Drones delay Firefighter response in CA fire

[Tim Ribich]

In the US, as I expect most participating in this thread already know:

>>
In the United States, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has the sole authority to control all public airspace, exclusively determining the rules and requirements for its use.<<

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_rights

[Mark Williams]

I recommend flying at model plane club fields or your own property if you own some acreage. Otherwise you are probably a nuisance.

[Greg Boston]

"There's an area not too far from where the fire started that's a pretty popular area for folks to come out and essentially play with their drones," Beyer said.

A crewmember in one of the firefighting planes noticed the drones and alerted ground crews, who tracked down the drone operators and forced them down.

"As soon as we see drones, we shut down all of our aircraft for the safety reasons," Beyer said. "If a drone got sucked into a wing or a propeller, that could have some serious impacts."

No arrests were made as it is only illegal to intentionally hinder firefighters or rescuers.

Gives me the impression that the operators weren't intentionally interfering.

[Dave Blackhurst]

"intent" could easily be inferred from being in an area where there was an emergency situation and shooting video... that argument doesn't hold water. "I was looking in the cookie jar for some loose change I misplaced"... NO, you were flying and shooting hoping for some YT hits, and maybe a media sale/notoriety, you caused potentially life and property threatening/damaging delays... a first year law student could win this one.

And particularly in the case of the North fire, there is NOTHING in that area, period - no where to fly drones, pull off the freeway for a couple miles in either direction (thus the particularly dangerous situation for vehicles)... NOTHING. And as the rapid fire spread illustrated, it is a VERY dangerous wind area that can act like a blowtorch under the "wrong" conditions... even point blank water drops were missing the mark due to the conditions!

I call BS on any drone pilot who tried to claim innocence while flying anywhere near that fire.

It's 100% understandable that safety comes first for the firefighters, unless you're more interested in scoring some "hot" footage over the safety of others - just 'cause the paparazzi have an air force now doesn't make bad behavior any more acceptable...

Let's put one of those "hobby drones" between a life flight heli and one of your loved ones in need of immediate evac... or a fire bearing down on your neighborhood... I'll bet you'll want some "regulation" enforcement too...

[Chuck Spaulding]

What amazes me, not sure if this has been mentioned or not but everyone seems to take it as fact that five, or any drones impeded the fire fighters in any way. Just because some reporter puts it in a newspaper article everyone jumps to the conclusion that it must have happened.

Maybe it did? I don't know, I wasn't there. But I did watch quite a bit of the live news footage during which there wasn't a single mention of a drone. I've traveled that pass often, its in the middle of no where, cars were stopped, and burned on the freeway so even if someone saw the smoke or the report on the news it would take hours, if at all possible to get the the scene.

This is way beyond the range of most, if not all, multirotors and I guess there's the possibility that some trapped in their cars might have had a drone with them. Probably not five. Of coarse if they did then they would be smart to launch their drones and figure a way out of their situation.

Like I said, after watching hours of live TV coverage from at least four media helicopters I did not see or hear of a drone in the area. Even if there was a drone in the area that doesn't prevent the fire department from doing their job either.

People need to get a grip and start to question a lot of this type of sensationalistic reporting. I also doubt that most of the people complaining about this have ever flown a drone, a helicopter or a plane.

[Greg Boston]

Originally Posted by Chuck Spaulding

What amazes me, not sure if this has been mentioned or not but everyone seems to take it as fact that five, or any drones impeded the fire fighters in any way. Just because some reporter puts it in a newspaper article everyone jumps to the conclusion that it must have happened.

Exactly. This is what I was more or less referring to in my original post in this thread. I have also recently seen input from someone who knows the RC folks who were the ones instructed to land. I am waiting on his permission to quote his post here on DVInfo because it pretty much corroborates the quote I posted from the ABC News story.

Right now, any negative rumor about 'drones' is guaranteed to get hyped, just as any negative rumor about Apple gets hyped in the financial press. Which is why I call the headline out as click bait in my first post above. From the headline, you'd have thought that there were 5 multirotors just hovering over the fire scene getting their images and causing the manned aircraft to sit on the ground.

-gb-

[Greg Boston]

So I received permission from this person on Facebook to quote here. He is a participant in one of the UAV related groups there.

