# Drone Hits Passenger Jet

#### jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
10,976
It has finally happened: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/0...proach-to-heathrow-airport.html?intcmp=hplnws

That article doesn't give much additional information. What is important is that there is absolutely no excuse for that happening. Unfortunately, the public response probably will be to punish all drone pilots, rather than address the fool(s) who caused this collision.

I am a life-long modeler and have flown "drones" since the 4th grade. There are many others like me. In fact, most of the people in our club have a similar history -- I am just a little older. Please be responsible. Don't be a lone wolf. As part of a group, you can help preserve this wonderful hobby.

John

#### Dr.killjoy

Joined Apr 28, 2013
1,196
Thanks for news..

I while ago I was looking to build a Tri-copter or V-tail copter but I was scared of something like this cause in my locations there are a commercial airport,Fighter airport,several private airports,and Coastguard which patrols the coast..

#### #12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,216
Unfortunately, the public response probably will be to punish all drone pilots,
There was no damage? Quick, make new laws because there are no laws against putting physical things in the way of real aircraft.

What's that? There are laws to address that?
Sorry, I'm stupid. Create some more laws anyway because that will fix my emotional incontinence.

[sarc/off]

#### crutschow

Joined Mar 14, 2008
26,057
As long as you only fly below a couple hundred foot altitude there should be no problem.
It's the idiots that fly there's above that altitude that are cause problems for the rest of us.

Out here they actually had to abort a fire fighting plane drop during a brush fire because one of those idiots was flying his drone at the plane's altitude (I presume to observe the fire with the drone's camera).

#### jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
10,976
There was no damage? Quick, make new laws because there are no laws against putting physical things in the way of real aircraft.

What's that? There are laws to address that?
Sorry, I'm stupid. Create some more laws anyway because that will fix my emotional incontinence.

[sarc/off]
You are absolutely right. The response will be new laws. If you have followed the FAA's involvement in RC aircraft (any RC aircraft is considered a drone in FAA language), there was a effort early on to effectively require flight plans. Fortunately, the American modeler group (AMA) had enough contacts to get that measure rescinded. There is now a distinction between large drones and small drones. Small drone pilots do need to be registered and that registration number must be affixed to the drone.

As for your sarcasm, it is conceivable that a drone hit to an engine could force a shutdown. Of course, takeoff would be a worse time for that to happen, but an engine shutdown in a twin is something you train for and hope it never happens (except in training).

The article doesn't say there was no damage. My reading of it was that after inspection, the aircraft was still considered airworthy. There is a difference.

Unfortunately, there is a good probability that the idiots won't follow the rules and/or enforcement will be intentionally lax until there is a disaster. Then, all drone flight will be highly restricted.

John

#### killivolt

Joined Jan 10, 2010
789
I think maybe it opens up and opportunity for an avid sharp shooter, or have an anti drone defense system. Develop sensing equipment and if the drone is within a certain distance of flight paths that it gets deployed.

kv

#### jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
10,976
I think maybe it opens up and opportunity for an avid sharp shooter, or have an anti drone defense system. Develop sensing equipment and if the drone is within a certain distance of flight paths that it gets deployed.

kv
Just don't mess with kangaroos.

John

#### prof328

Joined Apr 15, 2016
10
I don't believe for an instant that this was by accident, there is a subculture in specific communities within the uk that has fixed extreme anti-western beliefs, there has been several instances of high power hand held lasers being aimed into cockpits of aircraft on landing approach and I think this is just another intentional attempt to cause an "accident".

#### jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
10,976
New update form the US Senate via the AMA:
One of the provisions [still in the bill] would still require hobbyists to who build their own models at home to meet FAA design and production standards.
That refers to the current FAA re-authorization bill before the US Senate.

I do not want to make a political case out of this, but such provisions truly illustrate how ignorant our legislators are of the hobby. I am not a stranger to using sticks and silk or paper to build a model. But how many RC flyers on this forum actually do that for their models?

John

#### #12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,216
It sounds like the Senate is trying to get toys to meet the specs for aircraft. Then they will be able to do some real damage.

#### jpanhalt

Joined Jan 18, 2008
10,976
Yes. And I belong to the majority party; both parties are idiots. Neither has a clue. The FAA has stymied the development of small, general aviation aircraft for more than half a century. Many popular aircraft today were designed in the 1940's and 1950's. The hobby has advanced more in the past 10 years than any of those aircraft have advanced in 60 years. Can you imagine "modern" aircraft engines where the pilot still has to monitor manifold pressure and exhaust gas temperature to get maximum efficiency and power?

As for the legislation, what does built at home mean? What percentage has to be "at home?" Does a garage or shed count? If you buy the landing gear, for $1000, but the rest of the airplane only cost$500, was it "built at home?" That verbiage leaves way too much to the administrator's discretion.

My point simply is to encourage people who are only involved on a personal level to get involved on a wider level or the fools will take this hobby from us.

John