Drone encounter at 7500' today.

[0TreeLemur]

Pisses me off.

This afternoon, enroute in VFR conditions east of LIttle Rock, AR, at 7500' I spotted something at my 1 o'clock position, more or less same altitude.  At first, I thought it was a large dark bird.  As I followed it with my eyes by the time it was at my 3 o'clock position I could tell that it was a drone of some kind.  Not a winged one, but more of a helicopter/quadricopter type.  But it was BIG.  Assuming it was stationary, I'd guess it was maybe 1/4" mile away at most, and maybe one to 2 feet tall.  Despite my iPhone laying in the co-pilot's seat, I didn't get a photo-not enough time.  I was receiving VFR flight following from Memphis Center at the time and immediately reported it.  I as about 1 NM E of the 4M8 airport at 15:07 CDT. 

There is that video online of researchers at (Ohio State?) shooting a large drone into a Mooney wing at something approaching cruising speed.  It does a ton of damage.   Isn't it true that a license is required to buy and fly a drone that big and capable of flight thousands of feet above the ground?   Why don't those things have an ADS-B requirement?!?

I did file an FAA Hotline report.  I hope they can find the irresponsible jerk who put a cinder block in the air for me to luckily not hit today... and fine the shit out of them.

[cbarry]

Your experience fortunately ended well!  It’s sometimes difficult enough see and avoid other flying objects that are legally there much some kid-minded toy driver’s spy tool!  I may be wrong, but regardless of license (commercial...) the flight ceiling is still 400 agl or no more than 400 above the structure being observed by the drone.  I’m usually not in favor of additional regulation and most pilots it seems (drone or otherwise) are responsible enough to follow the rules, but here’s a reason for the manufacturers to be required to limit the agl flight ceiling while in operation.  They simply need to be governed to stop their climb at 400 ft agl.  Of course, there will always be some garage nerd that will override the limiting software just because it’s a challenge, but at least there would be an expectation of consistency.

Edited May 9, 2021 by cbarry

[GeeBee]

I can tell you this drone business will not end well, when the spectacular crash occurs because of bad operators. I was out over Palmdale on my way to KRHV in early April and took a vector from ATC to avoid "drone traffic". I was on an IFR and I surmised the operator was either military of military contractor.

 

[N201MKTurbo]

There was a kid I worked with who built a massive quad copter. He came to work one day and he said he tried to see how high it would go. He said it started to loose radio contact at about 6000 feet.

I chewed his ass up on side and down the other. I told him how many laws he broke. He lived 2 miles from Steller Air Park and is under the class C. At 6000 he was in the class C. He got the message.

[alexz]

Fortunately, large drones require some money to be put in the air. Unfortunately FAA is playing dumb game requiring yet another type of drone beacon which will not be directly compatible with ADSB even though 978 MHz band has plenty of bandwidth to accommodate thousands of targets in relatively small area, as well as modulation type used for 978 MHz ensures that you will always receive stronger signal even if weaker one overlaps it. Installing 978 MHz ADSB transmitter on large drone should be no brainer and will drive cost of the UAT modules down due to the volume. 

[Yetti]

Like most things the FAA has made a mess out of this.   So most of it is not regulatory.  Still doing things via an AC.  the 400 foot is a suggestion.  The commercial rules are approved April 21.   Let's assume you were in Class G.  So by making UAVs "aircraft" technically they can share the NAS.  The operator was violating suggestions but probably would get pinged for "unsafe Operations" rule.    You still are under the "see and avoid" rule.   Most every flight in Texas we have to see and avoid turkey vultures.  Which are about the same size.   I still want to take my handheld and see if I can get cleared into a class B to surface are with the drone "tail number".   There are different rules for recreation flying and commercial operations and like the real aircraft rules they are a bit goofy.   I noticed they were using a drone to follow the Kentucky Derby.  Or maybe it was one of the wire "flown" cameras.

[Rick Junkin]

At the risk of being declared today's Master of the Obvious, the rules for small UAS operations can be found here: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.2.107&rgn=div5 It's a pretty short read, and 107.51 is the paragraph of relevance to the limits we're discussing here. Our being familiar with the regulations that apply to the Small UAS can help us understand where to be looking and know what rules the operators are supposed to be following.

