Drone near miss at Heathrow

edster said:
They should tax multi rotor devices, but then this penalises the serious user Unles you KNOW it's beaingtaxedas well.
Click to expand...

What exactly would taxing them do? They'll be a bit more expensive... and? As a DJI Phantom is around £700 they're not exactly being bought by chavs on council estates now are they? Taxing will do nothing except raise a bit of revenue for the government, which they'll squander on something we don't need.
 
It's highly unlikely the smaller quadcopters like a phantom would have the slightest effect on a plane anyway.
They weigh under 2KG and are made mostly of supercrackium plastic, even the battery is softish material and about the size of a pack of butter.

I'm also convinced there's been a rather ridiculous campaign to vilify in the media.
There's no way pilots travelling at 200mph are seeing these things unless it's something much larger piloted by police or military.
Unless you stare fixedly at it you really struggle to spot it at all beyond about 500 feet.

Most owners are using them well below 400 feet for photography and video, planes shouldn't be there unless landing or taking off.
The aviation risk is being used as a tool to enforce controls but the real concern is probably the ability to make a mockery of most security.
Obviously terrorists and spies will be completely stumped when they realise they have to buy a license.

Suggesting radio blockers and such seems to overlook that the effect would be to cause loss of control and crash?
Not very sensible.
 
4wd said:
It's highly unlikely the smaller quadcopters like a phantom would have the slightest effect on a plane anyway..
Click to expand...

You'd be happy to have one ingested into the engine of the plane you're in upon landing would you then?
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
You'd be happy to have one ingested into the engine of the plane you're in upon landing would you then?
Click to expand...

Aren't aeroplane engines designed to withstand a frozen turkey being chucked into them, to simulate hitting bird in flight or something............. or is that just an urban myth
 
Last edited:
rpsmith79 said:
Aren't aeroplane engines designed to withstand a frozen turkey being chucked into them, to simulate hitting bird in flight or something............. or is that just an urban myth
Click to expand...

No.. they are.. but I ask again... Would you be happy to have one ingested into the engine upon landing?

They do fire dead birds into engines to test them, yes, but they're not necessarily testing to see if there's no effect. They're probably testing to see if any sheared fan blades remain within the engine nacelle, and don't fire shrapnel through the cabin.


Sorry.... but I don't see the issue with strictly regulating these craft, and making it impossible to buy one without a license. If you're serious about it, you'll get the license.


I wanted to drive... I obtained a license. I wanted to be a ham radio operator, I obtained the license. In fact, there are many things I enjoy now that require a license. I obtained the licenses required.
 
Pookeyhead said:
No.. they are.. but I ask again... Would you be happy to have one ingested into the engine upon landing?

They do fire dead birds into engines to test them, yes, but they're not necessarily testing to see if there's no effect. They're probably testing to see if any sheared fan blades remain within the engine nacelle, and don't fire shrapnel through the cabin.


Sorry.... but I don't see the issue with strictly regulating these craft, and making it impossible to buy one without a license. If you're serious about it, you'll get the license.


I wanted to drive... I obtained a license. I wanted to be a ham radio operator, I obtained the license. In fact, there are many things I enjoy now that require a license. I obtained the licenses required.
Click to expand...

There is no license relating these things.
 
Pookeyhead said:
Duh.... that's my point LOL


I never said there was... I said there should be.
Click to expand...

"Sorry.... but I don't see the issue with strictly regulating these craft, and making it impossible to buy one without a license. If you're serious about it, you'll get the license."

I was responding to the above. I read as though you thought there was. My mistake.
 
The problem is, i would suspect the vast majority of the, lets call call them, less professional drones, will be being bought of eBay via the far east where they can be picked up for peanuts, and again i would suspect most are bought as toys for children/teeneages, to try and regulate this with some sort of licence would be near impossible and unfeasable

At the end of the day, you don't even need a licence to ride a bike on the road, so any cyclist (young or old) could cause a multi-car pile up with no need for licencing/training/taxing etc

And i suspect the chances of a cyclist causing/being involved in an accident are far higher than any drone coming into contact with a commercial plane................... the sky is a pretty big place don't you know ;)
 
....nevermind
 
Ricardodaforce said:
Because it was your quote! I have already apologised once. Want me to do it again?
Click to expand...


Nope.... which is why I edited the post. No need to apologise at all really.

[edit] If you hadn't realised already, I found the past few exchanges quite funny :)
 
Last edited:
We've already had handguns and fireworks strapped to drones and fired remotely, where there is a will and an idiot there is always a way. If it hasn't already happened I'm sure the first 'murder by drone' in the civilian world is just around the corner.

It reminds me of 3D printing, quite a media stir over that a few years back but that seems to have calmed down now.
 
Pookeyhead said:
What exactly would taxing them do? They'll be a bit more expensive... and? As a DJI Phantom is around £700 they're not exactly being bought by chavs on council estates now are they? Taxing will do nothing except raise a bit of revenue for the government, which they'll squander on something we don't need.
Click to expand...

My point is that when they were expensive (~£2k) no body had one except the serious modeller. They were harder to fly and there were less of them around. Now they are literally 10 a penny and all over their sky. Point the sticks and off you go. They can be bought as a kit for less than £200, so yes I guess a 'chav' could buy one and do something stupid with it.

You haven't really come up with any good ideas to regulate it, just (counter) arguments.

The fact of the matter is that it is very hard to police. Humans are involved. And it's humans that will wreck it for those of us that are responsible...
 
edster said:
My point is that when they were expensive (~£2k) no body had one except the serious modeller. They were harder to fly and there were less of them around. Now they are literally 10 a penny and all over their sky. Point the sticks and off you go. They can be bought as a kit for less than £200, so yes I guess a 'chav' could buy one and do something stupid with it.

