Was it a drone? British airways flight

[SamNetwork]

If our "drones" were called "quadcopters" I'm sure public perception wouldn't be as bad.
If this was a drone involved then they need to find the person and throw the book at him/her with some serious jail time and make an example of him/her with the appropriate publicity.
There needs to be serious consequences for this to make idiots think twice about being so fullish.

That is, IF a drone hit the plane. It could have been a bird.

 

[AUSPETE]

Yeah. Maybe we should refer to Phantoms as quads?

Whenever someone approaches me and talks about my "drone" I tell them that it's a "quadcopter" not a drone. I explain that "drones" are unmanned combat planes. Makes me feel better if nothing else!!!!

 

[Ghost Rider]

I found a number........ 3.65 kg, no mention of temperature.

FYI as a data point...TOGA wont arm unless below a certain altitude, like maybe 2000 ft or maybe 2500 ft. So I guess it depends where Speedbird was located on approach to HTL.
Plates show 2500 ft at 7,5 miles to 27 L

Right. My understanding was he was below 2,000 AGL. I'm talking about 1,000 feet and under really.

 

[Ghost Rider]

That is, IF a drone hit the plane. It could have been a bird.

And if it was a bird, the media won't ever report it. And that doesn't help.

 

[Air Ontario]

I never trust anything the news reports. They have terrible reporting and editor review. Most stories are so ambiguous in their written reporting that you can't determine what actually happened. The grammar printed is pathetic for a journalist.

Always an agenda present and they are super hypocritical.
Pitiful for an agency to promote skewed views upon a object yet they literally clammer for FAA approval to fly drones over crowds themselves.

 

[dewster]

Let's hope it wasn't a drone but surely how much damage can a piece of plastic do compared to a flock of geese bones and all?!


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

I don't think you want to hit anything if you're traveling 500 mph.


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[dewster]

These are probably the same nuts strobing lasers at aircraft in flight. They have lots of money and no sense.



Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Clipper707]

The insanity with the word 'Drone' is 100% the fault of the press. Most citizens don't have a fricken clue what a drone is other than a device to spy and kill.

I disagree. I think the majority of the negative drone connotations are due to idiot drone operators.

When the news reports a British Airways jet hit a drone, I'm pretty sure citizens are picturing a white plastic DJI Phantom, not a USAF MQ-1 Predator. The public knows what drones are.

 

[Phantom fool]

This will likely result in more regulations and laws restricting our use of our phantoms.

Because, you know, criminals pay strict attention to laws and regulations

 

[shipdriver]

These are probably the same nuts strobing lasers at aircraft in flight. They have lots of money and no sense.



Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

Actually, in the 650 latest FAA reports, there was a report of a drone lasing an airliner cockpit. I highly doubt that it was in fact a drone lasing a cockpit, but that is what was reported.

I disagree. I think the majority of the negative drone connotations are due to idiot drone operators.

When the news reports a British Airways jet hit a drone, I'm pretty sure citizens are picturing a white plastic DJI Phantom, not a USAF MQ-1 Predator. The public knows what drones are.

I completely agree. Part of the problem is that drone operators have managed to all turn on each other as easy as kiss my hand. Hobbyists blame "evil" military drones for giving drones a bad reputation and commercial operators blame hooligan hobbyists for ruining drones' reputation and many other hobbyists follow suit. When in fact pilots clearly have difficulty visually identifying anything airborne (a historical problem not just a current one) meaning a lot of these stories are most likely not even drones at all- and yet the media, law enforcement and aviation authorities just believe every word without a second thought. Lack of following up on stories also means that when the truth (or at least contrary evidence) comes out, no one is listening.
For the good news, I don't see "drones in every household" like some predict and they will most likely remain by and large an enthusiast thing, in part because there is now a stigma attached to them and thus I see a future plateau in perceived drone misdeeds. I do see major long-term growth for commercial use however, which may still result in misguided incident reporting on its own.

