5 ms·

FYI, here's a video of a drone striking an airplane wing in a test environment: https://youtube.com/watch?v=QH0V7kp-xg0 https://youtube.com/watch?v=QH0V7kp-xg0

becauseSpecial 8y ago
The main idea not highlighted by this video: Aviation fuel tanks are frequently held in the wings, and a drone’s charged lithium batteries, when deformed, will arc, burn violently and often explode.
asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago
Can any air people comment on whether that collision would have been fatal to the aircraft? I'm sure it possibly could be, but at what likelihood? Personally I'd be more concerned about a propeller or wind screen strike, but these guys know more about it than me. There's just no good reason to be flying near an airport. On the other hand, if you're five miles away from the nearest airport, the odds of a collision (even if you break the rules r.e. flying in LOS or under a certain ceiling) are just astronomically low. The sky is an enormous place and the odds of two things occupying the same space in it without trying to are once in a century if that. At the current level of density, at any rate. Another thing that strikes me, and probably won't make me popular with pilots on this board: dozens or hundreds of GA pilots get themselves killed every year. Most of the time, this is due to pilot error. Drones represent some amount of increased risk to GA pilots. But, at the current level of drone market penetration, it seems empirically tiny compared to the risks GA pilots already faced voluntarily. I don't know what to do with this observation, except perhaps downgrade my personal concerns about the risks of drone <-> plane incidents.
- everdev 8y ago
  > The sky is an enormous place and the odds of two things occupying the same space in it without trying to are once in a century if that. Not near an airport. Planes takeoff and land in extremely predictable patterns. And at about the same height as drones typically operate. I think you're thinking of a meteorite hitting an airplane, which yes is probably extremely rare.
  - azinman2 8y ago
    No to mention that birds strike 13k planes a year in the US alone. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_strike https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_strike
  - jarfil 8y ago
    I wouldn't call "five miles away from the nearest airport" to be near an airport.
    - JshWright 8y ago
      Five miles off the end of the runway a landing plane is only ~1,500ft above the ground. That's higher than the legal ceiling for drones, but it's certainly well within their technical capabilities.
    - heelix 8y ago
      As a pilot, I would. Most of the bug smashers I rent will be flying around 90-120 nautical miles per hour, so 5 miles out puts you 2-3 minutes from the field. Within one minute or so you better be setting up for landings, usually dropping to 1000' AGL thereabouts. A fair bit of traffic in a 5 mile zone when towered.
  - nonfamous 8y ago
    > I think you're thinking of a meteorite hitting an airplane, which yes is probably extremely rare. Not as rare as you might think: for one airplane yes, but there are many planes and many meteorites. There’s a 5% chance a plane, somewhere, gets hit in the next 20 years: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2009/06/04/did-a-meteor-bring-down-air-france-447/ http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2009/06/04/...
- cmurf 8y ago
  I can't answer a fatality question, it seems out of scope. Anyway, big sky theory does not apply to class B airspace. And also, just go to flightaware and look at incoming flights to EWR which are going right over TEB. And the drone will not show up on either primary or secondary radar, and there's no radio contact with the drone operator, so there's no possible way to maintain the require positive separation guarantee of class B airspace. >The sky is an enormous place and the odds of two things occupying the same space in it without trying to are once in a century if that. Bullshit, and also it's a stupid statement. Just do some basic research about how many midair collisions there have been. A huge reason why we have positive control airspace and instrument flight rules is because of midair collisions.
- jarfil 8y ago
  The sky is an enormous space... and then people decide to all go to the same place, like some airport's runway. It's quite easy for some idiot drone operator to fly into an approach path, maybe just to take cool photos of landing planes, but still putting everyone at risk nevertheless. Just think about what happened with laser pointers: the sky is enormous, and yet many idiots decide to aim them at planes.
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago
    Right, I'm speaking only of a drone operator who is not seeking to be near other aircraft. For such operators, the risk of hitting something is very near zero. Surely lower than the odds of getting struck by lightning by an order of magnitude or more.
  - yellowapple 8y ago
    Wait, something happened with laser pointers?
leetcrew 8y ago
I'm not sure what your intention was behind posting this video with minimal commentary, but, given the context, it reads like fearmongering to me. there are now more registered drones than manned aircraft in the US, and they have been accessible to consumers for years now. there has yet to be a single fatal collision with a drone. on the other hand, there were 5-10 (graph is hard to read)[0] fatal collisions (and over 200 fatal accidents) in general aviation just in 2016. [0] https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/data/Pages/AviationDataStats2016.aspx https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/data/Pages/AviationDataS...

