Drone, jetliner nearly collided over Florida

The picture above is representative of the R/C remotely piloted model aircraft that was described in other articles concerning the near miss incident.

A Federal Aviation Administration official warned this week about the dangers of even small unmanned aircraft, pointing specifically to a recent close call involving a drone and commercial airliner that could have caused "catastrophic" results.

Then, Williams segued to a pilot's recent report of "a near midair collision" with a drone near the airport in Tallahassee, Florida. He did not specify who the pilot worked for and what she was flying. As to the drone, the pilot said that it appeared to be small, camouflaged, "remotely piloted" and about 2,300 feet up in the air at the time of the incident.

"The pilot said that the UAS was so close to his jet that he was sure he had collided with it," Williams said. "Thankfully, inspection to the airliner after landing found no damage. But this may not always be the case."

Full article and video here: Near Miss

Views: 3513

Comment by Thomas J Coyle III on May 9, 2014 at 4:14pm

Irresponsible hobby sUAS operators like this are going to be the death of the this hobby!!

TCIII ArduRover2 Developer

Comment by Dan Murray on May 9, 2014 at 4:24pm

Scumbag CNN - what a great example of utter s**t journalism. Huge story about one of many talking points, and no mention of any of the more positive points Jim had. In their context you would assume the FAA called a talk to discuss this one incident. Got to love the "breaking news" banner too. Fear-mongering idiots.

Comment by james sowell on May 9, 2014 at 6:03pm
Comment by Brian on May 9, 2014 at 6:09pm

A 3D rendering of a jet nearing hitting a model aircraft. I call a little Bull Shit on this video. Now the real question is who is flying above 400 feet? These people who don't follow simple rules will be the end of all of this.

Comment by Brian on May 9, 2014 at 6:10pm

Nice one James.

Comment by Stephen Gloor on May 9, 2014 at 6:15pm

Seems like a beat up to justify the FAA's continued bizarre behaviour on the subject of drones.  

Why is it a drone now and not a model aircraft?

A jet like this is far more likely to be a runaway model aircraft not a drone. 

Comment by Toby Lankford on May 9, 2014 at 9:29pm

I think that they are making up these stories.  Somehow hobbyists have been able to fly for decades without incident.  The news has not reported any stories like this till after the FAA lost the case and started sending out these BS press releases.

Comment by Oliver on May 9, 2014 at 11:40pm

Right on, Toby: The FAA is desperate to justify their hysterical posturing in the face of exactly zero genuine, verifiable, serious incidents involving any sort of unmanned aircraft.

Today they may also be trying to deflect attention away from the pathetic, ludicrous spectacle a few days ago in which air traffic at LAX and consequently throughout the country was disturbed because the FAA's equipment and procedures were totally flummoxed by the overflight of LAX by a U2 at some 70,000 feet. The systems, it seems, insisted that there were collision issues with aircraft flying 6 or 7 miles below the U2. Now, the FAA has had a bit of time to work this out. Fifty-nine years, to be exact. Yep, and these same people think they're capable of understanding (never mind "regulating") really new and rapidly evolving highly sophisticated airborne technologies? Right.

Here there isn't a shred of actual evidence presented of anything at all having happened, while meanwhile eyeball cockpit reports of everything short of a kitchen sink from Mars magically whizzing around in the "airspace" are common and notoriously unreliable. Human eyes are not designed to judge size, speed or distance of unfamiliar objects more than a few feet away. Personally I was once fooled badly while flying a little Cessna when I changed course to avoid a plane that popped into view and seemed right on top of me - but that turned out to be a C5 Galaxy a long, long way off. Show us radar data or STFU.

Anyway, for the FAA to drag out weak anecdotal crap like this simply points to the reality, which is that unlike what they, and to be candid many of us, expected the earth isn't littered with amputated fingers and noses and smoldering airplane wreckage as a result of Phantoms, Irises, Flamewheels, Flips and the rest paddling around over the treetops. To the contrary, casualty reports of any sort are really rare, and when idiots have been caught doing something stupid, obnoxious or even dangerous they have been dealt with by local cops and civil courts using existing laws, no Feds needed.

Which is not to say that the potential for a serious incident isn't there or should be ignored, but as with so many other things overstating the danger and overreacting to its hypothetical potential does nothing but create disrespect for genuine hazards, and can thus end up being exactly counterproductive, aside in this instance from leaving the US eating dust at the back of the pack of countries with at least semi-functional aviation bureaucracies. .

Comment by Gustav Kuhn on May 9, 2014 at 11:40pm

I suppose it isn't impossible to fit some form of autopilot into that..........

But very unlikely!

Comment by Austin Laws on May 10, 2014 at 12:10am
Wow the CNN reporters are such a bunch of dickheads. Anybody would think he was a terrorist. Don't get me wrong he is a idiot for doing it but Jesus the press in the states are crazy. It will come to a point where we will have to fit transponders to all model aircraft!


You need to be a member of DIY Drones to add comments!

Join DIY Drones

© 2019   Created by Chris Anderson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service