Boulder County fire started by drone crash April 2022

[sar104]

Also; when flying line of sight people are less likely to crash, that is a fact

I saw a video of this clown dustin downhill or something flying kilometres with a 4G fixed wing plane and he was saying "why is it forbidden to fly over all these miles of dried trees? Who cares if I crash here?"

which is the attitude that causes most accidents

That may or may not be a fact - I've seen no compiled statistics on the subject - but what does it have to do with this incident?

 

[Mazdaman323lx]

This fool crashes his plane on purpose and gets his license revoked for a year but drone pilots can get huge fines for minor indiscretions ? Really ?

 

[Skywatcher2001]

Actually in a crash it most likely isn't thermal runaway. Physical damage to the battery on impact can lead to puncture of the very thin membranes in the battery, which causes internal shorting and very high current flow inside the battery.

Thank you sar104 for the clarification. I appreciate you!!

As a construction manager I've seen our industry moving away from pneumatic tools and progressing to all battery operated. Makita, Milwaukee and others have these mandatory battery safety classes we have to take. Obviously they teach NOT to drop the batteries off buildings because of this. The two factors they covered was TR and internal damage. I assumed both are possible from a crash.

 

[sar104]

Thank you sar104 for the clarification. I appreciate you!!

As a construction manager I've seen our industry moving away from pneumatic tools and progressing to all battery operated. Makita, Milwaukee and others have these mandatory battery safety classes we have to take. Obviously they teach NOT to drop the batteries off buildings because of this. The two factors they covered was TR and internal damage. I assumed both are possible from a crash.

Yes - both are risks. Thermal runaway generally occurs with accumulated degradation over time, and more often happens during charging than during discharging. Internal shorting due to impact or penetration is rapid. We had a Skydio crash here that led to an immediate fire via that mechanism, and numerous others have been reported.

 

[Jorge Vergara Latoja]

From the article, first paragraph:



It's always a good idea to read beyond the title before forming an opinion.

You are absolutely right….it is always good to get information first before giving an opinion…although in this case, the first information was not completely complete or more detailed, so several of us gave our opinion about it…

 

[Starz]

Also; when flying line of sight people are less likely to crash, that is a fact

I’ll ask again. Would you be able to provide your source for this information ?

 

[Chip]

There was already more than enough wild speculation in the thread.
Why would you guess that the flyers in the incident were treated differently from the way anyone would be?

The flyers in the report didn't just shrug and walk away.

I have not studied this matter in detail and I do not know precisely what caused the crash. But, my understanding is the sheriff's department very quickly dismissed the entire matter as a mere "accident" for which there would be no charge or penalty.

My instinct tells me that whoever was involved with the flight which caused this 45+ acre fire got a huge pass that average person would not. But, my cynicism in such matters should not distract from the more interesting question of how law enforcement and courts distinguish between UAV "accidents" and incidents which give rise to civil or criminal liability.

 

[Meta4]

I have not studied this matter in detail and I do not know precisely what caused the crash. But, my understanding is the sheriff's department very quickly dismissed the entire matter as a mere "accident" for which there would be no charge or penalty.

Maybe that's because there was no blame-worthy action that caused the accident or the fire that followed.

My instinct tells me that whoever was involved with the flight which caused this 45+ acre fire got a huge pass that average person would not.

And maybe they were treated exactly the same way anyone else would be.
What charge would your instinct suggest would apply for anyone else?
Why would these flyers have been given special treatment?

 

[Chip]

Maybe that's because there was no blame-worthy action that caused the accident or the fire that followed.

Yes, that could be. Is that what you believe? Does it make a difference that:

1. The pilot was an engineer or an engineering student acting under the direction of the engineering department of a university;
2. The pilot and team knew they were flying over dry grass in an area known for high winds creating perfect conditions for wild fire;
3. The pilot and team knew they were creating risk of fire because they are engineers and they brought one fire extinguisher;
4. The pilot and team admitted that the one fire extinguisher was grossly inadequate.

We do not know what caused the crash. At least not yet. Does it make a difference whether pilot inattention, flyaway caused by wind gust, loss of radio or GPS signal, battery or prop failure, etc. What do you think?

 

[Chip]

And maybe they were treated exactly the same way anyone else would be.

Yes, maybe they were treated exactly the same way anyone else would be. That is certainly possible.

What charge would your instinct suggest would apply for anyone else?

Causing a fire that burns 45+ government acres in direct proximity to expensive infrastructure, causing $1million public evacuation and emergency response...

Why would these flyers have been given special treatment?

Because they are college engineering students flying a drone on government property while conducting a study.

 

[Meta4]

What do you think?

I don't automatically assume that the flyers must be guilty of dangerous flying or that other flyers would necessarily be treated differently.

Because they are college engineering students flying a drone on government property while conducting a study.

And somehow you think that is grounds to be given special treatment by law enforcement?
Sorry the logic of that escapes me.

 

[test2000Anafi]

I’ll ask again. Would you be able to provide your source for this information ?

Your point is that people flying beyond VLOS are less likely to crash?
People breaking aviation rules are less likely to crash.

Yeah… looks like I don’t need to provide anything to you

 

[Meta4]

Your point is that people flying beyond VLOS are less likely to crash?

Yeah… looks like I don’t need to provide anything to you

It looks like you can't provide anything to support your assertion.

 

[Chip]

This fool crashes his plane on purpose and gets his license revoked for a year but drone pilots can get huge fines for minor indiscretions ? Really ?

Well that is pretty much how I see it BUT I have to watch my conclusion jumping around here The FAA just came out with report slamming the guy and the final chapter has not yet been written. Check out this guy's analysis. Who would have thought that a fire extinguisher could be a smoking gun?

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

 

[test2000Anafi]

Well that is pretty much how I see it BUT I have to watch my conclusion jumping around here The FAA just came out with report slamming the guy and the final chapter has not yet been written. Check out this guy's analysis. Who would have thought that a fire extinguisher could be a smoking gun?

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

anybody looking at the guy can see it is 100% planned from the start, how he acts, that he is wearing a parachute, the fire extinguisher is a nice bonus but even without that it is really obvious he was crashing the plane on purpose

 

[Starz]

Your point is

I didn’t provide any point, you did, and without any substantive information to verify said claim.

 

[Chip]

anybody looking at the guy can see it is 100% planned from the start, how he acts, that he is wearing a parachute, the fire extinguisher is a nice bonus but even without that it is really obvious he was crashing the plane on purpose

Yeah, there was lots of evidence of staging but that fire extinguisher pushed it way over the top for me. I wonder what the chances are of plane bursting into flames when it hits ground with say 1/2 tank of gas?

 

[Zbip57]

Fire extinguishers used to be a requirement in Canada to fly drones and it had to be a Class B dry chemical extinguisher.

Well that explains one of the bizarre questions I encountered on the exam for my Basic certificate. What item must be immediately available to all crew members? Choosing the least ridiculous of the multiple choice answers, the fire extinguisher was the only one that made any sense. But I wondered why they insisted it must be available when there's no such requirement to be found in any of the current regulations. It used to be a requirement, but no longer is.

That said, it's certainly a good idea to always have an extinguisher handy.

4. The pilot and team admitted that the one fire extinguisher was grossly inadequate.

Our rally car burnt to the ground after a minor fuel leak sparked a fire in the engine compartment. We emptied our own three fire extinguishers on it, plus two more from following competitors who stopped to give us one of their extinguishers. We couldn't stop the fire because the fuel dripping onto the hot turbocharger instantly re-ignited the fire every time we put it out. We ran out of extinguishers and had to stand back and watch it burn. We eventually had the local fire department come put it out.