Drone Hits British Airways Plane at London Heathrow

[Mike Watson]

Originally Posted by David Heath

It's also wrong to say "nefarious pilots" are "never caught" - see Man fined after flying drones over Premier League stadiums - BBC News . Point is it takes time for law enforcement to catch up with new problems - just think back to mobile phone usage whilst driving a car, and how many accidents happened before legislation?

I didn't say nefarious pilots are never caught. I said the pilots of these drones that have so many "near-miss" encounters with full-size aircraft are never caught. Seems like we have no problem busting these guys outside football stadiums or in national parks, but put one near an airport and they are practically camouflaged.
Some time ago there were incidents with people shining laser pointers at aircraft. This is a device the size of an ink pen held by someone standing in a fenced backyard sometimes miles from the airfield. They arrest those guys regularly. We can find someone holding a device powered by a watch battery miles from a runway, but someone flying a drone in a landing pattern of a major airport that only has a 20 minute flight time that literally will guide you directly to it's owner... this is just too elusive a device to follow?

To be clear, I'm not arguing that it doesn't ever happen, hasn't ever happened, couldn't happen. I'm not arguing against legislation (in fact, a little common sense legislation could go a long way here). I just don't see how someone could look at this situation and not see a little exaggeration with the drone-panic.

[Gareth Watkins]

Hi there
I can see the regulations in many countries following the line France has taken for a while now.. basically banning the use of drones outside of private property, and then making it illegal to use any footage or photos taken.
For use in public places, there are so many restrictions, red tape, and hoops to jump through, that it is for all intents and purposes, unrealistic to want to shoot drone footage for a private or low budget project.
A shame when you see how awesome the pictures are, but with incidents like the one in, and the real possibility of weaponising these machines or using as spy cameras, one can understand France's position.
cheers
Gareth

[Brian Drysdale]

"I think the issue of Drones vs Aircraft is in most case way overblown. Most people have zero clue about modern aircraft and modern jet engines and their ability to withstand debris or bird strikes"

I understand the concern is the battery and such harder components, currently there seems to be pressure from the pilots' unions for tests to be run on drone strikes. The experence from F1 cars and tyre debris suggests that damage can be caused by hard opjects. With airliners the interest is centred on the cockpit windows and the emgines.

When flying a light plane you are aware of nearby birds and airliner approach speeds aren't so fast that you'd be unaware of similar sized objects coming at you (Drones are bright coloured).

[Noa Put]

Most people have zero clue about modern aircraft and modern jet engines and their ability to withstand debris or bird strikes

You mean like this little birdy that flew into the jet engine? Looks like the size of a drone to me.

Bird flies into jet engine on take off - YouTube

[Chris Harding]

Our current regulations state that you cannot fly within 5.5kms from any airport so obviously that doesn't apply in the UK ... We live probably around that distance from our local small aircraft runway so even flying in the area around home is illegal. This applies to not only commercial drones pilots but also to private ones and applies to UAV's under 2kg flown privately ..the regulations for larget vehicles is much tougher!!

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Mike Watson

Some time ago there were incidents with people shining laser pointers at aircraft. This is a device the size of an ink pen held by someone standing in a fenced backyard sometimes miles from the airfield. They arrest those guys regularly. We can find someone holding a device powered by a watch battery miles from a runway, but someone flying a drone in a landing pattern of a major airport that only has a 20 minute flight time that literally will guide you directly to it's owner... this is just too elusive a device to follow?

As just one example, this was the case of somebody jailed recently in the UK for just such an offence - Cardiff man jailed for shining laser pen at planes | UK news | The Guardian . The following excerpt should give an idea of how he was caught:

A police helicopter was sent to identify the source of the laser in eastern Cardiff and the pilot realised it was coming from a top-floor flat.

Officers were sent to the address and could see Chadwick moving about inside the flat. The prosecutor said he had taken three minutes to answer the door.

“He denied knowing anything about it, but they found parts of a laser pen which had been taken apart,” Lloyd-Nesling said.

In other words, it was relatively easy to trace the beam back and see exactly where it was coming from, certainly from a police helicopter. You could plainly see the source.

But obviously the control of a drone doesn't light itself up in so obvious a fashion, so yes, it will be more difficult to trace. But.... it really depends on the resources the police are prepared to commit. And I suspect now that an aircraft has actually been hit it's likely to receive much more attention. Do we really now have to wait until there's a strike which causes serious damage before it really gets serious?

Originally Posted by Mike Watson

To be clear, I'm not arguing that it doesn't ever happen, hasn't ever happened, couldn't happen. I'm not arguing against legislation (in fact, a little common sense legislation could go a long way here). I just don't see how someone could look at this situation and not see a little exaggeration with the drone-panic.

It was on the news in the UK again today, including a pilots leader calling for research into what exactly would be the outcome if a drone got sucked into the engine intake, or hit the canopy.

