Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in
  • Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Another drone takes down another helicopter 12

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sparweb

Sparweb

Aerospace
May 21, 2003
5,104
0
36
CA
Not the first time.
In its report, the NTSB noted that it has now completed three investigations where a collision with a drone has been confirmed, and gathered information on two other collisions where the evidence is consistent with a drone strike.

The drone was operating above 400 feet AGL in airspace that did not permit this, and at night when this is not normally permitted either. The type of drone that probably hit the helicopter (based on the damage) is not the kind that would be equipped with proper anti-collision lights that would make night flight possible.

Here is another example, probably not in the NTSB count - although a much more avoidable one that should not have happened.

 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Sort by date Sort by votes
But as the FAA has no traffic system in that airspace there is no way a drone operator can know what traffic is about.

Sub 300ft in a single engine'd helo is well inside the dead man's curve. And operating over high/medium density housing..... so I can't see how they can maintain flight safety even without any drones being up.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Alistair Heaton said:
But as the FAA has no traffic system in that airspace there is no way a drone operator can know what traffic is about.
Click to expand...

That's the crux. Who is responsible for separation? One, the other, or both?

As you point out, the heli is already operating below the dead-man's curve altitude. Helicopters do this ALL THE TIME. It is where the greatest utility of helicopters comes from. My rough estimate is 75% of heli operations happen below 300 feet with eyes on the ground. Given the risk implicit in that operation, would you add drone separation to the heli pilot's duties?

If the drone pilot is to be held responsible for separation, how would they gain the situational awareness to do it? Equip the toy with a transponder and relay TCAS data to their ground video screen? I may already be talking nonsense but from the FAA's point of view, the drone pilots do have to accept responsibility for their entrance into an airspace that is already being used, and that their appearance causes/increases hazards to the people/aircraft already there.

For now, the FAA is going to bat. As it stands, it looks like a no-win situation unless someone can propose a "lateral-thinking" solution. There are special-mission aircraft outfitters already planning offensive weapons to use against drones. Remember the nuisances over Heathrow last year? Using weapons such as these in the civilian realm makes me very uncomfortable, but the current liberty available to drone operators makes me equally uncomfortable. Ultimately, I think this will be decided by the people whose butts are at risk. If a police agency is concerned about the risk, you can be sure they will consider the weapons approach to dealing with it.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
...with time, the problem may only get worse...

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
to start this single engine single crew operation is completely illegal in Europe.

See and avoid is in the remit in class G airspace. VFR at night is country specific.

I might be coming across as a bit hard on the heli pilot but if your in that airspace you have absolutely zero protection your on your own like it or not. Sub 300 feet then you have to take a personal risk assessment on the flight conditions if you are going to be able to self separate from all threats including wires engine failures etc. So to me he shouldn't have been there what ever was going on on the ground. The fact that he hit something means he couldn't self separate.

The FAA is quite frankly screwed with drones in the USA they can't afford the infrastructure to separate traffic, there will be colossal political and legal fall out if they try and restrict peoples right to operate them. Even imposing licensing and hardware requirements is problematic.

I completely agree this is a test no win case. The FAA are more than likely wanting it to fail and won't be the ones pushing for it anyway, then they can say give us more money and then we can do something about it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Concur...

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
At that altitude the chopper pilot is trespassing on private property. LEO or not, he's violating the law stateside and should be held accountable.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
So to me he shouldn't have been there what ever was going on on the ground. The fact that he hit something means he couldn't self separate.
Click to expand...

It was just past midnight; and ALL other manned aircraft, namely any new helos, know to stay out of the way of the police helos, since they specifically monitor the police radios and know what the police are doing at all times. This guy basically did a pop-up in the middle of a police operation; he only HEARD the helo and he did not know where any of the aircraft were, he should not have flown into the police helo flight path.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
IRS: I disagree... the chopper ran into the drone... and the chopper pilot should have been more aware...

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Agree to disagree

Hernandez' craft was the interloper and it was small compared to ALL of the obstacles that the pilot already had to deal with in the dark of night. His drone should not have been there; therefore, it was the cause of the accident.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I can't read the minds of the members posting above, so if this feedback doesn't apply to you specifically, don't take it the wrong way.
If you suddenly realize it does apply to you, just take it as a reminder to think through what you say before posting.

How many of you didn't notice that it was a police helicopter that was struck?
Considering the operating rules that the LAPD pilots follow, I strongly doubt the positions taken above that the police flight crew were being reckless or derelict. Not personally involved in the special equipment is installed on these particular heli's to make night ops and low level flying tolerably safe, but personally involved with similar equipment for similar ops. Night helicopter operations are NOT like airline operations. Some hazards are bigger, some smaller. The threats and reactions are totally different. The energy equations are totally different. If for some reason you have a bone to pick with the cops in helicopters, how about all the other low-level helicopter ops that you DO believe fulfill a good purpose in society and maybe even VITAL?

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
So, if they have an obligation to fly safely below 300' then they really don't... to make matters worse then may have been trying to be undercover and not using their lights or anything to be identified... people have to get out of the idea that police are right, all around.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Seriously? They were responding to an air support request from ground units, so they would have been flying non-stealth and with search light on, and helos are hardly stealthy at 300 ft, particularly when the dope specifically flew his drone to see what all the helicopter commotion was about.

So, if they have an obligation to fly safely below 300' then they really don't
Click to expand...

