The Australian newspaper is carrying this story this morning.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/passenger-pilot-d...
Seems strange that this is the first mention in main-stream media of
an incident alleged to have occurred on March 19th 2014.
Plus altitude is mentioned as 3700ft yet Australia has been metric since 1988.
Can anyone confirm the authenticity of the report?
Comments
Whether it is a Multi-rotor or Fixed Wing is beside the point. The fact is that it is completely possible to fly an unmanned remotely controlled aircraft into the path of full sized commercial and private airplanes. The responsibility must lie with us as RPAS/UAV pilots and operators to keep out of the way. We owe it to ourselves if we want to keep being able to fly.
There are plenty of restrictions and rules that apply to commercial and private airplanes that exist to make it safe for them (and us to fly). If you doubt that an RC model can get up to 3700ft then just do a quick search for 'Above the clouds FPV'.
When we fly we are sharing the airspace with all other types of aircraft and must follow the same rules that enable flying of any kind to be safe. As a very bad analogy (I am sure that you guys will find a million holes but in general terms it fits), I could ride my electric powered, ungoverned bike at up to 80kmh completely unlicensed and unaware of any road rules or vehicles around me. I could choose to ride randomly across a freeway or just tool around in circles crossing traffic and having fun. Sounds like great fun. However, in order to survive and not cause accidents which could harm others, I restrict myself to following the road rules and being aware of other road users. If I want to ride freely I go somewhere where I know for a fact that there are no cars or trucks.
Flying RPAS/UAV is very similar. Commercial planes follow strict traffic lanes and altitudes and are all aware of each other, especially in controlled airspace. Private pilots are well aware of these aerial traffic lanes and how to fly safely around them and other planes. There are rules that allow them to fly in the same airspace safely such as track heights when flying in one direction or another. As RPAS pilots we have the same obligation when sharing airspace. It is not hard to stay away from controlled airspace and airports and it does not diminish the fun and enjoyment flying RC models. In fact it enhances it.
Knowing where and when to fly means that if you do decide to fly above 400ft then you can make an informed decision about whether or not it is likely to cause a major accident such as flying in a busy approach lane to a major airport or more commonly in the path of helicopters and low flying small planes. Then decide if you can take the risk.
For example, while I would love to fly all over and around Sydney Harbour, a little research shows that there are multiple transit and flight lanes that operate from sea level through to 1500 Ft, with special access for things such as seaplanes. in some areas around the harbour planes must fly at 500ft. This is all very low and completely in range of RC aircraft. I know if I stay over land and below tree tops then I am very unlikely to cause an issue. However, if I go over water and above 500ft west of the Harbour Bridge, I will be in the path of much faster and heavier aircraft with potentially fatal consequences.
I am not saying don't fly but try to do it safely and dont just say things like 'I can fly anywhere at any height' when some joker does manage to get into the flight path of a plane and cause an accident we will all be worse off. At a very minimum we should acknowledge that this story is possible and make sure that it is not one of us mentioned in the next near miss. Whether this particular story is true or not is besides the point. The more we can show ourselves to be responsible and safe users if shared airspace the better off we will be.
Even if it was not a UAV it just shows that we need to do more so that pilots and authorities don't use us as their replacement for unknown aircraft. If they can learn to trust that it is very unlikely for a UAV to be in the path of fulltime aircraft then we are heading in the right direction, the only way for that to happen is for us to be responsible and to some extent accountable for our actions.
Or the greys have effectively probed the pilots (ouch that must hurt) and they reflashed their memory with drone images.
Oh where did I put my tinfoil hat?
"CAA authorities around the globe have launch a small propaganda project against small UAS. Notice ALL the other events mentioned at the same time...and they worry about a quadcopter!!!"
yeah i think thats on the money -
I do not believe this story to be true, VERY FEW multi rotor pilots ever fly at that altitude...You ever dumped a multi rotor from 1200ft, if it's not a y6 - hexacopter or octocopter that puppy is gonna sail away and nobody flies quads at the height unless they lost control and then it will not stay in the air long. I think this was possibly something else and I am also aware that CAA authorities around the globe have launch a small propaganda project against small UAS. Notice ALL the other events mentioned at the same time...and they worry about a quadcopter!!!
It was a laser pointer. Far easier to believe and it doesnt require miracle batteries for multirotors or incredible night flying by a plane with fpv.
@Damien
Whats easier to believe the pilot saw a drone coming straight at him faster than the chopper could move or he misidentified something and just called it a drone.
But 3,700ft? Wow, that's high. Beyond the "safely up and down" height most multirotors can achieve on a battery.
An link to the possibility it was a miltary drone? Afterall, I think the military are sanction to 3,600ft in that area.
Who flies a "drone" at 3,700ft? Who uses a "bright strobe"?
Grey cylinders and camo jets. You couldn't made this stuff up. Oh wait, yes you could.
Thanks everyone, I appreciate the responses : )
interesting that altitude is in feet for historical reasons and
position is metric - derived from universal transverse mercator i guess?
I’m an artist and academic who wants to use uav’s in support of creative
open-source mapping. I have skills that include photography, electronics and some coding
and i’ve just finished my first build which is based on an F450 frame
so I’m near the beginning of the learning curve in this d-i-y drone community
what caught my attention about the news article was the not the content of the report
(and thanks guys for the links ), so much as the question of why is this news worthy now -
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next