Can a UAV bring down a plane?

[Raphael01]

Hi Guys, We actually sell an advanced drone Jammer for airports, that clears the flight path to a range of approx 5-7km in a narrow path.
As I am based inSydney, Australia I contacted CASA about it.
You won't believe the answers I got... from "we are doing a risk analysis for next 12 months" (how long does it take to analyze what a drone can do to a commercial plane) to suggesting I "contact individual airports" (who are clearly not responsible for traffic control and who suggested I contact CASA...).
I explained that we would be willing to do a test to demonstrate the system and that time is important, but no interest.
One thing is an idiot flying a drone near an airport, but the other possibility is some one flying one on several drones on purpose to bring down an airliner.
All are hiding behind a bureaucratic screen.
I have all the emails to prove this, but they prefer to wait till people get killed, and then justify it in front of the press. Very frustrating!
Raphael

 

[Classic flyer]

Hi Guys, We actually sell an advanced drone Jammer for airports, that clears the flight path to a range of approx 5-7km in a narrow path.
As I am based inSydney, Australia I contacted CASA about it.
You won't believe the answers I got... from "we are doing a risk analysis for next 12 months" (how long does it take to analyze what a drone can do to a commercial plane) to suggesting I "contact individual airports" (who are clearly not responsible for traffic control and who suggested I contact CASA...).
I explained that we would be willing to do a test to demonstrate the system and that time is important, but no interest.
One thing is an idiot flying a drone near an airport, but the other possibility is some one flying one on several drones on purpose to bring down an airliner.
All are hiding behind a bureaucratic screen.
I have all the emails to prove this, but they prefer to wait till people get killed, and then justify it in front of the press. Very frustrating!
Raphael

Good for you sir I wish you well in your endeavor...LORD knows we need a system like that

 

[Callum]

Hi Guys, We actually sell an advanced drone Jammer for airports, that clears the flight path to a range of approx 5-7km in a narrow path.
As I am based inSydney, Australia I contacted CASA about it.
You won't believe the answers I got... from "we are doing a risk analysis for next 12 months" (how long does it take to analyze what a drone can do to a commercial plane) to suggesting I "contact individual airports" (who are clearly not responsible for traffic control and who suggested I contact CASA...).
I explained that we would be willing to do a test to demonstrate the system and that time is important, but no interest.
One thing is an idiot flying a drone near an airport, but the other possibility is some one flying one on several drones on purpose to bring down an airliner.
All are hiding behind a bureaucratic screen.
I have all the emails to prove this, but they prefer to wait till people get killed, and then justify it in front of the press. Very frustrating!
Raphael

Surely that can't be legal.

 

[Zelnando]

It could happen....... ..... ...

That’s a yuneec lol, no wonder!

 

[Chip]

... they prefer to wait till people get killed, and then justify it in front of the press. Very frustrating!...Raphael

This sounds interesting and I would like to hear more. I hope you succeed whatever you do. But, is it possible that your potential customers do not believe the actual risk justifies the cost? Or that they do not want to spend the money until they see the data to justify it? My guess is they might also be concerned about the potential liability of installing tractor beams with no legal authorization from state or federal governments.

 

[787steve]

You're supposed to stay calm. Can you at least admit that this particular time, they did a really bad job at piloting their helicopter? In my book, if you crash your helicopter you probably did a bad job.

Yes, they did a horrible job. And crews who have crashed due to loss of a single engine did poorly as well. But if they had not lost the engine, everyone on board would still be alive. Again, just because an airplane can fly on one engine, doesn't mean that every crew will handle the emergency properly. Aviation is the safest form of travel because we try to minimize risks.

 

[Classic flyer]

This sounds interesting and I would like to hear more. I hope you succeed whatever you do. But, is it possible that your potential customers do not believe the actual risk justifies the cost? Or that they do not want to spend the money until they see the data to justify it? My guess is they might also be concerned about the potential liability of installing tractor beams with no legal authorization from state or federal governments.

That and the probability that a drone caught in the "KILL"zone may cause serious collateral damage when the pilot looses control

 

[Classic flyer]

Yes, they did a horrible job. And crews who have crashed due to loss of a single engine did poorly as well. But if they had not lost the engine, everyone on board would still be alive. Again, just because an airplane can fly on one engine, doesn't mean that every crew will handle the emergency properly. Aviation is the safest form of travel because we try to minimize risks.

Again I ask...are you a rated pilot

 

[AnzacJack]

Hi Guys, We actually sell an advanced drone Jammer for airports, that clears the flight path to a range of approx 5-7km in a narrow path.
As I am based inSydney, Australia I contacted CASA about it.
You won't believe the answers I got... from "we are doing a risk analysis for next 12 months" (how long does it take to analyze what a drone can do to a commercial plane) to suggesting I "contact individual airports" (who are clearly not responsible for traffic control and who suggested I contact CASA...).
I explained that we would be willing to do a test to demonstrate the system and that time is important, but no interest.
One thing is an idiot flying a drone near an airport, but the other possibility is some one flying one on several drones on purpose to bring down an airliner.
All are hiding behind a bureaucratic screen.
I have all the emails to prove this, but they prefer to wait till people get killed, and then justify it in front of the press. Very frustrating!
Raphael

can you give some more info on your system?

 

[AnzacJack]

A drone would be smashed to smithereens if hits a plane, soft plastic shreds when hit by something solid travelling at 150 mph plus.

There was a video where a drone hits a windscreen of aircraft and the drones turns to a million pieces.

Same goes for the engine, it would shred and be spat out the other side.

you have obviously not seen to many results of aircraft being struck by objects (youtube doesnt count)

 

[Classic flyer]

you have obviously not seen to many results of aircraft being struck by objects (youtube doesnt count)

Tell it bro!

