6 ms·
A news helicopter was struck by a suspected drone, causing substantial damage
- Jeff_Brown 7y agoDo drones really move fast enough to puncture a helicopter? If that's what happened, should they not have found at least some of the drone inside the helicopter afterward?
- p410n3 7y agoWell the heli was moving too. Plus, the damaga is not that crazy looking. Totally believable
- Jeff_Brown 7y agoThe damage is on the side of the tail. How fast can a helicopter move sideways?
- Rebelgecko 7y agoNot as fast as they move forwards, but still pretty quickly[1]. I think 50mph is doable. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGp2okWpyJg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGp2okWpyJg
- dmitrygr 7y agoit can rotate, and thus sweep the tailaround, quite fast
- starpilot 7y agoIt looks like it's the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer, but it's not totally clear from the photo. A leading edge impact is definitely indicative of a forward flight collision. Edit: Much better photo: https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/5734793_120419-kabc-11pm-air7-damage-vid.jpg?w=800&r=16%3A9 https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/5734793_120419-kabc-11pm-... Yes it's the h-stab. Upper surface of leading edge corresponds with a nose-down pitch of the helo in forward flight.
- theandrewbailey 7y agoTail rotors on helicopters move fast enough such that anything that touches it can puncture it.
- Jeff_Brown 7y agoIs that what was punctured? The article says that it was the tail of the helicopter that was punctured; they don't say anything about a rotor. I was assuming by "tail" they mean the narrowest (fixed) part of the body toward the rear, not one of the rotating blades. The article includes a picture of the damage, but that's not clearing up the ambiguity to me -- it's not tapered like a tail, and it's too fat to be a rotor.
- aeternum 7y agoLooks like it hit and punctured the horizontal stabilizer rather than the tail rotor. Since this is a front-facing part of the helicopter it is quite feasible that the helicopter was moving faster than the drone, adding to the energy of collision.
- TylerE 7y agoThere is a secondary vertical rotor on the tail, for yaw.
- nraynaud 7y agoI would think the object touched a rotor blade and got converted into shrapnel.
- StavrosK 7y agoI find it hard that a drone could puncture and dent a 3mm thick sheet of metal. Racing drones can move up to 100 km/h or so, but good luck hitting the moving tail of a helicopter at that speed. Racing drone owners are generally very responsible, in my experience, and don't fly that far/high anyway. Photography drones don't go anywhere near that fast, and have altitude limits.
- mbrameld 7y agoPhotography drones have regulatory altitude limits. Nothing stopping somebody from flying higher than that other than the threat of a fine if caught. It's the relative speed of the two objects colliding that matters, not just the speed of the drone.
- StavrosK 7y ago> Nothing stopping somebody from flying higher than that other than the threat of a fine if caught And the built-in software limit that physically prevents the drone from flying higher.
- lozaning 7y agoAnd what ubiquitous built in software would that be? You're aware there are myriad non DJI options for drone photography platforms yea?
- Piskvorrr 7y ago"Software limit." On Hacker News. Used unironically. These are truly the end days.
- StavrosK 7y agoLuckily that hasn't stopped people who know nothing about a subject from opining.
- 27182818284 7y agoThe closest example that comes to mind was done by the University of Dayton https://giphy.com/gifs/48LkLrgh9AKmcFUVxe/html5 https://giphy.com/gifs/48LkLrgh9AKmcFUVxe/html5 That simulated an aircraft's wing vs a drone at 238 mph. I was actually kinda surprised by the amount of damage inflicted.
- DoofusOfDeath 7y agoIf only the skin was damaged, what effect would that have on the ability to land a typical passenger jet? Also, did that simulation mostly damage just the skin, or did it also get the machinery inside the wing?
- 27182818284 7y agoMachinery inside. They simulated a bird strike too and found that to damage the internals less, so they suggested that future drone development might take that in to account and crumple closer to a bird strike.
- briandear 7y agoEver seen a bird strike? And a drone is heavier than most birds.
- starpilot 7y agoHelicopters regularly cruise at over 120 mph, and the skin is around 1.27 mm thin. The stuff gets SHREDDED in a crash [1], it's generally not load bearing and acts as an aerodynamic fairing for the rest of the helo. The tail boom contains a truss space frame to do the literal heavy lifting. You see those "NO STEP" marks on commercial jet wings, because a human walking on some spots can cause damage. It's very plausible that a 5 lb rigid object (which is also how much a brick weighs), could do significant damage when striking skin at 100+ mph. Add.: A better photo shows it's the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer that was damaged: https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/5734793_120419-kabc-11pm-air7-damage-vid.jpg?w=800&r=16%3A9 https://cdn.abcotvs.com/dip/images/5734793_120419-kabc-11pm-... The puncture location on the upper surface of leading edge corresponds with a nose-down pitch of the helo in forward flight. [1] This is something I notice wrong in CGI aircraft crashes, where it breaks into big solid chunks that bounce. In reality, aircraft crumple, disintegrate, and smear into tiny pieces on impact, leaving a long trail of small debris.
- mopsi 7y ago> [1] This is something I notice wrong in CGI aircraft crashes, where it breaks into big solid chunks that bounce. In reality, aircraft crumple, disintegrate, and smear into tiny pieces on impact, leaving a long trail of small debris. I recently came across a very good example of this, barely anything left. Scroll for photos: https://avherald.com/h?article=495997e2 https://avherald.com/h?article=495997e2
- loa_in_ 7y agoI can't really imagine how a drone could "rip through helicopter's tail".
