Drone operator arrested for impeding rescuers

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

georgegassaway

Lifetime Supporter
TRF Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
4,772
Reaction score
681
This guy didn't swat it-

View attachment 310843
BIRD STRIKE from 2009!

Thanks to Google image search:

https://www.birdstrikenews.com/2009/12/full-size-photos-from-show-low-bird.html

That's part of the problem, "drone hysteria", when in doubt... it must be a drone!

Last year, a British Airways airliner hit a drone during landing at Heathrow. The pilots heard a "whump" during thel anding approach. Fortunately the aircraft managed to survive the collision and land safely.

Made WORLDWIDE NEWS!

A few weeks later, the British Air Minister timidly announced it hit a PLASTIC BAG, not a drone. Winds had yanked a plastic bag into the sky, the plane hit it, and the bag being suddenly collapsed made the "Whump" sound. They found no traces of a drone on the airliner, apparently some residue of the kind of plastic used for a bag or else from lack of finding any trace of something like a drone, figured out it had to be a bag (maybe voice recorder analysis of the nature of the "whump" sound). That correction was barely reported, certainly not by most of the outlets that made such a big deal about the juicy "Drone hits airliner" story.

I am not excusing anyone who flies irresponsibly. But there are a lot of "drone" reports that turn out to be anything but. Like THAT one.

And posting that photo of a BIRD STRIKE as though it was a drone collision, is also irresponsible.
 
Last edited:

watheyak

Barnstormer
TRF Supporter
Joined
May 11, 2009
Messages
971
Reaction score
755
Location
Arizona
BIRD STRIKE from 2009!

Thanks to Google image search:

https://www.birdstrikenews.com/2009/12/full-size-photos-from-show-low-bird.html

And posting that photo of a BIRD STRIKE as though it was a drone collision, is also irresponsible.
I didn't mean to imply it was a drone! But now I can see how it certainly looks that way, my apologies.

Earlier in this thread, drone damage was compared to a bird strike. I'm just illustrating that a bird strike, or drone strike is no small matter.

Drones or birds can kill a pilot, do millions of dollars of damage to a turbine engine or cause any other number of other problems for flight crews.

I think a certain level of "drone hysteria" is warranted.
 

K'Tesh

OpenRocket Chuck Norris
TRF Supporter
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
15,579
Reaction score
2,146
While I was at Upper Heyford, one of our jets stuck a bird. From what I was told, it was a sparrow, or house finch, based on the feathers and the size of the damage. You know something tiny, and very light. At the moment of the impact, the aircraft was traveling at approximately 400 mph. The bird's speed wasn't estimated. The point of impact was on the leading edge of the left side engine intake. It blew a hole into the intake, at least 8" deep from what I saw, and probably 3" in diameter. I pretty sure that none of the resulting shrapnel made it into the actual engine, but they did shut it down and returned to base on a single engine.

I have no idea of what speed a helicopter's rotor blades travel at, but I'm sure that any impact with any object would not be a good thing for either the helicopter or the object.
 
Last edited:

Peter Olivola

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2010
Messages
667
Reaction score
3
Helicopter blade ends reach at least trans sonic speeds. That's what produces the characteristic sound of a helicopter. So, the potential for damage is very high. I keep thinking about pictures of a piece of straw penetrating clean through a telephone pole from a tornado.

I have no idea of what speed a helicopter's rotor blades travel at, but I'm sure that any impact with any object would not be a good thing for either the helicopter or the object.
 

georgegassaway

Lifetime Supporter
TRF Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
4,772
Reaction score
681
Stupid flying, agreed. Should not be flying near occupied buildings without permission, and there were people below if it had tumbled down to the ground.

But not an aircraft collision that I thought your link was going to show, and what this thread was discussing.

BTW - keep in mind that the same general public that is so up in arms about "drones", is the same kind of general public that tends to think (actually I should not imply there is much brain activity involved) of our larger rockets as "potential terrorist weapons" and would be just as happy to see outright banned. Hobby to hobby, we are living in a glass house....

Back to mid-air collisions:

When asked whether a drone could seriously damage an airliner, FAA spokesman Roland Herwig has declined to speculate. "There are so many variables. It depends on the circumstances. How fast is it going? How big is it? Is it coming at them or are they chasing it?"
OK, I played a bit of a trick. Typed in "drone" in place of where it originally was talking about rockets. Story from 2008, apparently HPR rocket flown without a waiver, along the flight path of an airliner:

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-...moments-from-striking-Continental-1560941.php

And IIRC, this happened about 3 years in a row at about the same time of year, similar general area in Texas. Culprits never were found.
 