becauseSpecial 8y ago

The main idea not highlighted by this video: Aviation fuel tanks are frequently held in the wings, and a drone’s charged lithium batteries, when deformed, will arc, burn violently and often explode.

asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago

Can any air people comment on whether that collision would have been fatal to the aircraft? I'm sure it possibly could be, but at what likelihood? Personally I'd be more concerned about a propeller or wind screen strike, but these guys know more about it than me. There's just no good reason to be flying near an airport. On the other hand, if you're five miles away from the nearest airport, the odds of a collision (even if you break the rules r.e. flying in LOS or under a certain ceiling) are just astronomically low. The sky is an enormous place and the odds of two things occupying the same space in it without trying to are once in a century if that. At the current level of density, at any rate. Another thing that strikes me, and probably won't make me popular with pilots on this board: dozens or hundreds of GA pilots get themselves killed every year. Most of the time, this is due to pilot error. Drones represent some amount of increased risk to GA pilots. But, at the current level of drone market penetration, it seems empirically tiny compared to the risks GA pilots already faced voluntarily. I don't know what to do with this observation, except perhaps downgrade my personal concerns about the risks of drone <-> plane incidents.

everdev 8y ago
> The sky is an enormous place and the odds of two things occupying the same space in it without trying to are once in a century if that. Not near an airport. Planes takeoff and land in extremely predictable patterns. And at about the same height as drones typically operate. I think you're thinking of a meteorite hitting an airplane, which yes is probably extremely rare.
- azinman2 8y ago
  No to mention that birds strike 13k planes a year in the US alone. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_strike https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_strike
- jarfil 8y ago
  I wouldn't call "five miles away from the nearest airport" to be near an airport.
  - JshWright 8y ago
    Five miles off the end of the runway a landing plane is only ~1,500ft above the ground. That's higher than the legal ceiling for drones, but it's certainly well within their technical capabilities.
  - heelix 8y ago
    As a pilot, I would. Most of the bug smashers I rent will be flying around 90-120 nautical miles per hour, so 5 miles out puts you 2-3 minutes from the field. Within one minute or so you better be setting up for landings, usually dropping to 1000' AGL thereabouts. A fair bit of traffic in a 5 mile zone when towered.
- nonfamous 8y ago
  > I think you're thinking of a meteorite hitting an airplane, which yes is probably extremely rare. Not as rare as you might think: for one airplane yes, but there are many planes and many meteorites. There’s a 5% chance a plane, somewhere, gets hit in the next 20 years: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2009/06/04/did-a-meteor-bring-down-air-france-447/ http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2009/06/04/...
cmurf 8y ago
I can't answer a fatality question, it seems out of scope. Anyway, big sky theory does not apply to class B airspace. And also, just go to flightaware and look at incoming flights to EWR which are going right over TEB. And the drone will not show up on either primary or secondary radar, and there's no radio contact with the drone operator, so there's no possible way to maintain the require positive separation guarantee of class B airspace. >The sky is an enormous place and the odds of two things occupying the same space in it without trying to are once in a century if that. Bullshit, and also it's a stupid statement. Just do some basic research about how many midair collisions there have been. A huge reason why we have positive control airspace and instrument flight rules is because of midair collisions.
jarfil 8y ago
The sky is an enormous space... and then people decide to all go to the same place, like some airport's runway. It's quite easy for some idiot drone operator to fly into an approach path, maybe just to take cool photos of landing planes, but still putting everyone at risk nevertheless. Just think about what happened with laser pointers: the sky is enormous, and yet many idiots decide to aim them at planes.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 8y ago
  Right, I'm speaking only of a drone operator who is not seeking to be near other aircraft. For such operators, the risk of hitting something is very near zero. Surely lower than the odds of getting struck by lightning by an order of magnitude or more.
- yellowapple 8y ago
  Wait, something happened with laser pointers?

leetcrew 8y ago

I'm not sure what your intention was behind posting this video with minimal commentary, but, given the context, it reads like fearmongering to me. there are now more registered drones than manned aircraft in the US, and they have been accessible to consumers for years now. there has yet to be a single fatal collision with a drone. on the other hand, there were 5-10 (graph is hard to read)[0] fatal collisions (and over 200 fatal accidents) in general aviation just in 2016. [0] https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/data/Pages/AviationDataStats2016.aspx https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/data/Pages/AviationDataS...