You haven't really come up with any good ideas to regulate it, just (counter) arguments.

The fact of the matter is that it is very hard to police. Humans are involved. And it's humans that will wreck it for those of us that are responsible...
Click to expand...

All over the sky? I've only seen one since the predicted "droneaggedon" last Christmas. I think you're exaggerating. A lot.
 
Ricardodaforce said:
All over the sky? I've only seen one since the predicted "droneaggedon" last Christmas. I think you're exaggerating. A lot.
Click to expand...

Ok a slight exaggeration, but there have been at least 8 or 9 reports in the press this year of near misses, not to mention the guy who crashed one over a nuclear power station last year and a guy who is being prosecuted for flying one over Derby County and Nottingham Forest's ground during matches (illegal). They are completely banned in the States unless you get express permission from the U.S. equivalent of the CAA as there have been numerous near misses and a collision.

It's all there, in the media. Go read.
 
Last edited:
edster said:
Ok a slight exaggeration, but there have been at least 8 or 9 reports in the press this year of near misses, not to mention the guy who crashed one over a nuclear power station last year and a guy who is being prosecuted for flying one over Derby County and Nottingham Forest's ground during matches (illegal). They are completely banned in the States unless you get express permission from the U.S. equivalent of the CAA as there have been numerous near misses and a collision.

It's all there, in the media. Go read.
Click to expand...

They are not banned in the USA at all.
 
Ricardodaforce said:
They are not banned in the USA at all.
Click to expand...

Commercially, in many states yes they are actually, without approval.

[These are Frequently Asked Questions about the current state of UAV regulation in the US. Regulations elsewhere are different, but here is a similar post giving the rules for Canada.]

Q: Are UAVs legal in the United States?

A: Under certain conditions, they are. There are two ways to legally fly Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in the "National Airspace", which is to say all but certain restricted areas: 1) Get a Certificate of Authorization (COA) from the FAA, a process that can take months or more. 2) Fly under exemptions granted to non-commercial ("recreational") flyers who adhere to certain restrictions. More detail is here.

Q) What are those restrictions for non-commercial UAVs flying without a COA?

A: You MUST do the following: 1) Stay below 400ft. 2) Maintain a "pilot in control", which is to say that you must always be able to take manual control and fly the aircraft out of danger (in general, that means maintaining line-of-sight contact with the aircraft). 3) Stay away from built-up areas. More detail is here.

Q) Who can apply for a COA?

A: Typically only government agencies (Law enforcement, Civil government, etc). This is not an option for a private individual.
 
Last edited:
steveo_mcg said:
Can we get a bit of perspective here. More than 1500 people are killed every year (in the UK) in road incidents mostly by insured , licenced, trained individuals following the rules (largely). Drones have killed how many? Injured?
Click to expand...
But playing Devils advocate, cars and people have been around a lot longer than drones.
Lets hope nothing ever happens but of course if it does there will be a whole host of people waiting to say " I told you so"
Or political parties all vying to jump on the band wagon to bring in (ridiculous) legislation.
( and no I don't fly one, but I used to fly fixed and rotary winged model aircraft)
 
So restrictions for non-commercial flying are the same as here then. Anyone can fly them.
 
The point is there are rules on flying them near prohibited areas and people aren't doing that. Fact. It's a shame as it will wreck it for everyone else. I don't think any of us are debating that?
 
edster said:
The point is there are rules on flying them near prohibited areas and people aren't doing that. Fact. It's a shame as it will wreck it for everyone else. I don't think any of us are debating that?
Click to expand...

No way are not. But you making ridiculous statements say they are banned in the USA, when they are not, really doesn't contribute to the discussion at all.
 
Then my contributions will end as I've wasted enough breath on this already.

Your contributions are weak anyway as you clearly have had your head in the sand if you haven't heard of the numerous near misses this year. Good day.
 
edster said:
Then my contributions will end as I've wasted enough breath on this already.

Your contributions are weak anyway as you clearly have had your head in the sand if you haven't heard of the numerous near misses this year. Good day.
Click to expand...

Eh? When have I ever said that I have not heard of any near miss? Laughable! You're right, best you do walk away from the topic as you clearly have a distorted perception of reality.
 
Ricardodaforce said:
All over the sky? I've only seen one since the predicted "droneaggedon" last Christmas. I think you're exaggerating. A lot.
Click to expand...

Here!

And for the record I'm not 'walking' anywhere you arrogant and condescending ****. You need to grow up a bit.

Think you need to go and do some reading in order to educate yourself as all you are doing is highlighting how little you know about the subject. That's what's laughable.
 
Last edited:
Keep it civil please guys,
and don't keep droning on about the same old same old.
Thanks
 
edster said:
Here!

Think you need to go and do some reading in order to educate yourself as all you are doing is highlighting how little you know about the subject. That's what's laughable.
Click to expand...

So I say that I have only seen one drone in the sky since Christmas means I don't acknowledge that there have been a number of worrying incidents involving drones this year does it? C'mon man, you are either on a wind-up, or English isn't your first language.
As for knowing little about the subject.....I can GUARANTEE without any doubt that I know more about the subject than you do.
 
I'm out of here. This guy is nothing but rude, insulting and incapable of having a civil discussion. This is normally a nice forum to chat on but yet again it is ruined by an idiot.
 
Last edited:
Ricardodaforce said:
I'm sorry, my post crossed yours.
Click to expand...
I guessed that was the case.

edster said:
I'm out of here. This guy is nothing but rude, insulting and incapable of having a civil discussion. This is normally a nice forum to chat on but yet again it is ruin by an idiot.
Click to expand...

Right you have both had a final say this ends now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top