Last edited:

kyle

Space: mostly nothing, partially stars
Joined
Nov 9, 2013
Messages
311
Reaction score
62
Location
Mid-Hudson Valley
I work for an agency that has almost completely banned UAVs. Whenever I contact someone for drone use I do two things. First, I ask about any background with r/c stuff, club membership etc., commercial photography using drones, anything like that. The answers to those questions determine whether they get a ticket and the UAV impounded, or if they get a warning and a lecture.

Then, no matter the outcome of the first set of questions, I inform them about the app that the FAA has developed called B4UFly. The app uses your location based off the gps location provided by your smartphone and provides basic information regarding the legality of a flight from that location. I wish that a card with information about the app was included with every hobby UAV sold.

I hope that things get straightened out out soon. As laws currently stand I'm not allowed to have even a Syma 107g that only flies inside (I live in government housing) as it violates agency policy, so I don't have one, or anything like it. Stupid? Yes. The law? Also yes.
 

kclo4

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
150
Reaction score
0
So you roll around harassing otherwise law obiding folks doing something that is generally legal, safe, and sane(like rocketry) most places in the country and you base how hard you bone them based on some arbitrary questions and not the nature or actual danger of the activity?


Go you, doing all of that protecting and serving and all.

I work for an agency that has almost completely banned UAVs. Whenever I contact someone for drone use I do two things. First, I ask about any background with r/c stuff, club membership etc., commercial photography using drones, anything like that. The answers to those questions determine whether they get a ticket and the UAV impounded, or if they get a warning and a lecture.

Then, no matter the outcome of the first set of questions, I inform them about the app that the FAA has developed called B4UFly. The app uses your location based off the gps location provided by your smartphone and provides basic information regarding the legality of a flight from that location. I wish that a card with information about the app was included with every hobby UAV sold.

I hope that things get straightened out out soon. As laws currently stand I'm not allowed to have even a Syma 107g that only flies inside (I live in government housing) as it violates agency policy, so I don't have one, or anything like it. Stupid? Yes. The law? Also yes.
 

kyle

Space: mostly nothing, partially stars
Joined
Nov 9, 2013
Messages
311
Reaction score
62
Location
Mid-Hudson Valley
So you roll around harassing otherwise law obiding folks doing something that is generally legal, safe, and sane(like rocketry) most places in the country and you base how hard you bone them based on some arbitrary questions and not the nature or actual danger of the activity?


Go you, doing all of that protecting and serving and all.
If that's how you choose to interpret that, I obviously need to simplify the wording.

If you know the rules and choose to violate them you get a ticket and your "toy" seized.

If you don't know the rules and accidentally violate them you get informed of the rules.

Either way you get informed of a resource to help you follow the rules.

Is that simple enough, or do I need to find smaller words?
 

Frederocket

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
460
Reaction score
89
Location
Maryland
I work for an agency that has almost completely banned UAVs. Whenever I contact someone for drone use I do two things. First, I ask about any background with r/c stuff, club membership etc., commercial photography using drones, anything like that. The answers to those questions determine whether they get a ticket and the UAV impounded, or if they get a warning and a lecture.

Then, no matter the outcome of the first set of questions, I inform them about the app that the FAA has developed called B4UFly. The app uses your location based off the gps location provided by your smartphone and provides basic information regarding the legality of a flight from that location. I wish that a card with information about the app was included with every hobby UAV sold.

I hope that things get straightened out out soon. As laws currently stand I'm not allowed to have even a Syma 107g that only flies inside (I live in government housing) as it violates agency policy, so I don't have one, or anything like it. Stupid? Yes. The law? Also yes.
There are no FAA rules, prohibiting possession of and, "indoor operation of a drone or any type model aircraft"... If you live on a military base, I would be careful about confiscation of personal property unless there is a directive that specifically allows such due process confiscation. Several years ago I went through this type overreach when a large fiberglass and metal fined HPR rocket was observed in my truck during a gate security check . Fortunately the outcome was in my favor, but only because I refused to budge on the ignorance of the issue and my refusal to not back down until the flight commander, operations officer, and myself had a robust conversation...
 

kyle

Space: mostly nothing, partially stars
Joined
Nov 9, 2013
Messages
311
Reaction score
62
Location
Mid-Hudson Valley
No FAA rules, but agency policy. It may be taking it to extremes, but I got rid of my Syma copters to set an example for my employees that the rules apply to all of us, and they fit the definition of a UAV.
 

Frederocket

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
460
Reaction score
89
Location
Maryland
No FAA rules, but agency policy. It may be taking it to extremes, but I got rid of my Syma copters to set an example for my employees that the rules apply to all of us, and they fit the definition of a UAV.
Agency policy is not regulations, unless written, especially when it comes to confiscation of property and issuing citations... I don't know you from Adam, but I call BS... I spent almost twenty years working on one of the most sensitive military installations in the military, (Andrews AFB), both on active duty and as a civilian contractor and never heard of any such regulations...
 
Top