Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What May Be U.S.’s First Drone-Linked Aircraft Crash Is Being Investigated

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 73 posts

Re: What May Be U.S.’s First Drone-Linked Aircraft Crash Is Being Investigated

#11

Post by huffpopo »

mpetrovich wrote: post #5

I wonder why the pilot didn’t attempt to go straight up.

Helicopters are slow, and they probably didn't have the rotor speed needed to yank the collective.

Hitting a 2kg drone would result in expensive repairs, e.g. $30K for replacement rotor blades and you still might crash.

I probably would have taken the hit but I'm much better off than the average R22 pilot who often operate or razor thin margins.

That said; my bet is that there was no drone. My guess is the student made a small mistake, the teacher took over and made a bigger mistake, and both want to keep their jobs/future carers. Drones make an easy target to lie about and are hated anyway. Not to say there are no irresponsible drone pilots, just currently I think it's more likely heli-pilot error at this stage. My hope is the GPS tracking in the phantom well let us know for sure.

Re: What May Be U.S.’s First Drone-Linked Aircraft Crash Is Being Investigated

#13

Post by chapium »

bri3d wrote: post #9
taneq wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or just realise that a 1.9kg toy should be ignored rather than evaded. What happens if a goose or swan or pelican flies near a helicopter?

This feels like a "I flipped my car dodging a squirrel" situation to me, as well, although the FAA models do support the potential of 1.9kg toys to cause fairly substantial damage. I think that given all documented collisions mentioned in the article resulted in zero-to-minor damage to the larger vehicle, drones are probably best ignored as well, but to make such a sweeping generalization in something as safety-criti…

More accurately, an rc car, not a squirrel. Squirrels are part of nature, but an rc car on a highway is an act of negligence.

Re: What May Be U.S.’s First Drone-Linked Aircraft Crash Is Being Investigated

#14

Post by wavefunction »

bri3d wrote: post #7
woofyman wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Flight instructor saw a drone during low-altitude hovering exercises with a student, panicked, tried to land, and hit a bush The pilot didn’t panic. The drone was directly in front of the helicopter.

I was making an unfair inference about the pilot's mental state, so I removed it. With that being said I still strongly question the relation of the drone to the crash physically and believe the effect of the drone on the pilot's decision-making is the interesting part of this story. Landing as an evasive maneuver doesn't make a lot of sense to me and the actual cause of the crash seems to be a situational awareness…

The fact is that the operation of drones is legally prohibited in certain ways to avoid any chance of drones and aircraft intercepting each other in flight.

Whoever the operator of the drone is, they are wholly responsible for illegal operation of their drone and the results thereafter.

Re: What May Be U.S.’s First Drone-Linked Aircraft Crash Is Being Investigated

#16

Post by thaumaturgy »

bri3d wrote: post #7
woofyman wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Flight instructor saw a drone during low-altitude hovering exercises with a student, panicked, tried to land, and hit a bush The pilot didn’t panic. The drone was directly in front of the helicopter.

I was making an unfair inference about the pilot's mental state, so I removed it. With that being said I still strongly question the relation of the drone to the crash physically and believe the effect of the drone on the pilot's decision-making is the interesting part of this story. Landing as an evasive maneuver doesn't make a lot of sense to me and the actual cause of the crash seems to be a situational awareness…

I wish people wouldn't armchair-quarterback people in situations that are (likely) completely outside of their experience.

I've gone through some helicopter safety training for SAR, and been picked up and dropped off by a UH-60. The pilots spend a lot of time briefing us on all of the things they are nervous about, and there are a lot of things that they're nervous about. All of our gear has to be tight and secure. Don't have our trekking poles on our backs (common). Some of it is about passenger safety -- where and how to approach depending on the situation -- and some of it is about the safety of the craft.

When doing a hoist by air, there are a lot of things that can go wrong and many of them will be fatal for the helicopter. We have a tag line that is used to stabilize a litter as it's being lifted, because rotor wash makes the litter spin dizzyingly (and here's what that looks like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msw31_dw7hE), and occasionally the tag line or something else will get loose and end up in one of the rotors and then a lot of people have a really bad day (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyuQ-XG7LbY -- the pilot here is a total badass).

The areas around, under, and above the main rotor are completely unpredictable and if the drone ends up in that and gets bounced into the fragile tail rotor, it could kill the pilot and student. The pilot knows nothing about the skill or knowledge of the drone operator; putting the helicopter on the ground is safe and prudent in that situation.

