Another idiot helping to ruin our hobby....

[Rabid Machina]

If I was a helicopter pilot or passenger on one, I sure as **** wouldn't want to share the airspace these idiots.

Why can't everyone respect the nfz's for *** sake. It's not that hard. To disregard and say it's fine..."the chopper can take the impact" is just as idiotic.
Advocating and giving this behaviour a pass will lead to more stories like this and make it tougher for us. Thanks.

This is because military craft (especially helicopters) operate at lower altitudes outside the NFZ. I watch them fly over my house rattling my cupboards and I live 22 miles from the military installation the operate from. If I had to guesstimate how low I would say 400-1000 ft above the ground.

Nothing is being advocated on my part. I stated that prop wash would most likely knock the drone out of the trajectory of the aircraft. And it'd by some chance it did get sucked down through the rotor not much would be left of the drone, also the heat sink may or may not be ingested since there are static blades and a protective nose cones in the intake of these engines with specific amounts of clearance from the rotating impeller blades.

Again, a big if for one of these to knock a helicopter especially a chinook with two rotors pushing down massive amounts of air, more than any mavic or most consumer drones would be able to handle and/or recover from.

Was it a cool story, probably. Clearly the media and whoever else has an underlying agenda wants to blow something that is most likely not a threat out of proportion.

The videos on YouTube you see where items Or people get sucked into intakes are not very likely especially at idle. As with anything you can take it as you may. I don't know your background or what you have done in your life, but if you base your point of view on media based hype then you can only see the picture from one angle.

Sorry if it sounds like I picked on your comment but I'm feeling a little lazy this morning as I am reply from my bathroom as I'm taking a pewp.

 

[Dw911]

At the moment it's all hypothetical as an identical amount of planes and helicopters have been taken down caused to crash by drones as there has been UFOs,/ alien spaceships taken down or caused to crashed by drones.

Not to mention your far more likely to die putting on your trousers than you are in a plane crash -with or without drone involvement -

Fly safe, encourage others to fly safe and don't worry about stuff you have no control over and to be honest I reckon for 99.9% of the population the thought of a drone bringing down an aircraft hasn't even entered there heads and most probably wouldn't care less even if they did give it any thought , I never did till I bought a drone and came on here and see it discussed daily and I'm still none the wiser

 

[stratos]

It would be nice to do some actual testing, drone strike jet engine tests, and see if damage is likely to occur. Maybe drones are not very dangerous, compared to bird strikes. I'm sure a bunch of you think it's perfectly safe, which may be the case, or not. Let's find out.

The other day I saw the tests of he engines of a 380.
Man... they are design to keep running in a freaking hurricane. They threw debris and so about 2 and a half tons of water per minute!!


Check this out:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Grey Wolf]

The prop wash alone would prevent the drone from hitting the Chinook. Not justifying anything, but there was no real danger there.

Except if the drone was above the Chinook and descended into the rotors. Of course if it was at 2000 feet high, like the story says, then it wouldn't have been a drone!

 

[riggsbie]

With Chinook's safety record, maybe a Mavic could take one down

They have a rather poor history of transmission failures, maybe they were all caused by 800gram drones too ?

 

[The_IanN]

I agree this is highly suspect . . at 138mph they are traveling 202feet/sec and if the PIC of the Chinook took control to avoid flying toward the "drone hovering 40m away" and could do so in a half a second . . he would have have less than another half second to make any significant control mechanism respond in any way . . .and by that time it would be gone by!

Just last week we were filming aircraft flying at 300-500ft. . . who were LOOKING for a mavic pro that was stationary at 400ft AGL (hovering over a single tree in the middle of a field). After 3 different pilots in three different aircraft and their 3 passenger photographers (that's 6 set of eyes) were guided to the exact spot by a ground controller . . . NONE OF THEM SAW IT!. After another 12-15 passes that morning all three saw a Phantom 4 placed in the same location. . . (because they said "it was white") . . . but NONE got more than a 1-2 second look at it, before they had gone by it. We got no air-to-air video from the aircraft but lots from the ground. and some good some good views from the Mavic and the P4.