 

[Shadow 81]

Still makin gthe BBC News this morning - I assume they are searching for the 'drone' in the area where this supposedly happended

 

[Meta4]

I don't think you want to hit anything if you're traveling 500 mph.

No jet is going 500 mph in the altitudes where it will find recreational drones.
Your typical passenger jet accelerates from takeoff as it climbs.
By the time it has gone 20 miles it is just breaking through 10000 feet and doing 325 mph.
In the USA and many other countries a 250-knot speed limit is imposed within the Class B airspace (just like the rest of the country under 10,000 ft0.

 

[Meta4]

Not that I don't agree with the sentiment, a P4 would be titanium vs titanium, maybe do some damage?

The major metal component in the P4 is magnesium, not titanium.

 

[Ambivalent Squirrel]

If our "drones" were called "quadcopters" I'm sure public perception wouldn't be as bad.
If this was a drone involved then they need to find the person and throw the book at him/her with some serious jail time and make an example of him/her with the appropriate publicity.
There needs to be serious consequences for this to make idiots think twice about being so fullish.

agree with this so much. Drones in the public perception are what rains hell on the middle east in trouble hotspots.

I fly a quadcopter safely and legally and take pictures of scenery, yet I'm lumped in with this 'drone' term with all it's negative connotations.

This story will not help the hobby

 

[Stuart Bishop]

I can't see why they aren't publishing that some drones firmware won't allow a drone to even take off in a restricted area, especially Phantom's which see to be the images I've seen associated with this story. This is going to impact on the community though, we live in a society that loves to suck the fun out of life.

Now it's all about when will terrorists use them, like they haven't used cars, motorbikes, perhaps they should all be banned.

I just hope if they find its not a drone they publish it. They may but it won't stop the changes coming. Those no fly zones will just grow ever larger until you can only take off in 1 field somewhere on the moors.

Sad days.

 

[peterepeat69]

Firstly they need to prove it was a drone, did anyone take a photo? Could have been a bird, let's ban all birds, impossible.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Numone]

I just wonder how the pilot would even see a small UAV aircraft whilst travelling at 140kts.
If it was a UAV, I can only imagine it would not have been something like a DJI P, weighing in at 1.3kg, given the fact that the aircraft was checked showed no damage and cleared to make its next trip. I wonder what a DJI motor would do to an aircraft body if it was fired at it at 140kts? (£160mph).
In any event, legislation will result I'm sure, albeit it'll take some time, given the lack of resources in the CAA.

 

[Suntana]

'Drone' hits British Airways plane approaching Heathrow Airport
'Drone' hits British Airways plane approaching Heathrow Airport - BBC News


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Numone]

I can't see why they aren't publishing that some drones firmware won't allow a drone to even take off in a restricted area, especially Phantom's which see to be the images I've seen associated with this story. This is going to impact on the community though, we live in a society that loves to suck the fun out of life.

Now it's all about when will terrorists use them, like they haven't used cars, motorbikes, perhaps they should all be banned.

I just hope if they find its not a drone they publish it. They may but it won't stop the changes coming. Those no fly zones will just grow ever larger until you can only take off in 1 field somewhere on the moors.

Sad days.

The "expert" on BBC Breakfast this morning did state that some manufacturers do have geo-fencing, which won't allow you to fly around airports but "these can easily be be bypassed". Nice one...<sigh> He also mentioned DJI in passing...

 

[4wd]

This incident is exactly why regulation, enforcement and accountability is required.

That's what you're supposed to think but of course anyone who abides by current rules and common sense wouldn't be there either, and rules making it more illegal won't stop anyone intent on trying to cause an incident (or an accidental loss of control)

Until they find bits of drone I'm highly sceptical - furthermore the fact no damage was caused is almost a plus point as 'we' have been saying they do not have much more mass than a modest sized bird which get hit all the time and are very numerous.

Most likely outcome - no debris or evidence will be found but "drone hits airliner" story will be quoted constantly to demand new legislation regardless because more control is always a good thing in the eyes of do-gooders.