A Drone, are you kidding me!

[Danb]

Well after 30 yrs at Kilg I finally had to call the tower. On downwind to RW 32 I just lowered the gear and said what's that. At 1000 ft. I saw a black little shiny image maybe 3 ft by3 ft and quickly had to evade it since it was exactly at my windshield , shoved the nose over just missed it by 10 ft or so. Notified the tower and reported a drone just went over top of me as I entered the downwind. Security met me at the hanger then another car, I provided all my info, they stated they will report the incident I guess to the FAA. They should get the local police envolved. 

This could have been ugly. Has anyone else encountered drones it there flight path? 

[Seth]

A friend of mine just outside the SFRA south of Frederick had one uncomfortably close.  He was between 1500 and 2000 feet at the time heading South back to GAI.

-Seth

[rbridges]

10 ft is ridiculously close.  Especially being on downind, they must have had that drone 800-1000 ft AGL.  All kinds of stupid in that situation.

[Danb]

Good guess I was descending from 1100 through 1000. I shoved the nose over at about 1050 ft really to close for comfort. It appears the airport is taking it seriously.

[1964-M20E]

Even though the Mooney is not well suited to it coordinate with the tower and circle the area and try to see where it goes and direct local law enforcement with the tower's help to that location to catch the idiot.  He needs to be prosecuted for stupidity if nothing else.

 

 

[Danb]

John they were rapidly on it, I had a good proximity and they wasted no time moving on the situation, I was surprised, the one security man insinuated it was not the first time, but did not directly state that. I play golf with the tower mgr so I'll grill him this weekend.

[NotarPilot]

Unfortunately it'll take one of these things killing someone before they really start to clamp down on this BS. It seems that the law will have to be written in blood. The downside is how easy do you think it is to catch these people? Answer: Not very easy at all.

[Raptor05121]

1 hour ago, NotarPilot said:

Unfortunately it'll take one of these things killing someone before they really start to clamp down on this BS. It seems that the law will have to be written in blood. The downside is how easy do you think it is to catch these people? Answer: Not very easy at all.

As much as I disdain the drone pilots from operating in a space they shouldn't, I highly doubt these will "kill someone". A few years ago, there was a video filmed of an aerobatic biplane that flew into a 60-pound aerobatic RC plane doing stunts over the runway. The biplane destroyed the RC plane, with very little damage to the wing of the real one. Most of these drones are smaller and lighter than a scale RC plane.

[Danb]

I seriously think they will kill someone, it's just to easy to put some kind of explosive or worse "stuff" on one of these and target it efficiently at a target. When ups is testing using them to deliver it'd be next used to deliver something lethal. Notar is dead on.

[201er]

FAA should simply mandate an altitude restriction of say 200ft from the manufacturers and require a license or special training for any unit that goes higher. If the FAA can't do it, maybe the FCC can.

[Danb]

2 hours ago, 201er said:

FAA should simply mandate an altitude restriction of say 200ft from the manufacturers and require a license or special training for any unit that goes higher. If the FAA can't do it, maybe the FCC can.

Like it.  I met with the tower manager last night, they took action quickly including having the police go to the place I saw and reported it, the police actually acted swiftly. Apparently this has become an issue.

[Marauder]

My airport supports RC airplane activities. I was fine with this when they were operating away from the traffic pattern. But the day some Bozo with an RC plane decided to do an Immelmann in front of me while I was on short final was the end of my support. If I had tried to avoid the RC I would have certainly put my flight at risk.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[DonMuncy]

It seems to me that the most likely effective (although far from perfect) requirement would be for the sellers of drones be required to affix (relatively tough to remove) identification plates on the drones and register the sale. At least, if and when they can find the remains, they could have someone to charge.

 

[jclemens]

Almost all of the rules/restrictions suggested so far in this thread are already in place.  But, you know what they say about rules.  Recreational RC pilot's are to remain under 400 feet AGL.  The pilot is to now be registered, and the registration number permanently affixed to the aircraft.  Operation within 5 miles of an airport is usually prohibited.  But, there are a LOT of sanctioned RC flying fields much closer to airports than 5 miles.  Some are even at airports.  The FAA and ATC people are taking RC incidents very seriously.  If you fly RC, like a lot of the aviation community, be sure you take it just as seriously.  If you are a licensed pilot, any violations made with RC aircraft will be taken against your certificate.  Hitting one in flight would most likely be no worse than hitting a bird.  They are mostly plastic and for the most part light weight.  There are large 55lb drones out there, but the pilots of those will be more educated, having invested a significant amount of time and money into his/her craft.  You will probably encounter some idiot who went out and bought himself a ready to fly quadcopter and a case of beer, who needs to be arrested and paraded around on the news to deter others.