 

[Cymruflyer]

That’s a yuneec lol, no wonder!

That's also a fake video. Read the previous posts, it would save us all some time.

 

[Cymruflyer]

This sounds interesting and I would like to hear more. I hope you succeed whatever you do. But, is it possible that your potential customers do not believe the actual risk justifies the cost? Or that they do not want to spend the money until they see the data to justify it? My guess is they might also be concerned about the potential liability of installing tractor beams with no legal authorization from state or federal governments.

There is something else to consider. What exactly does the system do to bring down the drone, what electronics does it affect? What happens when the same sort of electronics are present in say, an aircraft control system? Is there a chance that this drone killing system could also kill the aircraft's electronic control system as well? There is a lot to consider and many questions to ask about such a system before it can be deemed something safe.

 

[sar104]

Surely that can't be legal.

There are such commercial solutions available, including in the US but, as far as I'm aware, they cannot be used without Federal authorization. However, I know of some that have been legally deployed under that umbrella.

 

[BigEegit]

It all depends on speed and type of aircraft.

Correct. If you consider a kite an aircraft? At most a drone would take down another drone of similar size.

A drone would most definitely come through the windscreen of a lot of aircraft, so you can imagine what this could do.

You know no such fact! "Imagine" being the operative word. May I refer you to Newtons Third Law and ask you to consider a drone similar in size to the mavic pro flying at full speed towards a bus traveling at 60km-100km/hr towards the mavic - you're not suggesting the mavic would penetrate the windscreen glass of that bus?? There are simply too many variables in favour of the moving bus.

It would also have a good chance of rupturing the leading edge fuel tank of a Cessna. Then you have multiple scenarios of what could happen if taken into a turbine. In my 40 years in aviation I have seen plenty of bird strikes and the damage caused by different sized birds so I am pretty sure of what a drone could do. (Actually saw the results of a snake strike believe it or not, but that’s another story )

With all due respect, being 'pretty sure' from witnessing bird strikes over 40 years of aviation has no factual baring on the issue and is merely speculation.

Tired of the scaremongering.

 

[sar104]

Correct. If you consider a kite an aircraft? At most a drone would take down another drone of similar size.



You know no such fact! "Imagine" being the operative word. May I refer you to Newtons Third Law and ask you to consider a drone similar in size to the mavic pro flying at full speed towards a bus traveling at 60km-100km/hr towards the mavic - you're not suggesting the mavic would penetrate the windscreen glass of that bus?? There are simply to many variables in favour of the moving bus.



With a due respect, being 'pretty sure' from witnessing bird strikes over 40 years of aviation has no factual baring on the issue and is merely speculation.

Tired of the scaremongering.

I'm intrigued. Is this a serious post or are you just having some fun here?

 

[Raphael01]

There is something else to consider. What exactly does the system do to bring down the drone, what electronics does it affect? What happens when the same sort of electronics are present in say, an aircraft control system? Is there a chance that this drone killing system could also kill the aircraft's electronic control system as well? There is a lot to consider and many questions to ask about such a system before it can be deemed something safe.

The system Jams the drone control frequencies, it doesnt interfere with the aircraft systems. Further, the system is passive most of the time "listening" to possible drone activity. Only when the activity is detected inside the "no fly zone" will it automatically become active and Jam the drone, causing it to land or to return to base.
It can also activate an advanced CCTV system to actually see the drone.
All we asked for is that CASA (the Australian FAA) show interest and go to the next step to evaluate the possibilities and test it.

Anyone interested in more info, please contact me at [email protected] or +61-401931731.
Cheers,
Raphael

Btw, the system has been tested and is certified as safe for aircraft interference

 

[Raphael01]

Just another point... anyone who thinks a drone can't bring down a plane and that this is scare mongering is delusional. Just see the result of bird strikes on cockpit windows or on a engine.
Losing power on one engine during take off can be disastrous.
I really dont get the ignorance!

Read about US Airways flight 1549 if you dont believe it, or how about reading : Bird strike - Wikipedia

Try to be informed and dont give ignorant answers, Thanks!
Raphael

 

[RoryG]

Correct. If you consider a kite an aircraft? At most a drone would take down another drone of similar size.



You know no such fact! "Imagine" being the operative word. May I refer you to Newtons Third Law and ask you to consider a drone similar in size to the mavic pro flying at full speed towards a bus traveling at 60km-100km/hr towards the mavic - you're not suggesting the mavic would penetrate the windscreen glass of that bus?? There are simply to many variables in favour of the moving bus.



With a due respect, being 'pretty sure' from witnessing bird strikes over 40 years of aviation has no factual baring on the issue and is merely speculation.

Tired of the scaremongering.

I hit a seagull with my Ford Kuga the other day, it just took off from the side of the road right into the front of the car. I was travelling at 60mph, the seagull was effectively stationary. £800 worth of damage, the front bumper above the number plate completely broken!

 

[Danchow96]

Thanks for all the input including complete novices (myself included) and captains that had served 40+ years in aviation.

I feel we have all digressed and this post has got way out of hand now with different subjects such as birds, helicopters, cars, busses, signal jammers...

Thank you all for your theories and imagination. Please remember we are all here for the same thing - to enjoy SAFE and fun flight whilst learning, increasing our knowledge on such subjects as this one.

I have really learned a lot from each post and hope you all have too.

I didn’t know how much controversy this post was due to cause but glad it sparked a discussion as it IS a serious debate!

Hopefully all of your drone theories can stay exactly that and we will never have to witness such an unfortunate event.

Safe flying ladies and gents!