I believe engines are built to normally withstand an average bird strike (even if such is very undesirable) but as was explained, the flesh and bones of a bird are one thing - the metal and plastic of a drone quite another, especially with a lithium battery. It was suspected the results would be catastrophic - but hence the call for research.

Let me put a question to you. If the test called for a drone to be deliberately flown into the engine of a plane in flight, and all drone owners who considered the situation "exaggeration with the drone-panic" were invited to be passengers to observe the test from on-board the plane - would you happily go along? Seriously? Are you so sure the damage would be minor that you'd happily go along? Because I certainly wouldn't.

[Mike Watson]

Originally Posted by David Heath

As just one example, this was the case of somebody jailed recently in the UK for just such an offence - Cardiff man jailed for shining laser pen at planes | UK news | The Guardian . The following excerpt should give an idea of how he was caught:

In other words, it was relatively easy to trace the beam back and see exactly where it was coming from, certainly from a police helicopter. You could plainly see the source.

This is on an item that shines literally a pinpoint of light and shuts off completely and immediately the instant you stop pressing the button. Compared to a drone, a 1.5ft wide object that has to fly from the point of the "near miss" directly back to it's operator. Seems like it would be easier to chase the drone, yes?

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by David Heath

If the test called for a drone to be deliberately flown into the engine of a plane in flight, and all drone owners who considered the situation "exaggeration with the drone-panic" were invited to be passengers to observe the test from on-board the plane

Your example is a good one, it's easy to have an opinion about this when you are standing safe on the ground and watching the news afterwards about any casualties.

I don't have anything against drone operators but anyone flying a drone deliberately into the flying path of planes at a airport is no better then a terrorist setting of a bomb in the departure hall of that same airport.

[Brian Drysdale]

Originally Posted by Mike Watson

This is on an item that shines literally a pinpoint of light and shuts off completely and immediately the instant you stop pressing the button. Compared to a drone, a 1.5ft wide object that has to fly from the point of the "near miss" directly back to it's operator. Seems like it would be easier to chase the drone, yes?

Not if the guy keeps pointing on the laser into the night sky after the incident. You need to have a handy police helicopter at the time the drone is around to follow it.

[Roger Van Duyn]

I wonder how many camera operators flying drones have considered whether their business liability policy would cover their "assets" in the event of an unfortunate mishap? Most policies have clauses with various exclusions if proper safety practices aren't followed.

One thing that made me laugh, another video blog mentioned a drone manufacturer insuring the drones they sell. When I read further, they'll replace the drone if it gets damaged. There's no coverage whatsoever regarding liability of the owner.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Mike Watson

This is on an item that shines literally a pinpoint of light and shuts off completely and immediately the instant you stop pressing the button.

No. A pinpoint of light is not what such a laser looks like from a position just off the beam - it has the appearance of a line, and it points back exactly to where it's coming from. Take a photograph or video, and even if it gets turned off quickly, there's then evidence to trace exactly where it's coming from. Try looking at this clip :

Green laser pointer shone at police helicopter - YouTube

In that case, the problem was one person amidst a large crowd, and not enough police on the ground. But do it from a garden or balcony and it's relatively easy to direct police to a specific address. Which I believe is how the arrest was made in the example I linked earlier. (And others.)

Originally Posted by Mike Watson

Compared to a drone, a 1.5ft wide object that has to fly from the point of the "near miss" directly back to it's operator. Seems like it would be easier to chase the drone, yes?

If a police helicopter happened to be in the vicinity of the near miss at the time, and they were altered about it immediately, then yes, maybe. But that's pretty unlikely, isn't it?

It also assumes the drone is actually under control, and a lot of assumptions are that the violations are deliberate. Maybe, but maybe also some near misses may result from a loss of control? In which case chasing the drone wouldn't lead back to the owner anyway.

[Bill Sherren]

Latest reports suggest it might have been a plastic bag! I think we will see a crack down on plastic bags quite soon!

Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Bill Sherren

Latest reports suggest it might have been a plastic bag!

A plastic bag at 1,700 feet? Hmm, a bit unlikely that? It hasn't even been very windy in London for the past week or so.

[Gary Huff]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

You mean like this little birdy that flew into the jet engine? Looks like the size of a drone to me.

Always helps to check what the actual story is instead of simply a YouTube video title.

Originally Posted by http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/manchester/6606375.stm

The aircraft's engines are designed to cope with bird strikes but because this case involved two very large birds being sucked in at once there were problems.

A rather special case.

But clearly, people are dying and drone manufacture and sales needs to be banned altogether. Is it really worth the cost of a single life just to have an aerial shot? That's a first world luxury, not a necessity.

[Mike Watson]

Originally Posted by Bill Sherren

Latest reports suggest it might have been a plastic bag! I think we will see a crack down on plastic bags quite soon!

Drone believed to have hit British Airways flight 'may have been a plastic bag'

This is clearly impossible. The pilot saw that it was a drone, and the pilot must never be questioned.