Re: What May Be U.S.’s First Drone-Linked Aircraft Crash Is Being Investigated

#17

Post by cmurf »

GiorgioG wrote: post #12

They were flying in a remote area, low to the ground. If it wasn't by an airport and below 400 feet, I'm not sure there was any wrong-doing on the drone's part. Sometimes they're called 'accidents' aka s * happens.

That's deeply ignorant. Instead of speculating and arriving at the ridiculous idea that the only regulation is staying below 400 feet and away from airports and then anything goes, how about finding the regulation?

§107.23 Hazardous operation. No person may: (a) Operate a small unmanned aircraft system in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another;

§107.37 Operation near aircraft; right-of-way rules. (a) Each small unmanned aircraft must yield the right of way to all aircraft, airborne vehicles, and launch and reentry vehicles. Yielding the right of way means that the small unmanned aircraft must give way to the aircraft or vehicle and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless well clear. (b) No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft so close to another aircraft as to create a collision hazard.

I mean come on. If there is an accident someone made a mistake. And if the regulations don't make clear who did what wrong, then the regulations have a mistake in them and need to be extended or clarified.

Re: What May Be U.S.’s First Drone-Linked Aircraft Crash Is Being Investigated

#18

Post by trevyn »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #16
bri3d wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was making an unfair inference about the pilot's mental state, so I removed it. With that being said I still strongly question the relation of the drone to the crash physically and believe the effect of the drone on the pilot's decision-making is the interesting part of this story. Landing as an evasive maneuver doesn't make a lot of sense to me and the actual cause of the crash seems to be a situational awareness…

I wish people wouldn't armchair-quarterback people in situations that are (likely) completely outside of their experience. I've gone through some helicopter safety training for SAR, and been picked up and dropped off by a UH-60. The pilots spend a lot of time briefing us on all of the things they are nervous about, and there are a lot of things that they're nervous about. All of our gear has to be tight and secure. D…

>I wish people wouldn't armchair-quarterback people in situations that are (likely) completely outside of their experience.

I have flown a helicopter on numerous occasions. One does not want to be surprised by things while doing that.

Could an experienced pilot keep his cool in this situation? Of course. Is the pilot’s brain a huge factor here? Absofuckinglutely.

But yes, if you’re just doing hovering exercises, there’s absolutely no reason not to just put it down if you see something unsafe nearby — you’re usually only ~10ft above the ground anyway.

Re: What May Be U.S.’s First Drone-Linked Aircraft Crash Is Being Investigated

#19

Post by kelchm »

cmurf wrote: post #17
GiorgioG wrote: post #12

They were flying in a remote area, low to the ground. If it wasn't by an airport and below 400 feet, I'm not sure there was any wrong-doing on the drone's part. Sometimes they're called 'accidents' aka s * happens.

That's deeply ignorant. Instead of speculating and arriving at the ridiculous idea that the only regulation is staying below 400 feet and away from airports and then anything goes, how about finding the regulation? §107.23 Hazardous operation. No person may: (a) Operate a small unmanned aircraft system in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another; §107.37 Operation near aircraft;…

> staying below 400 feet

As someone that has spent a lot of time flying model sailplanes, I want to point out that there is no regulation which prevents a hobbyist from flying above 400ft AGL, as long as you abide by the guidelines established by the AMA or another "nationwide community-based organization".

The FAA boils everything from section 336 (the "Special Rule for Model Aircraft") as follows:

- Fly for hobby or recreation ONLY

- Register your model aircraft

- Follow community-based safety guidelines and fly within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization Fly a model aircraft under 55 lbs. unless certified by a community-based organization

- Fly within visual line-of-sight

- Never fly near other aircraft

- Notify the airport and air traffic control tower prior to flying within 5 miles of an airport

- Never fly near emergency response efforts

Re: What May Be U.S.’s First Drone-Linked Aircraft Crash Is Being Investigated

#20

Post by GiorgioG »

cmurf wrote: post #17
GiorgioG wrote: post #12

They were flying in a remote area, low to the ground. If it wasn't by an airport and below 400 feet, I'm not sure there was any wrong-doing on the drone's part. Sometimes they're called 'accidents' aka s * happens.

That's deeply ignorant. Instead of speculating and arriving at the ridiculous idea that the only regulation is staying below 400 feet and away from airports and then anything goes, how about finding the regulation? §107.23 Hazardous operation. No person may: (a) Operate a small unmanned aircraft system in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another; §107.37 Operation near aircraft;…

> If there is an accident someone made a mistake.

Yep the instructor smacked the chopper into a bush/tree/etc. The drone didn’t cause the crash, the instructor’s reaction caused it. We don’t know enough about what happened to know how far away and what actions the drone took which caused the instructor to panic (and overreact?)

Post reply on HN