BBC Reports Drone incident

Maybe.

It would be hard to spot a drone when you are at 150kts 6 miles from touchdown and on an ILS ........ :)

I disagree:
Under normal VFR conditions (ie not in cloud) it is pretty easy to spot a 2ft drone at 500-800ft. 150 kts is 250ft/ sec so if you were looking ahead . . . and and drone WAS directly ahead on a collision course then there is lots of time to identify the UFO (2-3 sec) and almost no time to react . . . hence the concern for 250 passengers over Heathrow. If you know anything about drones nowadays, as a pilot, I suspect the realization and identification of the drone's shape, model and manufacturer . . coming right at you . . . would be permanently recorded in the brain in about 250 milliseconds.

It is unlikely that the first MIDAIR COLLISION with a 1-2kg drone will actually bring down a passenger liner . . there will be a few hits pretty soon no doubt . . . on the other hand it could happen with the first hit . . . so why do these drone idiots think the risk is acceptable. If they knew for sure they would kill a 200 people by flying this way would they still fly there for fun?
 
  • Like
Reactions: eaglegoaltender
I disagree:
Under normal VFR conditions (ie not in cloud) it is pretty easy to spot a 2ft drone at 500-800ft. 150 kts is 250ft/ sec so if you were looking ahead . . . and and drone WAS directly ahead on a collision course then there is lots of time to identify the UFO (2-3 sec) and almost no time to react . . . hence the concern for 250 passengers over Heathrow. If you know anything about drones nowadays, as a pilot, I suspect the realization and identification of the drone's shape, model and manufacturer . . coming right at you . . . would be permanently recorded in the brain in about 250 milliseconds.

It is unlikely that the first MIDAIR COLLISION with a 1-2kg drone will actually bring down a passenger liner . . there will be a few hits pretty soon no doubt . . . on the other hand it could happen with the first hit . . . so why do these drone idiots think the risk is acceptable. If they knew for sure they would kill a 200 people by flying this way would they still fly there for fun?


I was being a bit sarcastic there, as a pilot of human carrying aircraft, I am well aware that you can see these things..........I have come across all sorts of things at altitude, including a supermarket carrier bag at 3000'.......:)
 
I was being a bit sarcastic there, as a pilot of human carrying aircraft, I am well aware that you can see these things..........I have come across all sorts of things at altitude, including a supermarket carrier bag at 3000'.......:)

I agree . . too much hype in the news about this and other near miss / evasive maneuvers here in Canada too. Thanks for the feedback. Pilots are entitled to be worried about drones . .but we need more investigation and analysis before the news grabs in there teeth and runs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Philltayl
I agree . . too much hype in the news about this and other near miss / evasive maneuvers here in Canada too. Thanks for the feedback. Pilots are entitled to be worried about drones . .but we need more investigation and analysis before the news grabs in there teeth and runs.
The Airbus A320, which was carrying around 165 passengers as it approached Heathrow Airport on 18 July, was within 66ft (20m) of the device.
The report, based on the pilot's observations, described the incident as a "very near miss".
The plane was at an altitude of 4,900ft (1,494m) when the drone was seen from the right-side flight deck window.
OK .. it happened 4 months ago and that isn't long enough for someone to be slightly skeptical?
It was reported from a plane, therefor it must be a drone.
Because drone/plane interactions make hot news stories and we've heard so many about how many there are it must be true.
Just like the FAA database which has almost daily reports like this.
One of these involves a real drone. Can you pick it?
i-pFJZTtH-X2.jpg
 
It's not just at 10,000ft . . that's about the limit for a 20 min flight anyway . . the problem is widespread and REAL.
Here are some Canadian official reports from the HUNDREDS of actual sighting of things that were not balloons and not birds. There are at least 400 of these so far in 2016 . . in Canada alone. "no impact on operations" is misleading. It just means they did not have time or need to dodge one . . it is effecting operations everywhere.

2016P1842 2016-10-12 17:08 Day-time Incident 10 NM E VANCOUVER INTL BC (CYVR) British Columbia 2016-10-13 - A WestJet Boeing 737-7CT (C-FWSY/WJA112) from Vancouver, BC (CYVR) to Calgary, AB (CYYC) departed CYVR and encountered an unmanned air vehicle (UAV) at 9000 feet when approximately 10 NM East of CYVR (N490828 W1225400). The pilot described the UAV as large and of black colour. The UAV was off the left wing and 200 feet below WJA112. No impact to operations. Police were advised and dispatched.