LESSON LEARNED:
Taking evasive from a Mavic sized drone is likely to result in hitting a drone as much as missing and such maneuvering is more likely to produce a more unsafe flight incident. You'd be hard pressed to hit a small drone intentionally even iff you know were it is and it's not moving.

As well, I honestly doubt any L-Band or UHF traffic radar is capable of defining a 60-80 sq cm largely non-metallic target at ANY range let alone an mile or 2. . maybe I'm wrong there . . try this test report if you want to figure that out accurately.

It makes a nice sensational story for the newspaper but does not compute with the laws of physics, the reaction time of helicopter pilots (I am one) or the capabilities of ATC traffic radar. . . . may not ALL be false but just sayin' . . I'd like a bit more in the way of facts.

This is where those math problems from school come in handy. When a 60M Pound Chinook Military Helicopter traveling at 138mph spots a drone hovering at 2,100 ft, how long does it take for the entire world to loose their poop, and say drones should be illegal.

No doubt, this one drone pilot makes the responsible drone pilots look irresponsible. I would think (and for the sake of our brave military) there have been Chinook helicopters that have seen more damage than a drone strike and returned home safely.

I guess saying follow the rules is too much to ask for.

 

[Static8]

People need to ignore this BS news source. Daily Mail UK is very well known for bull s stories. They are very known for click bait.

 

[Georges]

Fake new or not, there has never been a substantiated report of a hobby drone bring down a aircraft. on the other hand public opinion can bring all of our drones down overnight.

 

[BerndM]

138mph equals 61.692 meters per second so that Super Sports version of the Chinook would have closed that 40 meter distance to the "drone" AND maneuvered his huge helo to avoid a collision in about 1/2 second.
VERY VERY IMPRESSIVE reaction time and obviously 100% pure BS

 

[danman999]

As a Certified FAA pilot with instrument and ground Instructor ratings, I can say with certantity that many of you on this thread have no idea what you are talking about. It does not matter if it was Mavic, Phantom or other drone, it still posed a danger to the other aircraft and crew.
I fly in Southern California (based at KSNA), the busiest airspace in the world and the greatest fear of my fellow general aviation pilots is not a mid-air collision with another aircraft, but an encounter with a drone flown by somebody who just walked out of Best Buy and now thinks he is an aviator. No, getting a medical certificate, going to flight school, passing a knowledge test and subsequent checkride with a FAA pilot examiner makes you an aviator.
Just follow the rules, use common sense and there is plenty of room for all of us in the sky. If you want to learn more about FAA/ICAO regulations and real aviation, join AOPA and take some of their ground study courses. They welcome the opportunity to educate drone operators, making it safer and more enjoyable for all of us.

 

[JimZ]

The prop wash alone would prevent the drone from hitting the Chinook. Not justifying anything, but there was no real danger there.

Great point!

 

[Flyboy1950]

Danman999, you are absolutely right. Most of these posts are clueless about the physics of heli operation. Any drone from above the main rotor, or from the side of the tail rotor, if it gets to close, WILL get sucked into the blades. That event could chip, or crack the the high velocity blade tips, which could result in extreme vibration to the rotor disk, with potentialy catastrophic consequences.

 

[Static8]

I agree 100 percent danman999, that is the big issue with new operators, most are young and have no clue about safe operation , again a lot to blame here are the manufacturers advertising how easy it is to fly these birds.,I'm all for safe use operation guidelines and laws but because of crap stories like the one posted here and lawbreakers, governments , public opinion are making it impossible to practice our favourite hobby and are developing senseless laws that will not do anything to prevent potential air catastrophe. We need is education, and perhaps their should be proper course people need to take before they can even purchase a drone. I would have no problem doing so if the governments can relax on the laws, especially the Canadian law

 

[Rabid Machina]

While I agree that safety is paramount, the pandemonium that is being created by this exaggerated story is ridiculous. What if this, what if that?
Could a drone striking the blade of, maybe, one of the most resilient rotary aircraft the worlds military has in its arsenal; cause catastrophic damage? Highly unlikely. there is a difference between piloting a craft and maintaining an aircraft. I know for the smaller prop job pilots do some of their maintenance, but for something like a Chinook if you are flying and maintaining I would like to shake your hand and buy you a beer.

