes probably wouldn't be there, but if I flew helicopters I'd be mighty concerned.

That'd be a little low even for a helo, not saying I condone what they are doing, it's illegal, but I'd say the biggest threat I saw in that video would be the thing crapping the bed and landing on a bike rider and causing some bumps and bruises.