The MOTO part is that people aren't following the rules so the safety of manned aircraft is compromised beyond the risks Part 107 is supposed to mitigate. Enforcement actions are occurring against violating UAS operations and there are organizations encouraging and supporting safe UAS operations, AOPA being one of them. That doesn't help us in the immediate near term, and a good defensive course of action is to remain vigilant and immediately report to ATC as @0TreeLemur did anything you see that is a threat to you or other aircraft. As the news of enforcement actions makes its way into main stream media and UAS operators become more aware of the consequences we could see a decline in the threat. But there will always be those not operating to the rules, just as in GA.

https://skyvector.com is the best source I've found for at least gaining awareness of the legal UAS operations that are conducted. Select "DROTAMs" in the Layers drop down to get a useful graphic depiction of where planned legal operations are occurring. It also shows where UAS operations are restricted by NOTAM which can be useful information. Of course the UAS operators that are violating the Part 107 rules aren't checking the NOTAMs, so there is that.

Cheers,
Rick

[N201MKTurbo]

I think the UAS rules are being crafted to support the likes of Amazon and such. They have more political clout then we ever will. So any requirements for ADSB or other beacons will be to support them, not us. I wouldn't be surprised if one day our access to airspace is restricted to accommodate UAS.  

[carusoam]

Would it help to have a strobe light to help see...  so we have a chance to avoid?

 

Join the NAS the way we have... ADSB out, strobes and running lights....

 

Must be a drag to lose a drone so far away...

Best regards,

-a-

[Yetti]

3 hours ago, Junkman said:

At the risk of being declared today's Master of the Obvious, the rules for small UAS operations can be found here: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.2.107&rgn=div5 It's a pretty short read, and 107.51 is the paragraph of relevance to the limits we're discussing here. Our being familiar with the regulations that apply to the Small UAS can help us understand where to be looking and know what rules the operators are supposed to be following.

The MOTO part is that people aren't following the rules so the safety of manned aircraft is compromised beyond the risks Part 107 is supposed to mitigate. Enforcement actions are occurring against violating UAS operations and there are organizations encouraging and supporting safe UAS operations, AOPA being one of them. That doesn't help us in the immediate near term, and a good defensive course of action is to remain vigilant and immediately report to ATC as @0TreeLemur did anything you see that is a threat to you or other aircraft. As the news of enforcement actions makes its way into main stream media and UAS operators become more aware of the consequences we could see a decline in the threat. But there will always be those not operating to the rules, just as in GA.

https://skyvector.com is the best source I've found for at least gaining awareness of the legal UAS operations that are conducted. Select "DROTAMs" in the Layers drop down to get a useful graphic depiction of where planned legal operations are occurring. It also shows where UAS operations are restricted by NOTAM which can be useful information. Of course the UAS operators that are violating the Part 107 rules aren't checking the NOTAMs, so there is that.

Cheers,
Rick

You forgot the recreational carve out.  https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_fliers/

 

[Yetti]

2 hours ago, carusoam said:

Would it help to have a strobe light to help see...  so we have a chance to avoid?

 

Join the NAS the way we have... ADSB out, strobes and running lights....

 

Must be a drag to lose a drone so far away...

Best regards,

-a-

The tracking rules were crafted so that the police could find the operator on the ground.  DJI actually has flights uploaded to their database.  The FAA has shown up at an operators house and asked him about an illegal flight.

[N201MKTurbo]

Just now, Yetti said:

The tracking rules were crafted so that the police could find the operator on the ground.  DJI actually has flights uploaded to their database.  The FAA has shown up at an operators house and asked him about an illegal flight.

That's great if you have a DJI or some other commercial UAS. The kid I mentioned above built his from scratch. If someone wants to do something nefarious, nothing will stop them.

Yes, you would need to be double stupid to use an off the shelf quad copter to mount guns to, or bombs to or haul drugs. 

[Yetti]

27 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

That's great if you have a DJI or some other commercial UAS. The kid I mentioned above built his from scratch. If someone wants to do something nefarious, nothing will stop them.

Yes, you would need to be double stupid to use an off the shelf quad copter to mount guns to, or bombs to or haul drugs. 