- dmitrygr 7y ago1. hit blade 2. get accelerated by said blade 3. hit tail 4. rip tail OR 1. stay in place 2. heli rotates in place (as it can and does) quickly 3. tail sweeps around the center 4. get hit by tail at high angular (and thus linear) speed 5. rip tail OR 1. stay in place 2. heli moves sideways quickly 3. get hit by tail at high speed 4. rip tail all of these start with a quadcopter being where it was not supposed to be, and SADLY likely do not end with proper jailtime for reckless endangerment
- Teknoman117 7y agoI hope it didn't hit the blades. They're actually really fragile.
- starpilot 7y agoIt's similar to a brick hitting a 1 mm aluminum sheet at 100+ mph.
- Teknoman117 7y agoAircraft skin is extremely thin. You only need it to be there and be strong enough to not be destroyed by airflow. Any more than that is undesirable excess mass. Typically it's only a bit more than a millimeter thick. A hammer with a light swing would almost certainly puncture it. Contrary to the and movies, helicopters can move fairly fast. You average news helicopter has a top forward speed of around 160 mph. Drones, being mostly made of what would otherwise be considered in the aircraft world to be fairly durable material, would have no issues passing through the thin aluminum skin of a helicopter at 120+ mph. The pictures of the damage shows it on the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer, indicitive of a strike when the helicopter was in nose down, forward motion (they lean in the direction they're moving).
- sunstone 7y agoAlternatively, A drone was struck by a suspected news helicopter, causing substantial damage.
- starpilot 7y agoDrone lives matter. Edit: Downvotes, fair. I thought everyone realized we talk about the helicopter being hit by a drone, rather than the other way around, because we generally place more importance on vehicles carrying humans. Any regulations will follow this; ensure the safety of the human, at the expense of the drone.
- jancsika 7y agoWhich heavenly item did the striking? if (demand_for_permit_to_shoot(item1) > demand_for_permit_to_shoot(item2)) then return item1 else return item2
- FireBeyond 7y agoIt's intriguing, even as a drone owner myself, how the general attitude seems to be "what? no way, couldn't have been a drone". When you look at the damage, it certainly wasn't a bird.
- hirundo 7y agoTo be accurate: "A news helicopter was struck by a UFO..."
- dmlittle 7y agoWhile technically accurate the general public associates UFOs with aliens
- StavrosK 7y agoThe general attitude also seems to be "there was something unidentified up there, it must have been a drone".
- jascii 7y agoTo be fair, it seems rather unlikely an hobbyist drone would do that particular damage to the tail considering both objects velocities. The article mentions "a pop", "a bang", "a light". Uh, a flare maybe?
- ceejayoz 7y agoWhere does the article say their velocities, and how does a flare get up to 1,100 feet?
- kbos87 7y agoAs a drone owner I think it’s only a matter of time until enough stupid and reckless things like this happen before it’s ruined for everyone who is safe and thoughtful about their drone use. DJI has gotten better as has the FAA in making it easier to decipher where you can and can’t fly, but the fact of the matter is that they have a lot more they should be doing. Why not limit flights in the US to the FAA mandated 400ft ceiling? There are enough high altitude videos on YouTube to indicate that people still like to test the limits and don’t think of the possible consequences.
- Filligree 7y agoWhile I'd understand if such a limit was implemented, for me it'd kill the hobby. Not because I like going high above the terrain -- that's illegal, after all -- but because I do my photography somewhere very hilly, with grades averaging 45 degrees in most of the places I fly. "120 meters above the launch site" would also mean "120 meters away from the launch site", and then only in two possible directions. The other two have cliffs. Before you ask, it's pretty deserted. It's also really pretty.
- 14 7y agoI don’t like restrictions as well. I am quite capable of working within the law without mandated restrictions. It seems weird as well since from about 8yrs old I would go to my local hobby shop myself and buy model rockets capable of reaching several thousand feet easily.
- Teknoman117 7y agoAt least some states require notification of local authorities before launching model rockets (such as California). Some states also put out altitude ceiling regulations for them. When I lived outside Chicago in the first half of the 00's, you had to get approval for launching above 2500 ft. You were also required to cease launching if any low flying aircraft were visible. You could get in some real nasty trouble if you violated those rules.
- 7952 7y ago
- Paraesthetic 7y agoAs a drone owner, there is no drone that would cause that much damage, but its easy to blame a drone because what will happen to news crews if anyone can fly a drone and capture their scoop.
- late2part 7y agoHow do we know the helicopter didn't run into the drone?
- stfp 7y agoOn a semi-related note... News helicopters: why? How are they justified at this point? It's crazy to me that we're flying entire people on fragile, noisy, polluting machines over dense urban areas so the 7 people still watching TV can look at... traffic? I think this should go away entirely or be done with (drum roll) drones.
- e40 7y agoCost will very likely move in the direction of drones and not human-powered helicopters. Or, looking at another way, once Police departments are flying drones everywhere, and if that footage were accessible to citizens, then news orgs would for sure stop paying for the current system. That's a big "if", though. It just as easily might be the drones come, but the footage is locked up behind legal departments.
- casefields 7y agoThank god for them: https://youtu.be/Em8C6AvD4sk https://youtu.be/Em8C6AvD4sk
- duelingjello 7y agoI've never heard of a drone proper (vertical lift, multiple motor R/C) operating at 1100', which is well above the legal limit. Without proof, they're both speculating by not presenting factual news, and scapegoating drones. That's why the NTSB doesn't jump to conclusions before the facts are in. PS: Here's another, better article with the news station involved and video interview: https://abc7.com/federal-agencies-investigating-drone-collision-involving-air7-hd/5736304/ https://abc7.com/federal-agencies-investigating-drone-collis...