Just curious. If we take this tack that "it's idiots with their toys", are we ignoring the possibility that it is extremists with their new weapons? Look at what happened in Brussels with lax security. Do extremists actually have to bring DOWN a plane and kill all aboard to take the focus of the boys and their toys? As for birds. Really????????????? With animals, all you can do is figure out how to adapt. I'm not willing to say "we just have to adapt to irresponsible civilians". You can't jail flocks of birds. But you can pass laws and penalize those who break them.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Drone collides with British Airways A320
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Rick G View PostThe latest thoughts are that it may not have been a drone, but rather a plastic bag carried aloft and floating up in the air.
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2016/04/...cial-says.html
I have an an idea to make skies safer. We register all plastic bags, kites, helium balloons, and other toys with the FAA. Surely that will eliminate all risk.
The he drone threat is overblown.
Comment
-
Originally posted by xspeedy View Post.......
The he drone threat is overblown......If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !
Comment
-
Originally posted by brianw999 View PostAnd you are a stupid individual if you believe that. A drone is quite capable of carrying enough explosives to bring down an aircraft. Fly it into the front of an aircraft on short finals. Result ? Instant devastation of the cockpit resulting in an out of control aircraft coming down on a busy airport with the possibility of involving other aircraft on the ground not to mention all those terminals with people in them.
Comment
-
the context is this: prior to every tom dick and nimrod being able to fly these toys (since the prior gens of RC toys took skill this generation of idiots don't possess) there have been extremely few instances of people flying in the vicinity of airports.
now, since pretty much a 3 y/o can fly a drone, a big chunk of the masses of asses out there think its cool to film aircraft in one of the most sensitives regimes of flight. drones proliferated because of their ability to film and the ease of which they are flown. every knucklehead with a few bucks that saw some video on youtube decided he/she had to have one to make his/her own rad films of nothing.
deniers like you will be eating your words when it happens.
oh, just thought of something! you might just be one of those knuckleheads flying drones...
Comment
-
Originally posted by TeeVee View Postthe context is this: prior to every tom dick and nimrod being able to fly these toys (since the prior gens of RC toys took skill this generation of idiots don't possess) there have been extremely few instances of people flying in the vicinity of airports.
now, since pretty much a 3 y/o can fly a drone, a big chunk of the masses of asses out there think its cool to film aircraft in one of the most sensitives regimes of flight. drones proliferated because of their ability to film and the ease of which they are flown. every knucklehead with a few bucks that saw some video on youtube decided he/she had to have one to make his/her own rad films of nothing.
deniers like you will be eating your words when it happens.
oh, just thought of something! you might just be one of those knuckleheads flying drones...
Yes, I do have a drone - really a remote control aircraft as it doesn't fly itself to a GPS coordinate. It is about six inches long and weighs about the same as a parakeet. Cost me $20 and I fly it in my living room. Does that make me evil? The bottom line is that I don't think a typical hobby drone presents any more risk than a large bird. There are risks out there, and no amount of you bitching about it or FAA regulation is going to put a stop to "asses" flying drones. If a typical plane hits a hobby drone it will amount to a dinged leading edge of a wing, bruised radome, or perhaps a shattered windscreen. Same as a bird strike.
Trying to ban drones altogether is like trying to ban smartphones because some terrorists use them as communications tools. Technology proliferation can't be stopped. And FAA regulations and associated bureaucracy is not going to eliminate baddies.
I'm reminded about all the other media driven fears around flying - personal aircraft (remember PSA and Aeromexico?) or runway incursions. No matter how rare these things are, somehow all of us will die. Never mind how wireless signals from your phone or laptop will send a plane into a death spiral - that is until airlines figured out they can profit from charging for Internet access. Then it was all cool. I'm sure a few years back you were complaining about the evil pax that dared turn on their personal electronics during flight. I see the drone thing as being the current media rubbish that will soon go away.
Comment
-
Originally posted by xspeedy View PostThe bottom line is that I don't think a typical hobby drone presents any more risk than a large bird.
There are risks out there, and no amount of you bitching about it or FAA regulation is going to put a stop to "asses" flying drones. If a typical plane hits a hobby drone it will amount to a dinged leading edge of a wing, bruised radome, or perhaps a shattered windscreen. Same as a bird strike.
Trying to ban drones altogether...
... is like trying to ban smartphones because some terrorists use them as communications tools.
Now, imprison a couple of otherwise law-abiding citizens for knowingly flying a drone in the approach path of an airport and endangering a flight, and you'll see how many law abiding citizens (not terrorist) that would have otherwise considered it will refrain from that.
I'm reminded about all the other media driven fears around flying - personal aircraft (remember PSA and Aeromexico?) or runway incursions. No matter how rare these things are, somehow all of us will die.
There are already enough regulations governing RC models including so-called drones:
- Not a less than X miles from an airport.
- Not above X hundred feet AGL.
- Not near real aircraft.
- Always in direct sight of the device (if using FPV goggles to operate the device, a second person looking directly at it is required).
These are the same rules that have governed RC planes for years, and they are enough. We just need more enforcement since self-control is not working anymore, for the very reasons that TeeVee already described.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Comment
-
Originally posted by flyerforfun View PostCase closed
No evidence there was a drone in the first place. Maybe a grocery bag :)
It's time to ban dispendable plastic bags, if they are a threat not only to environment, but also to flight safety.
Let me repeat that last bit.... THE POTENTIAL TO CAUSE LOSS OF LIFE.
Somebody else said "or a shattered windscreen" as if that is not a problem. Yeah, there you are concentrating on your approach about 300 feet above ground on short finals and BANG, there goes your windscreen. You would be saying a bit more than "Dear me, how terribly inconvenient. If that screen comes in it will take my head off!"
We don't need to ban drones but we do need to strictly apply the laws against endangering an aircraft in flight. A couple of prison sentences will make the muppets at least look up and wonder if it's worth it. The sentence can be up to 10 years in jail.Last edited by brianw999; 2016-04-28, 12:37.If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !
Comment
-
Brian,
I fully agree.
On a personal note, flying single engine piston, at less altitude and kinetic energy than liners, however vulnerable to collision with any flying object, I'm very much concerned.
My (not explicit) comment was about the fact that BA Case, highly publicized in world medias, had been closed by AIAA. Not the subject of course.
Assurons-nous bien du fait, avant de nous inquiéter de la cause Fontenelle 1687 - Let's check on facts before looking for their cause
Comment
-
Originally posted by brianw999 View PostBANG, there goes your windscreen. You would be saying a bit more than "Dear me, how terribly inconvenient. If that screen comes in it will take my head off!"
Comment
Comment