[Hank]

The rules are simple enough, even a dummy can understand:

http://www.amaflightschool.org/video/jeff-dunham-bubba-j-have-message-you-about-drone-safety

(shamelessly copied from www.modelaircraft.org, the Academy of Model Aeronautics. My membership card rides beside those for AOPA, EAA and MAPA, and predates them all.)

Edited May 30, 2016 by Hank

[Raptor05121]

On ‎5‎/‎25‎/‎2016 at 8:31 AM, Danb said:

I seriously think they will kill someone, it's just to easy to put some kind of explosive or worse "stuff" on one of these and target it efficiently at a target. When UPS is testing using them to deliver it'd be next used to deliver something lethal.

g

 

 

Context is everything. Your viewpoint is the same as someone who moves next to an airport and tries to get it closed using the exact wording you just used.

[Danb]

Easy to say wonder how you will react when is in you windshield view with limited time to act or worse. The GD rules state 5 miles from an airport 400 feet msl. That's all the hell I Ask!

[Hank]

6 minutes ago, Hyett6420 said:

Surely it is easier to make sure that all drones sold cannot fly within X miles of an airport or above a certain height by programming their little circuit boards?  

That would be simple to hack around. 

[slowflyin]

10 minutes ago, Hyett6420 said:

Surely it is easier to make sure that all drones sold cannot fly within X miles of an airport or above a certain height by programming their little circuit boards?  

Some of the leading manufacturers of these hobbyist systems do exactly that.  Turn it on within 5 of an airport or anywhere else it's illegal to fly  and it won't work.  They are also limited to 400 feet AGL everywhere including Restricted airspace.  That being said, there is a ton of open source autopilot software being used.  Think of your Android phone software flying around.  Yikes.  At the end of the day most of the half a million of these things flying are being operated by responsible folks.  It's always the few that make trouble for the rest.  

[Yetti]

Everyone is using the words Rules and Illegal.  They are guidelines. The FAA cannot get off their collective arses to make rules/laws about them even after congress told them to do it.  The FAA did make people register them so technically they have as much FAA validation to operate in the same airspace as other aircraft.    I have dodged lots of birds in my short 3 years of flying.... I would do the same for a UAV.  The FAA has issued my authority to operate UAVs in the National Airspace system.  As I told the FSDO, If they are operating near a plane they are being bad.   You can hear a plane 3 miles away.  So they know the plane is coming.

[Tom]

British drone-freezing ray gets US airports trial

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36425879

I don't think that this stuff is going to be paid for by the civil penalties levied against the 20 year-old flunkies who get caught flying drones near airports.  

Edited June 2, 2016 by Tom

[steingar]

I doubt anyone is going to die from hitting a drone, but they may be able to do some expensive damage.

[aviatoreb]

A drone through the wind screen can absolutely kill someone.  Just like a bird through the windscreen but worse.  Also a low and slow airplane on short final, we don't want to encourage evasive maneuvers in that configuration.  I am not sure everyone comes out without a stall.  And a drone sucked into a jet engine at low altitude is a bad day too.

I think an electronic governor for most drones is a good idea. That restricts altitude and perhaps operations near an airport.  At least for those above say 8 ounces or something.  And licensure to buy a drone without the governor.  Yes a governor can be hacked but my guess is 99% of those violating airspaces are simply yahoos and teenagers without the motivation or know how to do that.  

I understand a bit these yahoos - I was one when I was 12 years old.  I was very much into RC. (We used to call them RC airplanes, before drones.)  I didn't have an RC airplane (too expensive) but I did get an RC car capable of 45mph.   For fun I would hide it until a car went by on our suburban residential street, then I would come out of hiding pass the car and cross in front of it and try not to get un over.  Great fun for a 12 year old. It is more fun than just zipping up and down the street to interact with the real thing car.   I knew I was disturbing the drivers but somehow I wasn't worried about it.  I didn't think anyone would get hurt and it was standard 12 year old antics.  I somehow think that the the drone incursions are mostly of this category of operator. 12 year olds, or 35 year olds with the responsibility capabilities of a 12 year old.  A governor would moderate all those "12 year olds" and that is likely most of the problem.  The other category of excursions being described here are terrorists - I doubt they would be flying 1lb drones but more like 50lb drones, but nonetheless, this is a separate problem.

My middle son who is going off to Cornell next year to study mechanical and aeronautical engineering and I share two "drones".  One is a 1.25lb foam WWII style Corsair with brushless motors and the other is a delta-wing twin engine brushless motor job.  Both are registered and my son knows the rules better than I do.

[yvesg]

Here is another possible drone close call at 9000 feet!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/tsb-toronto-risk-collision-1.3850218

Yves

 

[yvesg]

And look at the radar data... weird!

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/pd204/#b9c28ee