You keep harping on this with no evidence; they were flying safely and would stayed safe, until some dope stuck a drone in their flight path.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I tend to agree that the police don't automatically have special airspace privilege just by flying, which means they need to ensure they are operating safely just as much as the drone operator has to operate safely. If they were operating below 300' then they need to be held responsible if they fly into something just the same as any other aircraft operator in that air space.

It would seem the key question not yet answered or publicly available is did the drone fly into the helicopter or did the helicopter fly into the drone? Flight path data, if available, should answer this and the at fault operator should be obvious. Considering the arrest, it's possible the FBI have already assessed this and have the data.

I would like to see links to the information backing up the statements that he flew the drone because he heard the helicopter and that he admitted to flying the drone distracted.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
[URL unfurl="true" said:
https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/hollywood-man-arrested-federal-charge-alleging-he-recklessly-operated-drone-crashed-and[/URL]]According to the complaint, Hernandez said he flew his drone “to see what was going on.” As the drone was ascending, Hernandez saw the drone “smacked” by the hovering police helicopter, and it fell to the ground at a nearby residence, the complaint states.
Click to expand...


[URL unfurl="true" said:
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2020/november/23/man-faces-prison-for-allegedly-flying-drone-into-helicopter[/URL]]As the drone was ascending, Hernandez looked down for a couple of seconds at the drone controller, which was attached to his phone. As Hernandez looked up again at his drone, he saw the drone being ‘smacked’ by the helicopter, which was hovering.
Click to expand...

By some accounts, the drone was a Mavic Pro
It's barely 13 inches across, not exactly a large target in the dark, even with running lights

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thank you. It's rather annoying seeing a news article posted and then claims being stated as fact that were not in the new article.

That first story is all over the place. It starts out saying that as the helicopter was coming into the area the pilot saw the drone and tried to avoid it but the collision still happened. And then the story says the drone was smacked by the hovering helicopter as the drone ascended, whatever that means. I simply can't make heads or tails from what happened reading that article.

The second article also appears to claim in a roundabout way that the drone ascended into the hovering helicopter even though the helicopter climbed to avoid it. That makes little sense because you'd have to be a complete idiot to fly a drone straight up into a hovering helicopter without realizing a collision was close to happening. Even if you were alternating between watching the drone and watching the controls, or more likely looking at the camera.

The initial article says he flew the drone when he heard sirens, not when he heard the helicopter. I wouldn't be surprised if he launched the drone before the helicopter got to the area or as the helicopter flew into the area.

Overall, my guess would be the drone was moving vertically upwards as it took off and the helicopter was moving horizontally and possibly downwards towards the scene. Even though the helicopter pilot saw the drone and tried to avoid by climbing, they still collided. Since the drone pilot was between building he might not have been able to see the helicopter coming until it was too late to avoid. He also might have looked down to try and find the helicopter on the camera. Who knows for sure at this point without seeing the evidence, but proving guilt could be difficult.

Of course, it's also possible he clearly and obviously flew the drone straight up into the helicopter for some reason making it a rather simple case to prosecute.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I simply can't make heads or tails from what happened reading that article.
Click to expand...

That's par for the course, even for actual eyewitnesses. All we can be certain is that H. flew his drone upward with no sense of situational awareness and the police helo barely saw the drone, pulled up, collided, but avoided getting collision debris into the engine intake. Relative speeds/positions, etc. are all guesses. Nevertheless, his drone was the interloper; I think prosecution will argue that a 1-ft wide drone is not particularly visible at night and should not have flown without the situational awareness that was needed for safe flight.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
No. The drone was the interloper only if it flew into the area after the helicopter had arrived. Otherwise, the helicopter was the interloper.

Saying he had no sense of situational awareness is just assuming too.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The drone was the interloper only if it flew into the area after the helicopter had arrived.
Click to expand...

Only if it was there long enough for the pilot to detect him and be able to avoid him; it would be no different that if you were driving 15 mph and changed lanes into the path of a car doing 65 mph with no warning or ability for the oncoming car to avoid you. Yes, you were there first, but your movement caused the accident.

And, he admitted to looking down and then looking up and seeing his drone get hit, ergo, no situational awareness.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
LionelHutz said:
The second article also appears to claim in a roundabout way that the drone ascended into the hovering helicopter even though the helicopter climbed to avoid it. That makes little sense because you'd have to be a complete idiot to fly a drone straight up into a hovering helicopter without realizing a collision was close to happening.
Click to expand...
I can't speak for this specific drone model, but many of the drones nowadays have a form of autopilot... you tell it to go to 'X' feet in altitude and it shoots straight up in an attempt to reach it. Same goes for the models who will go to a specific set of GPS coordinates... set it and press the big green 'go' button. Not all drone flight is hands-on the entire time.

Dan - Owner
Footwell%20Animation%20Tiny.gif
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JohnRBaker
  • Locked
  • News
Another bridge collision, just not as catastrophic...
Replies
2
Views
21
Murph 9000
Murph 9000
enginesrus
  • Locked
  • Question
Another big recall 44
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
120
Alistair_Heaton
Alistair_Heaton
TigerGuy
  • Locked
  • Question
Another tower leaning in Italy? 2
Replies
15
Views
49
Red Corona
Red Corona
FacEngrPE
  • Locked
  • Question
Another Bridge The “Mile Long” Bridge in Breckenridge Texas 2
2
Replies
29
Views
81
JStephen
JStephen
TigerGuy
  • Locked
  • Question
Another construction collapse
Replies
3
Views
4
Sym P. le
Sym P. le
Back
Top