BBC reporting a drone has hit an airliner at Heathrow
Discussion
They need at the very least all users registered (although it won't stop this) or licensing. As has been said in another thread recently the DJI phantom has a geofencing feature that I believe is not activated at present in the UK however there are many brands on the market which probably don't offer that feature.
This really irritates me (for several reasons)
Firstly- They are Not friggin DRONES! They are remote controlled multirotors "AKA Toys" a Drones is a remotely operated aircraft used for target practice by the military.
Secondly- the Dick-wads flying these things into planes and crowds are going to get them regulated or banned and ruin the fun that millions of people world-wide enjoy safely with these remote control toys.
Any time anyone invents something fun, some jerk has to misuse/abuse it and spoil the thing for everyone else- selfish mouth breathing knuckle dragging Neanderthal scum.
Firstly- They are Not friggin DRONES! They are remote controlled multirotors "AKA Toys" a Drones is a remotely operated aircraft used for target practice by the military.
Secondly- the Dick-wads flying these things into planes and crowds are going to get them regulated or banned and ruin the fun that millions of people world-wide enjoy safely with these remote control toys.
Any time anyone invents something fun, some jerk has to misuse/abuse it and spoil the thing for everyone else- selfish mouth breathing knuckle dragging Neanderthal scum.
I'm not sure how the system works with these drones but considering how large they can get I'd say some sort of regulation wouldn't be a bad thing.
Unlike an r/c plane or helicopter that are flown for the pleasure of doing so, these are generally used for filming stuff and so it is very likely that the users are going to be drawn to places where 'action' is going on. That makes the chance of an incident more likely.
If the engine had ingested it someone would be looking at a several million Dollar shop visit bill.
I wonder what it would be classed as. Not really FOD or a bird strike. Somewhere in the middle
Unlike an r/c plane or helicopter that are flown for the pleasure of doing so, these are generally used for filming stuff and so it is very likely that the users are going to be drawn to places where 'action' is going on. That makes the chance of an incident more likely.
If the engine had ingested it someone would be looking at a several million Dollar shop visit bill.
I wonder what it would be classed as. Not really FOD or a bird strike. Somewhere in the middle
Edited by longshot on Monday 18th April 11:22
longshot said:
I'm not sure how the system works with these drones but considering how large they can get I'd say some sort of regulation wouldn't be a bad thing.
Unlike an r/c plane or helicopter that are flown for the pleasure of doing so, these are generally used for filming stuff and so it is very likely that the users are going to be drawn to places where 'action' is going on. That makes the chance of an incident more likely.
If the engine had ingested it someone would be looking at a several million Dollar shop visit bill.
As a qualified Commercial Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) operator, hopefully I can answer your point. To make any form of financial gain from UAS flights in the UK you must a) be insured, including public liability, and b) in possesion of a Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) issued Permit for Aerial Work (PfAW). Commerical customers are now becoming very aware that they can only make use of imagary gained through legitimate flights, so in my experience there is no market in looking for reward from flying illegally. It simply isn't worth the risk for a commercial operator to go 'hunting' for an action story! Besides, we have to seek a number of permissions and carry out particular checks (which are madatory and must be held on record) to fly in each new location.Unlike an r/c plane or helicopter that are flown for the pleasure of doing so, these are generally used for filming stuff and so it is very likely that the users are going to be drawn to places where 'action' is going on. That makes the chance of an incident more likely.
If the engine had ingested it someone would be looking at a several million Dollar shop visit bill.
By way of being endorsed by the CAA, commercial UAS operators are already registered and regulated. The threat (in my opinion) remains from uninformed, unqualified hobbyists.
Olly
Sylvaforever said:
And where did the BBC source the footage of that BA 747 on approach to landing they are showing on the news
?
My guess is it was a helicopter being flown near the airport and being operated by qualified pilots and being vectored by the air traffic controllers? ?
It might be a qualified commercial drone operator depending on distance and altitude but I doubt it.
I'm pretty sure it wasn't from someone. Who just bought a drone online and is loading the footage onto YouTube.
J4CKO said:
Who said the airlines have exclusive use of the entire sky to ply their trade ?
I am joking, playing devils advocate, but who actually owns the sky ?
We have someone fly over our road in a helicopter fairly regularly, I didnt give him permission to overfly my house, thats my sky
You do realise that there is something called "Air Law"?I am joking, playing devils advocate, but who actually owns the sky ?
We have someone fly over our road in a helicopter fairly regularly, I didnt give him permission to overfly my house, thats my sky
scubadude said:
Firstly- They are Not friggin DRONES! They are remote controlled multirotors "AKA Toys" a Drones is a remotely operated aircraft used for target practice by the military.
Our friends in Oxford have this to say...A remote-controlled pilotless aircraft or missile
I think it sums up the things we're talking about quite well.
ukaskew said:
scubadude said:
Firstly- They are Not friggin DRONES! They are remote controlled multirotors "AKA Toys" a Drones is a remotely operated aircraft used for target practice by the military.
Our friends in Oxford have this to say...A remote-controlled pilotless aircraft or missile
I think it sums up the things we're talking about quite well.
http://www.parrot.com/uk/drones/
Eric Mc said:
J4CKO said:
Who said the airlines have exclusive use of the entire sky to ply their trade ?
I am joking, playing devils advocate, but who actually owns the sky ?
We have someone fly over our road in a helicopter fairly regularly, I didnt give him permission to overfly my house, thats my sky
You do realise that there is something called "Air Law"?I am joking, playing devils advocate, but who actually owns the sky ?
We have someone fly over our road in a helicopter fairly regularly, I didnt give him permission to overfly my house, thats my sky
Boatbuoy said:
longshot said:
I'm not sure how the system works with these drones but considering how large they can get I'd say some sort of regulation wouldn't be a bad thing.
Unlike an r/c plane or helicopter that are flown for the pleasure of doing so, these are generally used for filming stuff and so it is very likely that the users are going to be drawn to places where 'action' is going on. That makes the chance of an incident more likely.
If the engine had ingested it someone would be looking at a several million Dollar shop visit bill.
As a qualified Commercial Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) operator, hopefully I can answer your point. To make any form of financial gain from UAS flights in the UK you must a) be insured, including public liability, and b) in possesion of a Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) issued Permit for Aerial Work (PfAW). Commerical customers are now becoming very aware that they can only make use of imagary gained through legitimate flights, so in my experience there is no market in looking for reward from flying illegally. It simply isn't worth the risk for a commercial operator to go 'hunting' for an action story! Besides, we have to seek a number of permissions and carry out particular checks (which are madatory and must be held on record) to fly in each new location.Unlike an r/c plane or helicopter that are flown for the pleasure of doing so, these are generally used for filming stuff and so it is very likely that the users are going to be drawn to places where 'action' is going on. That makes the chance of an incident more likely.
If the engine had ingested it someone would be looking at a several million Dollar shop visit bill.
By way of being endorsed by the CAA, commercial UAS operators are already registered and regulated. The threat (in my opinion) remains from uninformed, unqualified hobbyists.
Olly
ukaskew said:
Our friends in Oxford have this to say...
A remote-controlled pilotless aircraft or missile
I think it sums up the things we're talking about quite well.
I think its pretty much globally accepted that the people in Oxford have a bee up their arses when it comes to definition, therefore they are IMO wrong.A remote-controlled pilotless aircraft or missile
I think it sums up the things we're talking about quite well.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff