We knew it would happen...now it has

[macoman]

In another report, it says that DJI is a party in the investigation.

Which is awesome and that's good publicity for them so the public and government can see that DJI is not just a manufacturer that wants to make money only. They are willing to do the right thing.

 

[sar104]

Not all car crashes are fatal, but some are.

As an (inactive) PPL holder I never want(ed) to contact any object while in flight.

Your hyperbole with regards to the outcome of a collision make you seem just as sensationalistic.

Agreed. This incident occurred with a structurally well-protected military helicopter, and still caused significant damage. Collisions between UAVs and other aircraft are never going to be viewed, by the public, the FAA or the NTSB, as tolerable at all, and every time that the UAV community looks like it is trying to minimize the seriousness it risks hastening further and more stringent regulation, especially in regards to hobby operations. Even just trying to argue that news reporting overplays the hazards looks exactly like that, and as a community of operators we need to be fully and clearly on board with the philosophy that all collisions in the NAS are unacceptable.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Just getting back to this...

ALL manned aircraft be 1500 feet or higher unless landing or taking off.

Just to satisfy your hobby? FAR 91.119 spells it out completely. If you think aircraft are being operate too low in your vicinity, there are avenues to report the occurrence, even if its a military aircraft.

 

[BigAl07]

Guess what else can be put to rest?!

The sensationalistic media reports that almost ANY contact between a Phantom and a manned aircraft of any kind will most certainly result in the immediate and complete catastrophic destruction of said manned aircraft.

I don’t mean to diminish the seriousness of any contact between the two, but I think it’s now safe to say that Prince Harry wasn’t likely to go down in a ball of flames...

So because a Phantom4 didn't cause a UH-60 Black Hawk to come crashing down in a ball of fire then everything other UAS to Manned Aviation should be the same? Do you even realize how tough and robust the UH-60 is? It's designed to operate in a very HOSTILE environment in some Worse Case scenarios. Not exactly what we can say for ANY aircraft in General Aviation.

With all due respect, I think our community is actually VERY lucky this operator hit a UH-60 because if it did that much damage to their blade imagine exactly what it "COULD" do to a tail rotor on a "Normal" helicopter.

As a group we need to get or heads out of the sand and be realistic on what COULD happen and do everything in our power to keep it from happening before knee-jerk reactions bring about over reaching (end enforceable) regulations.

 

[jwmcgrath]

So because a Phantom4 didn't cause a UH-60 Black Hawk to come crashing down in a ball of fire then everything other UAS to Manned Aviation should be the same? Do you even realize how tough and robust the UH-60 is? It's designed to operate in a very HOSTILE environment in some Worse Case scenarios. Not exactly what we can say for ANY aircraft in General Aviation.

With all due respect, I think our community is actually VERY lucky this operator hit a UH-60 because if it did that much damage to their blade imagine exactly what it "COULD" do to a tail rotor on a "Normal" helicopter.

As a group we need to get or heads out of the sand and be realistic on what COULD happen and do everything in our power to keep it from happening before knee-jerk reactions bring about over reaching (end enforceable) regulations.

Um... oops. Didn’t mean to trivialize ANYTHING. I was specifically poking at an individual reporting “style” that we’ve seen too many times but it’s hard to convey tone, context and reference in a post.

And yes, I do know how tough they are... learned that close up while being shuttled from Kandahar to Kabul and back with utter respect and admiration for every person and gear in involved in the process.

Can we have a do-over on that last post?

 

[BigAl07]

Um... oops. Didn’t mean to trivialize ANYTHING. I was specifically poking at an individual reporting “style” that we’ve seen too many times but it’s hard to convey tone, context and reference in a post.

And yes, I do know how tough they are... learned that close up while being shuttled from Kandahar to Kabul and back with utter respect and admiration for every person and gear in involved in the process.

Can we have a do-over on that last post?

I gotta admit your last comment made my day.

It's all good. It's hard to read and get the real "feel" for what someone means from simple typed text. I'm probably as much fault on that as anyone else.

 

[Higherperspectivect]

I've seen a few people say this isn't true etc. But just so everyone knows it's 100% true. My brother is in the national guard and he works in Groton CT. At the Avcrad as a helicopter electrician. His shop is where military choppers go that need repair. Whether they be active service damage or training or even just maintenance. I got to see this hawk first hand and its very real. And also a bit of fruit for thought a black hawk prop, assembled, balanced, installed etc is about $140,000 each! And I honestly forgot what he told me the repairs for the window and door was but it was a high number in total.

 

[jwmcgrath]

I gotta admit your last comment made my day.

It's all good. It's hard to read and get the real "feel" for what someone means from simple typed text. I'm probably as much fault on that as anyone else.

It IS all good for sure Al.

 

[N017RW]

Yup...
The cost of post-collision aircraft inspection, repair, certification, etc., would likely pose a serious financial burden to any Drone operator when cited for such.

 

[sar104]

Yup...
The cost of post-collision aircraft inspection, repair, certification, etc., would likely pose a serious financial burden to any Drone operator when cited for such.

That raises an interesting question - if the operator of that P4 is found to be at fault (almost certainly) then is it possible/likely that they will go after him/her for the costs?

 

[N017RW]

I am not in any way qualified to make a legally-trained opinion.

Having said that... They'd better!

As a taxpayer I certainly expect them to if the heli pilot is not in any way negligent.

I can't imagine being culpable for damages to U.S. State or Federal Govt. property and not be pursued for the costs of returning the equipment to service.

Not to mention the personal legal costs 'working' this through the system.

 

[Higherperspectivect]

That raises an interesting question - if the operator of that P4 is found to be at fault (almost certainly) then is it possible/likely that they will go after him/her for the costs?

I'm also in no way a lawyer... but I'd think they wouldn't make them responsible for the actual cost as they would probally tax them with a hefty fine... but I'd like to see them charge the full amount

 

[N017RW]

Why would you not expect the Govt.to pursue full compensation?

Have you ever been found at fault of an automobile accident?
Hope not, but there's no difference if you're at fault other than, in the USA, your required to carry minimum proper insurance when operating an automobile to help shield from some possible legal judgments.

Each case is different but judgment may also include detention. (Jail, Prison, etc.)

 

[Higherperspectivect]

Why would you not expect the Govt.to pursue full compensation?

Have you ever been found at fault of an automobile accident?
Hope not, but there's no difference if you're at fault other than, in the USA, your required to carry minimum proper insurance when operating an automobile to help shield from some possible legal judgments.

Each case is different but judgment may also include detention. (Jail, Prison, etc.)

Idk... its just i heard the cost of just the parts and I can't imagine they'd hit someone with that. It would just end up being jail time. And military is very different then civilian insurance and accidents.

I could be a million % wrong I just wouldn't think he'd end up in court against the us military. I'd think the faa would instead levy a very large fine on him or something.

Again I'm basing that on what makes more sense in my head...0 factual knowledge about it.

 

[N017RW]

I'm too lazy to Google this now but there are CFRs regarding the causing of damage to Govt. property, State, Federal, Military or otherwise

 

[Drone Dude CT]

Can I fly my drone in Central Park??

I was reading the article and it says illegal to fly in big apple except in parks???

Is this true??

TY

[emoji41]

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I think our community is actually VERY lucky this operator hit a UH-60 because if it did that much damage to their blade imagine exactly what it "COULD" do to a tail rotor on a "Normal" helicopter.

Several years ago I worked at an aeromedical operation maintaining an A Star (AS 350). A tinker-toy helicopter, although very fast for it size and easy to maintain, it was basically plastic. A collision with any type of drone would be a disaster, especially a tail rotor strike. Because they have a plastic fuel tank, they also tend to burn real easy!

I believe many folks who have what I call "drone altitude envy" also don't know how to determine aircraft height above the ground. Many a time we had complaints about our helicopter operating "too low" when in fact they were under ATC control and were at 500' in an established low-level corridor, and we had the tapes to prove it. I see that on here with some of the comments about "low flying aircraft." Some of you folks who just got their aviation training from the bottom of a Phantom box better start to understand that your hobby has to conform with the national airspace system that (in it's present form) been around for 50 years plus, not the other way around.

As been said many times before on this forum, keep bitchin and whining about having to yield to manned aircraft (as well as committing airspace violations like this), and there will come a day when you'll have the opportunity to be put on a level playing field by having ALL drone operators, hobbyists or not LICENSED!

(stepping off the soap box)

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Can I fly my drone in Central Park??

I was reading the article and it says illegal to fly in big apple except in parks???

Is this true??

TY

[emoji41]

 

[Higherperspectivect]

I'm too lazy to Google this now but there are CFRs regarding the causing of damage to Govt. property, State, Federal, Military or otherwise

Well you already know more then me about this lol. I'd love to learn more. If you end up googling pls do share!

 

[Higherperspectivect]

Can I fly my drone in Central Park??

I was reading the article and it says illegal to fly in big apple except in parks???

Is this true??

TY

[emoji41]

where are you in CT? I'm also from CT