Only DJI made it mandatory.   Parrot drones have an option.   I need to look at the data logging to see.   From a gee wiz standpoint a FLIR camera on a drone for 2 AMU is pretty cool   https://www.adorama.com/papf728120aa.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwkN6EBhBNEiwADVfyaxxsrwu-UYURnDI3oEfIGj-bMBqijzZtfj0PJUq5wSrqsq0cuz7mfhoC-q8QAvD_BwE&gclid=CjwKCAjwkN6EBhBNEiwADVfyaxxsrwu-UYURnDI3oEfIGj-bMBqijzZtfj0PJUq5wSrqsq0cuz7mfhoC-q8QAvD_BwE&utm_source=adl-gbase-p

 

 

[0TreeLemur]

1 hour ago, Yetti said:

Only DJI made it mandatory.   Parrot drones have an option.   I need to look at the data logging to see.   From a gee wiz standpoint a FLIR camera on a drone for 2 AMU is pretty cool   https://www.adorama.com/papf728120aa.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwkN6EBhBNEiwADVfyaxxsrwu-UYURnDI3oEfIGj-bMBqijzZtfj0PJUq5wSrqsq0cuz7mfhoC-q8QAvD_BwE&gclid=CjwKCAjwkN6EBhBNEiwADVfyaxxsrwu-UYURnDI3oEfIGj-bMBqijzZtfj0PJUq5wSrqsq0cuz7mfhoC-q8QAvD_BwE&utm_source=adl-gbase-p

 

 

Interesting.  The thing that I saw was boxy and tall.  More similar to the demonstration helicopter that is flying on Mars.   It looked like it had a camera module attached to the top of a Parrot-like system.  I suppose there might be photos of my pass on some facebook page right now.   Won't find them because MS is as close as I get to social media.  I was about 1 NM east of the Clarendon, Arkansas, airport.

[N201MKTurbo]

Like this?

https://ascentaerosystems.com/

or this?

https://www.taiwanexcellence.org/en/award/product/27408

or maybe this?

http://www.ttrobotix.com/products/detail/925.html

[0TreeLemur]

25 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Like this?

https://ascentaerosystems.com/

or this?

https://www.taiwanexcellence.org/en/award/product/27408

or maybe this?

http://www.ttrobotix.com/products/detail/925.html

Not quite.   The first one was more similar, but it wasn't just cylindrical.  The silhouette looked more like this, which I suppose is just the body of the UAV assuming there were arms holding props away from the body.

 

 

[0TreeLemur]

Got a call from the Little Rock FSDO today.  They heard from KZME about my report and asked for details.   They have contacted the sheriff in that town and asked them to be on the lookout for suspicious drone flyin' folk.  Not holding my breath...

[N201MKTurbo]

2 hours ago, 0TreeLemur said:

Got a call from the Little Rock FSDO today.  They heard from KZME about my report and asked for details.   They have contacted the sheriff in that town and asked them to be on the lookout for suspicious drone flyin' folk.  Not holding my breath...

It is nice to know the FAA is here to help you.

It will probably make them happy if they can help you. Their normal job is just a paperwork slog. Doing some real good would make their day.

Edited May 11, 2021 by N201MKTurbo

[GeeBee]

Won't happen, but would it not be cool to have some drone killing tech on your airplane? Like a signal jammer? The drone community would get right with the world, real quick.

 

[A64Pilot]

On 5/9/2021 at 8:19 AM, GeeBee said:

I can tell you this drone business will not end well, when the spectacular crash occurs because of bad operators. I was out over Palmdale on my way to KRHV in early April and took a vector from ATC to avoid "drone traffic". I was on an IFR and I surmised the operator was either military of military contractor.

 

I was at Oshkosh years ago as am exhibitor, and before the start of the show I was walking around and spotted a Predator drone on display, being interested I walked over to the thing and noticed it’s big CBP decal. They apparently use reapers which are big 1000 HP aircraft to patrol the border? I asked how they did that, how did they get around the see and avoid requirement, and someone else walked up and said they only fly in controlled airspace so it was legit. I asked what controlled airspace and was told class A, so I asked how do you get to class A? He walked away.