What I'm getting at is yes this supposed drone (which hasn't been specified) posed a threat that could of ended in a very ugly situation extremely quickly. But to go from OH SHET A DRONE!!! to BOOM CRASH!!! is a bit extreme. I have seen and repaired Chinooks that have crashed into the sides of a mountains in undisclosed locations while they were forward deployed in conflict zones. Watching them trailer in an aircraft that should most certainly be headed to the boneyard. All to repair it and watch pilots go out and do there flight control and system checks in hover is mind-boggling.

Yes the danger was there, nothing happened. Complacency kills. The Chinook is a beast of a craft that can take a lot of licks; even to the titanium lined leading edge that will most definitely buckle before cracking or chipping, well because it is an extremely durable material. Would it cause a vibration? Absolutely, but to say extreme vibration. I don't think so. It may seem so as it is a moving assembly, but the likelihood of the Chinook tearing itself apart from torsion and its own harmonic vibrations is more likely.

So let's not jump to conclusions and berate each other over hypotheticals until the shet has actually hit the fan.

 

[JHG]

well now I just had to put my 25 cents worth in...that chinook story sounds a little suspect to me...but there are idiots out there.I live in Red Deer, alberta, Canada and I'm about 3 blocks from the general hospital which has a helipad on it.An idiot with a mavic sent it up to take pictures of the cockpit while it was coming in to land with a patient.....he had it taken away from him for a few days and then returned but as far as I know that's all....for me there has to be more severe actions taken against this guy but for now we really don't have any regs that set fines and such.I believe that's all going to change soon as the federal government is drawing up a new batch of regs for this hobby and incidents like this doesn't help the cause....sorry...probably more like 50 cents worth

 

[Daneby2]

I wouldn't put it past the military to be practising drone avoidance drills with simulated terrorist drones attacks. If this was the case then the story is true, but amost an own goal.

 

[Static8]

well now I just had to put my 25 cents worth in...that chinook story sounds a little suspect to me...but there are idiots out there.I live in Red Deer, alberta, Canada and I'm about 3 blocks from the general hospital which has a helipad on it.An idiot with a mavic sent it up to take pictures of the cockpit while it was coming in to land with a patient.....he had it taken away from him for a few days and then returned but as far as I know that's all....for me there has to be more severe actions taken against this guy but for now we really don't have any regs that set fines and such.I believe that's all going to change soon as the federal government is drawing up a new batch of regs for this hobby and incidents like this doesn't help the cause....sorry...probably more like 50 cents worth

JHG, there are laws in place in Canada already , they are interim but likely will be permanent this month. I'm trying to work with 3600 petitioners to work on less strict laws but I agree this one guy did something serious. He should have been given a 3000 dollar fine which is the law right now, but I think he should be banned from the hobby permnantely for a stupid stunt like that...my 2 cents

 

[Marko9219]

It's amazing how little most people understand about what a risk to an aircraft is. It's pretty obvious by the postings here. We had an incident here where a Video cassette tape cartridge (hmm... Just about Mavic size only SMALLER) got dropped into an idling F-16 engine on the tarmac. It trashed the engine. Well, the Chinook has a jet turbine engine(s) too. A Mavick getting sucked into the compressor of that turbine could MOST CERTAINLY destroy that engine instantly.
Don't dismiss the threat of our little baby Mavics to an aircraft! Small, soft bodied birds have ruined engines mid-air.

 

[Oingo Boingo]

Ya well there are "special" people all around the world.. someone is talking crack here.... Anyway if a drone can bring down a plane or a Chinook.... Then we better ban all flying birds as well

 

[Rabid Machina]

It's amazing how little most people understand about what a risk to an aircraft is. It's pretty obvious by the postings here. We had an incident here where a Video cassette tape cartridge (hmm... Just about Mavic size only SMALLER) got dropped into an idling F-16 engine on the tarmac. It trashed the engine. Well, the Chinook has a jet turbine engine(s) too. A Mavick getting sucked into the compressor of that turbine could MOST CERTAINLY destroy that engine instantly.
Don't dismiss the threat of our little baby Mavics to an aircraft! Small, soft bodied birds have ruined engines mid-air.

Thank goodness for auto-rotation.