I happen be very close friends with RC pilots who were flying at Cajon Pass that day. I can also state that they ALL landed immediately after being asked to do so. 2 of them were near the end of an 8-hour flight needed to achieve the highest level in the soaring achievement program of the League of Silent Flight. One of them is also a full scale pilot and long time military program UAV pilot. He is also a well known model maker for the movies and has flown RC planes in numerous Hollywood blockbusters. So these are serious folks who are accomplished RC and full scale pilots and they abandoned their record attempts without question or hesitation. BTW, all the planes they were flying were larger than 4-foot spans and none of them interfered with any fire-fighting activities in the area.- Bill Malvey

Here's the webpage related to the site being referenced in this quote and the news story above...

Cajon Pass Flying Site (ISR) Club Flying Site | Flying SoCal

[Warren Kawamoto]

Originally Posted by Chuck Spaulding

Just because some reporter puts it in a newspaper article everyone jumps to the conclusion that it must have happened.

There are many reports of this, at differing locations, supposedly originated by "US Forest Service" on the front lines. If it didn't happen, why would lawmakers get involved?
Assemblyman Gatto and Senator Gaines Announce Bill to Knock Drones Out Of Fire Zones - Assemblymember Mike Gatto Representing the 43rd California Assembly District

Proposed California law would allow disabling or damaging of drones during fires - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego

[Greg Boston]

Originally Posted by Warren Kawamoto

There are many reports of this, at differing locations, supposedly originated by "US Forest Service" on the front lines. If it didn't happen, why would lawmakers get involved?
Assemblyman Gatto and Senator Gaines Announce Bill to Knock Drones Out Of Fire Zones - Assemblymember Mike Gatto Representing the 43rd California Assembly District

Proposed California law would allow disabling or damaging of drones during fires - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego

This thread refers to a singular incident. Let's keep it that way.

[John Nantz]

I appologize for offending anyone, getting off topic, or anything else.

[Greg Boston]

John, I am a licensed pilot. And we need to stop with the derogatory name calling. I'm going to start deleting and/or editing posts that are rants vs. rational discussion. The Flying Cameras forum is intended to be a discussion of the benefits and capabilities of such cameras. However, it seems that some just want to post threads that are the latest negative media headlines.

Rants, tirades, crusades, politics, religion and other such polarizing subjects are against DVInfo policy.

In reference to your earlier point about dropping a 2 pound rock onto a windshield, of course that will cause damage. I experienced that very thing at 2 am when some kids pushed rocks off a railroad overpass in front of my vehicle.

However, had they been dropping 2 pound chunks of styrofoam, I'm guessing the damage would have been much less severe. It's not the weight so much as how dense the object is. What would happen if I dropped a mattress off a bridge onto my windshield.

I have flown my share of C-172 aircraft and I just don't believe a lightweight plastic UAV is going to destroy that spinning aluminum Hartzell prop.

I for one, would like to see real testing done to determine how such impacts would affect the airworthiness of different classes of aircraft.

[Mike Watson]

Originally Posted by Warren Kawamoto

There are many reports of this, at differing locations, supposedly originated by "US Forest Service" on the front lines. If it didn't happen, why would lawmakers get involved?

Asking why lawmakers get involved in mediaworthy click-bait-y stories is a good question, but sadly unanswerable and having nothing to do with what actually happened that day.

Originally Posted by John Nantz

As for preventing the fire department from doing their job - if there is a drone in the area and they’re using aircaraft, be they tankers, air drops, or spotter planes, they have to shut down the airspace for safety reasons. Drones and planes cannot safely fly in the same airspace.

Originally Posted by John Nantz

Spotter planes are needed to track the progress of the fire and determine if there are any spots where it is jumping to. Reconiscense is needed to insure the safety of personnel on the ground so if the spotter planes can’t fly it impacts the safety of ground crews. If the ground crews have to retreat becasue if insufficient information then obviously the fire can grow which in turn will make matters even worse. And all this as a result of some idiot with a drone.

Spotter aircraft and fire recon is exactly the kind of flight that will be done by quadcopter in 5 years, which is why it's a terrible idea to enact overreaching drone legislation today.

[Brian Drysdale]

Any such drone spotters will be under the control of the forest/fire fighting authorities, these current ones could be positioned anywhere in the flightpath of the manned aircraft.

[Mike Watson]

They won't exist at all if we regulate them out of existence. The innovation is important.

[Brian Drysdale]

I don't think having sensible rules is the same as regulating out of existence, Unfortunately, some users seem to lack sense.

Drone pilots warned after close call with passenger jet - BBC News