2016P1827 2016-10-11 22:34 Day-time Incident 4 NW VANCOUVER INTL BC (CYVR) British Columbia 2016-10-12 - An Air Canada Airbus A320-211 (C-FFWJ/ACA252) from Vancouver, BC (CYVR) to Edmonton, AB (CYEG) reported passing an unmanned air vehicle (UAV), or similar object, yellow/black climbing through 7000 ft. No impact to operations.




2016P1728 2016-09-22 22:30 Day-time Incident VANCOUVER HARBOUR BC (Water) (CYHC) British Columbia 2016-09-23 - An unmanned air vehicle (UAV) was reported approximately 1 KM West of Jericho Beach at approximately 1000 Feet AGL Westbound.




2016P1714 2016-09-21 23:00 Day-time Incident 7NM SSE VANCOUVER / BOUNDARY BAY BC (CZBB) British Columbia 2016-09-22 - A WestJet Boeing 737-8CT (C-GVWA/WJA1789) from Las Vegas, NV (KLAS) to Vancouver, BC (CYVR) on approach to CYVR was at 7000 feet and 7NM SSE of Boundary Bay, BC (CZBB), over the water, when it had a close encounter with a unmanned air vehicle (UAV). No impact on operations and WJA1789 landed safely. Police were alerted.




2016P1663 2016-09-09 19:05 Day-time Incident VICTORIA HARBOUR BC (Water) (CYWH) British Columbia 2016-09-13 - An unauthorized unmanned air vehicle (UAV) quad copter, white in colour, was spotted over the Alfa/Bravo Intersection at Victoria Harbour, BC (CYWH) operating between ground level and 500? AGL. Transport Canada, the Victoria Police and aircraft operating in the vicinity were advised.




2016P1448 2016-08-20 01:52 Day-time Incident In the vicinity of: 4914N 12255W British Columbia 2016-08-22 - An unmanned air vehicle (UAV) was sighted by two aircraft, a Jazz de Havilland DHC-3-311 (C-FADF / JZA8231) from Prince Rupert, BC (CYPR) to Vancouver, BC (CYVR) and a Jazz de Havilland DHC-8-402 (C-GGND / JZA8186) from Fort St. John, BC (CYXJ) to CYVR at 4 000 feet on the downwind for Runway 26R. Reported to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP). No other impact on operations.
 
As a pilot, I'd be hard pressed to see such a small object while traveling over 200 MPH. I have difficulty even seeing my drone from the ground when I know where to look. I feel that most of these reports are suspect.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tony Walker
I get upset when I see a small plane flying in my 400' airspace but you never hear complaints about those idiots that are flying their Cessna at 200' or 300'. I think commercial aircraft should be fixed with some type of radar wave that will disable a drone when at that altitude. Might stop the morons from endangering people's lives.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots
 
That's a couple of great ideas... little expensive maybe for airplanes to carry radar power you could control like that but it would be nice alright

How about having drones capable serious.damage have to automatically connect to internet and transmit altitude and gps position... and owners name and address.... to FAA or ATC if they violate civil airspace. There should be an app for that


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ron Davis
As a pilot, I'd be hard pressed to see such a small object while traveling over 200 MPH. I have difficulty even seeing my drone from the ground when I know where to look. I feel that most of these reports are suspect.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots
The thing about looking out the cockpit at 200kts is there is usually nothing there directly in front of you but sky . . so when even the smallest object appears there . . it grabs your attention instantly . . you have no trouble seeing it there. If the shape, color or size is even vaguely familiar it takes your brain less than 200-300msec to process it as a threat or not and will almost as quickly try to match it to a known object . . . bird, plastic bag, balloon, or quadcopter. Even more impressive is, you will retrieve the name of that object (if you have ever seen one or something resembling it) in another 100-200msec. . . . and you blurt out "BIRD!" . . . as your sympathetic nervous system's unconscious response is already trying to make your muscles do things to avoid hitting it . . well before you are even aware you are doing it . . .and before you can make a sound. If the object is not directly head-on, there is more than ample time to acquire and assess it.

Pattern recognition and human reflexes are amazing and the speed of this ability (in almost all animals) is also equally incredible.

I think most drone sightings by pilots are quite credible at any speed.
 
Last edited:
Of course. I'm very quotable.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,355
Members
104,934
Latest member
jody.paugh@fullerandsons.