BBC reporting a drone has hit an airliner at Heathrow

[anonymous-user]

Another report of a near miss but can a "football sized" drone really hit an altitude of 11,000ft?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-382646...

[surveyor]

In theory the Phantom 4 is limited to 400 ft. It's actual ceiling is 19685 feet above sea level. So it's possible.

It does seem unlikely though...

[anonymous-user]

surveyor said:

In theory the Phantom 4 is limited to 400 ft. It's actual ceiling is 19685 feet above sea level. So it's possible.

It does seem unlikely though...

Wow. Way beyond what I thought a little drone could do.

Edited by djstevec on Friday 9th December 16:15

[MartG]

surveyor said:

In theory the Phantom 4 is limited to 400 ft. It's actual ceiling is 19685 feet above sea level. So it's possible.

It does seem unlikely though...

Much more likely to be a party balloon again

[Ayahuasca]

Can a drone do any more damage than say a goose?

[djc206]

Ayahuasca said:

Can a drone do any more damage than say a goose?

I'm sure feeding a lithium ion battery pack through a jet engine would be interesting

[Ayahuasca]

djc206 said:

Ayahuasca said:

Can a drone do any more damage than say a goose?

I'm sure feeding a lithium ion battery pack through a jet engine would be interesting

As interesting as a 14 pound Canada goose?

I guess the battery is maybe the toughest part of a drone. Would lithium cause a chemical reaction or just mechanical damage?

[djc206]

Ayahuasca said:

As interesting as a 14 pound Canada goose?

I guess the battery is maybe the toughest part of a drone. Would lithium cause a chemical reaction or just mechanical damage?

I honestly couldn't tell you but given the propensity of Lithium batteries for catching fire I'm not sure I'd want to try. As much as the goose is going to do a lot of damage if it hits a plane and potentially destroy an engine worst case the plane continues on its good engine and the cabin smells like quick roasted goose. They might be large but they are squishy and don't catch fire, I doubt the same can't be said of drones.

[anonymous-user]

djc206 said:

Ayahuasca said:

As interesting as a 14 pound Canada goose?

I guess the battery is maybe the toughest part of a drone. Would lithium cause a chemical reaction or just mechanical damage?

I honestly couldn't tell you but given the propensity of Lithium batteries for catching fire I'm not sure I'd want to try. As much as the goose is going to do a lot of damage if it hits a plane and potentially destroy an engine worst case the plane continues on its good engine and the cabin smells like quick roasted goose. They might be large but they are squishy and don't catch fire, I doubt the same can't be said of drones.

I took a dove into an engine (RR RB211) years ago. It destroyed it and caused plenty of damage. I'm sure a drone with batteries and camera would be at least as bad.

To all the experts guessing it was a balloon, I'm sure I could tell the difference between a balloon and a drone if it' was in my way,

Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 10th December 19:30

[hidetheelephants]

Ayahuasca said:

Can a drone do any more damage than say a goose?

Given the choice of having a 2-3kg object hurled at me at 200mph I'd prefer it to be a goose rather than a tangle of carbon fibre tubing and electric motors.

[djc206]

El stovey said:

I took a dove into an engine (RR RB211) years ago. It destroyed it and caused plenty of damage. I'm sure a drone with batteries and camera would be at least as bad.

To all the experts guessing it was a balloon, I'm sure I could tell the difference between a balloon and a drone if it' was in my way,

Edited by El stovey on Saturday 10th December 19:30

In fairness they reckon the "drone strike" that happened back in April was actually a plastic bag!

I was working the day of the latest reported incident, caused quite a lot of concern in the TMA.

[surveyor]

Not disputing that drove vs plane is a bad thing, but if a drone goes through the fan blades on fire that area is usually pretty damn hot anyway...

Someone took a DJI phantom drone to that height. Just going up and down, they returned with a battery charge of 3%. Pretty risky for the expensive drone.

I believe there is some research going on as to the effect of a collision. Only got funding for £1 million so not many engines will be destroyed..

[pushthebutton]

djc206 said:

In fairness they reckon the "drone strike" that happened back in April was actually a plastic bag!

Sadly, it's not worth repeating that as fact .

It seems that there's quite a lot of money to be made by the 'drone' industry going forward. Lots of vested interest in ensuring that its growth continues, including those interested in revenue from taxation.

I've heard that a drone strike on an aircraft actually does more damage than first anticipated

[djc206]

pushthebutton said:

Sadly, it's not worth repeating that as fact .

It seems that there's quite a lot of money to be made by the 'drone' industry going forward. Lots of vested interest in ensuring that its growth continues, including those interested in revenue from taxation.

I've heard that a drone strike on an aircraft actually does more damage than first anticipated

Sadly it's only a matter of time until we find out!!

[Vipers]

Why not design a point and shoot gizmo the pilot can aim at the drone, and kill the connection to the controller.

[surveyor]

pushthebutton said:

djc206 said:

In fairness they reckon the "drone strike" that happened back in April was actually a plastic bag!

Sadly, it's not worth repeating that as fact .

It seems that there's quite a lot of money to be made by the 'drone' industry going forward. Lots of vested interest in ensuring that its growth continues, including those interested in revenue from taxation.

I've heard that a drone strike on an aircraft actually does more damage than first anticipated

I think the only people with that vested interest is the vendors/manufacturers. The qualified operators would I'm sure be quite happy to keep the competition numbers limited.

However, I suspect the problem is not with the qualified people with Permission for Commercial Work, but the hobbiest, who have no idea or worse do not care.

[Vipers]

djc206 said:

Ayahuasca said:

Can a drone do any more damage than say a goose?

I'm sure feeding a lithium ion battery pack through a jet engine would be interesting

Let's not find out. Why don't drone manufactures be compelled to restrict max height.

[surveyor]

Vipers said:

djc206 said:

Ayahuasca said:

Can a drone do any more damage than say a goose?

I'm sure feeding a lithium ion battery pack through a jet engine would be interesting

Let's not find out. Why don't drone manufactures be compelled to restrict max height.

DJI drones are electronically limited to 400ft in the UK, which is the maximum height that they should be flown (and 500ft laterally).

[Cold]

Sorted.

[King Herald]

scubadude said:

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.

A bit like the plebs who call automobiles 'cars' for some pitiful reason, then drive them,like lunatics,on public highways, which will probably result in the automobile being banned, ruining the fun for blah blah.......