Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

Helicopter meet Phantom. Phantom lost

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Brojon, Aug 19, 2018.

  1. sar104

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    4,163
    Likes Received:
    1,898
    Location:
    Los Alamos, NM.
    That was certainly an unlucky collision, but low speed and minimal damage. Good outcome. I guess that makes at least two documented helicopter/UAV collisions.
     
    loonie01 and ianzone like this.
  2. w1r3d

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2018
    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    20
    3 including a close call on Hollywood Beach
     
  3. With The Birds

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    6,900
    Likes Received:
    2,613
    Location:
    Australia
    So that might be at least three then....
     
  4. With The Birds

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2016
    Messages:
    6,900
    Likes Received:
    2,613
    Location:
    Australia
    I can't see it ever being phantom win- only phantom loose or phantom and manned AC loose.... Lets hope its not the 2nd option ever!
     
    Brojon likes this.
  5. Brojon

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2017
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    99
    The thing I hope the authorities take home from this is both parties were operating in a completely legal fashion.
    Folks forget that life isn't predictable and risk mitigation has to allow for that - nothing is served by requiring licensing, draconian restrictions or even outright bans.
     
  6. sar104

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    4,163
    Likes Received:
    1,898
    Location:
    Los Alamos, NM.
    There I would disagree. Flying compliantly makes it less likely that conflicts with air traffic will arise, and regulation, testing and licensing is a proven method to encourage and ensure compliant flying.
     
    Douglas Scott Sr and gfieldsr like this.
  7. lmmavrick

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    120
    great for pilots ,even UAS operators .testing which is needed to get 107 . to heap more rules and regulation and licensing on the all ready adequate part 107 would be beyond insane and would make no difference in potential conflicts . Of course if one wanted to do away with hobby flying of any kind or limit it to RC fields that would be one way to go. people make a bigger deal of drones then need be . like it or not they are either tools or toys depending on how you use them . drone operators [pilot just doens't fit] getting part 107 and sticking to the guidelines is more then enough , as shown by the above story
     
  8. sar104

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    4,163
    Likes Received:
    1,898
    Location:
    Los Alamos, NM.
    I mostly agree, with the caveat that perhaps Part 107 would be better if it included some element of flight testing. I was disagreeing with the statement that "nothing is served by requiring licensing...".
     
    Douglas Scott Sr likes this.
  9. lmmavrick

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    120
    not sure how flight testing would be incorporated into 107 . go up, go down, fly in a circle ? anyone can take a test and pass . look at all the drivers that can't really drive , they all took a driving test . hands 10 and 2 etc . it's not adding more testing that will help but enforcing existing rule and regs . same with illegal immigration . plenty of laws and more laws won't help but enforcing them will
     
    weldor, bsartist and MotorCycle-Man like this.
  10. sar104

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    4,163
    Likes Received:
    1,898
    Location:
    Los Alamos, NM.
    Flight testing is clearly beyond the current scope of the FAA's resources, but it would be nice to ensure that pilots have a basic understanding of the aircraft that they fly. Enforcement is probably also resource limited, but that's not a reason not to have regulations, since most (hopefully) Part 107 pilots will at least attempt to follow them.
     
    BigAl07 likes this.
  11. lmmavrick

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    120
    But we do have regulations , plenty in place to assure a safe environment . The only thing that could change is eliminate hobby operators or require all to go through 107 testing before being able to buy a drone . wouldn't that be great show your license before you could buy a drone . the drone again is no plane /helicopter . it will basically fly it's self and crash easily with operator error . ask me how i know this ! lol even pilots with all the training crash . it happens no way to avoid this 100% . Or they could continue to put limits on drones abilities make it so they can't fly over 400' are set max distance at 1000' or less , are these regulations you would want ?. It's a slippery slope .
     
    Heady440, weldor and rustybucket like this.
  12. sar104

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    4,163
    Likes Received:
    1,898
    Location:
    Los Alamos, NM.
    It's a slippery slope fallacy, not a slippery slope. Regulation of hobby flight is currently negligible. There is no altitude limit, no VLOS requirement, no controlled airspace, and no mechanism to ensure that hobbyists know anything at all about safe flying before they open the box and hit auto-takeoff. That's untenable, long term, with the explosion of use of aircraft that can easily fly miles away and 500 m high.
     
    TheKestrel and BigAl07 like this.
  13. lmmavrick

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2017
    Messages:
    387
    Likes Received:
    120
     
  14. sar104

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    4,163
    Likes Received:
    1,898
    Location:
    Los Alamos, NM.
    There are guidelines for Part 101, and note how much time hobbyists spend on these forums pointing out that they are not law and do not need to be followed. And that's the people who even know the guidelines exist – not the vast numbers of hobbyists who just buy a drone on Amazon and then go out and fly it, blissfully ignorant of laws and guidelines.
     
    TheKestrel and With The Birds like this.
  15. DKG13CC

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2017
    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    113
    Location:
    TX
    All im gonna say is the placement of the impact was absolutely perfect for the helicopter pilots safety. I can think of a million other places it couldve collided with and not had the same results.
     
    BigAl07 likes this.
  16. dangerd

    Joined:
    May 25, 2016
    Messages:
    167
    Likes Received:
    48
    Agreed, even hobby flight should know about airspace and keep within VLOS and under 400AGL. Because of cheap quadcopters that anybody can buy and fly everyone is suffering and I feel most sorry for fixed wing Model Aircraft operators who almost never leave the club field but are probably going to get regulated to death.
    Problem is that unless you require some kind of permit at the point of purchase for hobby quads idiots will continue to screw things up for everyone.
     
  17. Bad Andy

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    107
    Location:
    NYC
    Flight testing could be put in the hands of the AMA, sort of like how the FCC doles out ham radio testing to Volunteer Examiners or how some states use NRA instructors to conduct firearms range testing.

    Just a thought.
     
  18. sar104

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2014
    Messages:
    4,163
    Likes Received:
    1,898
    Location:
    Los Alamos, NM.
    Maybe. But if we are talking about flight testing for Part 107 then it might be a bit incongruous to use a hobby organization to conduct flight testing for non-hobby pilots.
     
  19. Bad Andy

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2017
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    107
    Location:
    NYC
    I don't think it's nearly as incongruous as you think it is.

    For ham radio testing, there are separate tests that a Volunteer Examiner must pass in order to administer exams and the VE can only administer exams up to the level of licensing of the VE (as both a ham operator and VE). The ARRL is the FCC's proxy for most of this.

    Hams are to a great extent hobbyists but many are also professionals. Though I won't go into things like the radiotelephone licenses, etc.

    So back to the proverbial brass tacks, part 107 pilots, ostensibly with additional examiner qualifications from the FAA and its assigned proxy (AMA), could and would administer a Part 107 test.
     
Loading...