Jump to content

It could have easily happened


Recommended Posts

I like some of us, have some serious concerns about the use of drones in our airspace. What follows is a prime example why I feel the way I do. I live within a stones throw from Staunton State park here in Colorado. It is important to note, that the park is surrounded on three sides by residential developments. The park is in the foothills west of Denver with an elevation of 8-10000 MSL Yesterday, I watched from my deck as St. Anthony's Flight for Life (AS350b3) performed a recon for an LZ after being called to assist in the rescue of a fallen climber. He spent about 15 minutes flying over the area at about 200-300 ft AGL (depending on terrain) before finally landing in the park. The rescue was completed successfully. Now, here is where it gets interesting. Today, on a local forum, a resident posted a request for help from the community in locating and returning his lost, very expensive drone. The person stated that he lost it somewhere in the area of Staunton park while he was flying it over his neighborhood which is located on the eastern border of the park. He doesn't mention when he lost it, but that is not the point. The point is, he was flying an unknown sized drone, lost control of said drone which could have ended up anywhere. I can't help but think of FFL crew and the unknown danger that they possible faced yesterday, if in fact that is when the drone went rogue. I would love to hear everyone's thoughts about this and how you would respond to the situation. I think I will call FFL and at least give them a heads up, that we have a known drone flyer in the area that can't control his toys.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Today, on a local forum, a resident posted a request for help from the community in locating and returning his lost, very expensive drone. The person stated that he lost it somewhere in the area of Staunton park while he was flying it over his neighborhood which is located on the eastern border of the park. He doesn't mention when he lost it, but that is not the point. The point is, he was flying an unknown sized drone, lost control of said drone which could have ended up anywhere.

 

 

A private Predator? Hardly.

 

Someone lost their RC toy. They're everywhere. They always have been. Get used to it.

 

UAV's are another matter, and nobody has a private UAV/UAS/UCAV as a toy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what he was flying, and frankly I don't care. It was a hazard that, having lost control of it, could have had catastrophic results. The person is offering a reward for whoever finds it, which tells me that it was probably more than just your average RC helicopter. Toy or not, the point is to illustrate the potential dangers that we face as this industry grows and the amateurs take to the skies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My brother has one that has a 60 mile range. Cameras on it, downlink video feed, tail number, FAA registration...he has to keep his private pilot cert current to fly it, etc etc. Along with a trailer command post with monitors and controls. While it's not a Predator, it has an 8' wingspan and could definitely ruin someone's day if he were to ever lose control of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UAVs are not a big deal. I don't know why people are so scared of them...

 

I've hit hundreds- if not thousands- of birds, bats, etc. Usually not a big deal, they're small, very light and lightly built organic, smeary material, even the power plants. And, they have nearly panaromic vision with a natural disinclination to being squashed like bugs.

UAVs do not share any, or very many, of those traits. Especially the power plants and fuel cells. And, they're much much faster than birds. The engines would be projectiles through the aircraft if you encountered them head on. Suppose the considerable ones have traffic avoidance, video? Well, suppose they have much higher accident rate in much less busy airspace (4 times conventional piloted comparable airframes by one estimate) but that has been acceptable in the scenarios used... They are efficient assets when you measure the cost against recovering manned aircraft and crew in hostile scenarios. Is that the appropriate level of risk/benefit assessment for civil use?

Suppose it is decided to allow LE, other government use only. How do you do that with general aviation presence? Well, you declare a TFR and use enforcement actions...

 

I see the utility and advantage. But it's not an easy fix.

Edited by Wally
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...