I mean be realistic, what does the CBP need Reapers for? It even had the wing hard points. 32 million dollar a piece drone and the ground station costs God knows how much, to replace a man in a C-182. Operating costs of the Reaper are over $12,000 a hour.

https://gizmodo.com/we-mapped-where-customs-and-border-protection-drones-ar-1843928454

Again years ago I was at an IA renewal in Savannah Ga, it was at the 8th Air Force museum. One of the classes was given by the Civilian in charge of the Army drones at FT. Stewart. He said the flew them in the Restricted area. I asked where they were kept, he said that fly them out of Wright Army airfield which is now a joint Military / Civil airfield and or course is outside of the Restricted area. I asked how do they get the to the Restricted area since they are not allowed to fly in the National airspace system and he got a little pissed and didn’t answer.

Edited May 11, 2021 by A64Pilot

[N201MKTurbo]

49 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

I was at Oshkosh years ago as am exhibitor, and before the start of the show I was walking around and spotted a Predator drone on display, being interested I walked over to the thing and noticed it’s big CBP decal. They apparently use reapers which are big 1000 HP aircraft to patrol the border? I asked how they did that, how did they get around the see and avoid requirement, and someone else walked up and said they only fly in controlled airspace so it was legit. I asked what controlled airspace and was told class A, so I asked how do you get to class A? He walked away.

I mean be realistic, what does the CBP need Reapers for? It even had the wing hard points. 32 million dollar a piece drone and the ground station costs God knows how much, to replace a man in a C-182. Operating costs of the Reaper are over $12,000 a hour.

https://gizmodo.com/we-mapped-where-customs-and-border-protection-drones-ar-1843928454

Again years ago I was at an IA renewal in Savannah Ga, it was at the 8th Air Force museum. One of the classes was given by the Civilian in charge of the Army drones at FT. Stewart. He said the flew them in the Restricted area. I asked where they were kept, he said that fly them out of Wright Army airfield which is now a joint Military / Civil airfield and or course is outside of the Restricted area. I asked how do they get the to the Restricted area since they are not allowed to fly in the National airspace system and he got a little pissed and didn’t answer.

I used to have a friend who flew for the customs service. He said the aerostat balloons put up at the southern border have never found anything. He said all the planes they found were found after being told they were coming. He said regular old case work was the most effective way to find and stop drug smugglers. 

[A64Pilot]

Years ago there was something called JTF-6, it was a joint venture between the US Military and the CBP, actually the Border Patrol as Home Land security didn’t exist yet. Sometimes LP/OP’s set up by infantry (listening snd observation posts) up to a Squadron of Apache helicopters.

‘Due to Posse Comittatus we weren’t allowed to do anything but observe and report, nor should we have, Army isn’t policemen, we would suck at it. 

But anyway we absolutely could shut down the border, nothing bigger than a mouse could get through without being seen.

The first night we would be in a sector, we caught drug smugglers, but by night two we only got some people who were crossing to find jobs, no drugs.

‘Very quickly we figured out that there was an intelligence leak in the CBP as the military didn’t know in advance which sector we would be working and we asked if we could be allowed to run a screen line over several sectors determined by us, which was of course denied.

‘Before some get too upset, we were an Air Cav unit and this was actually very good training for us performing a couple of our actual war time jobs, mostly a screen line, so it wasn’t wasting the taxpayers money. It was some of the best training we got.

‘Anyway JTF-6 got canceled when some Marines after being shot at several times, returned fire, one shot and killed the aggressor. Well the media made it out like the Marines were out killing innocent immigrants and that was the end of that.

‘It was a set up job by the drug Cartels, they knew that would end military involvement.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Task_Force_North

Edited May 11, 2021 by A64Pilot

[EricJ]

12 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I used to have a friend who flew for the customs service. He said the aerostat balloons put up at the southern border have never found anything. He said all the planes they found were found after being told they were coming. He said regular old case work was the most effective way to find and stop drug smugglers. 

The word on that was that it was so obvious when it was up that nobody flew then.   Apparently they came down regularly and predictably for maintenance or whatever, so, yeah, the balloons never detected anything when they were up, which was pretty predictable.

[N201MKTurbo]

2 minutes ago, EricJ said:

The word on that was that it was so obvious when it was up that nobody flew then.   Apparently they came down regularly and predictably for maintenance or whatever, so, yeah, the balloons never detected anything when they were up, which was pretty predictable.

Will told me that the smugglers has people watching them. They would phone in when it want down.

[A64Pilot]

That balloon has apparently caught several boaters that have visited Cuba though, not smugglers, just tourists.