Cessna almost hit my drone yesterday

[jagraphics]

C-130s fly near treelines sometimes where i live for extreme low-altitude training, nearly inches from the top of the tree.

Whilst an aircraft is an aircraft if it hits you: military aircraft do have different rules to civilian aircraft so they can fly in places civilians can't and in some cases without prior notification. Though training areas I would think are clearly marked NFZ's

 

[JAW]

My opinion is you were right to call 911 and your actions were obviously the correct ones to avoid the other aircraft. The onus is on you to "see and avoid," something you can't likely do if flying BVLOS.
Good job!

p.s. I wouldn't count on the local PD forwarding your complaint to the FAA. If you want to press the issue, I would go the PD that took your initial call and file a written complaint. Get the complaint number and contact the FAA yourself.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/atl/local_more/media/nlowfly.pdf

 

[bobscheel53]

I was out flying over a local lake yesterday around 5-6pm just getting the sunset before it gets too cold to fly regularly and the leaves are still colorful. I was a little over treetop level, maybe 200ft AGL and about 15-20 miles form the nearest airport and not anywhere near an NFZ.

About halfway through my 2nd flight a Cessna 172 or 182 comes sreaming in 100 feet above the trees and close to the same height as my drone. He was in a steep baking turn. I had to shove the the stick all the way down and quickly so he wouldn't hit me. I ended up calling 911 and they said thanks, but we can't do anything without a registration number, but we'll forward your complaint to the FAA. I tried to get their "N-number" but he was a bit too far and between the sun and myself so I couldn't make it out.

If he had is transponder on could I look up the time and place to get a track somewhere?

If I am not mistaken he is allowed to be at low altitude over water. So it's a case of see and avoid with you having to yield to the manned aircraft.

 

[sar104]

If that was true, then ALL of our Bonanza flights and C-182 flights we do in our flying club would show up.
Yet, they don’t, as not all of us do flight following or fly IFR.

I have no idea what you mean by "if that was true". This is trivial to verify for yourself rather than just guessing based on anecdotal evidence:

ADS-B Flight Tracking - FlightAware

FlightAware operates a worldwide network of ADS-B receivers that track ADS-B-equipped aircraft flying around the globe. FlightAware owns and operates these receivers at hundreds of airports around the world in conjunction with airport operators. We also invite customers and professional users...

flightaware.com

 

[Bikerbill]

I'm not up on current rules for powered flight as I have not utilized my pilots IFR license in about 30 years, BUT unless there were houses, buildings or people on the ground below, a pilot of a small aircraft can fly almost down to the surface of the earth. They do it all the time with aerial crop spraying in farming areas. And a small powered aircraft should not have to be on the lookout for "flying bugs" but I guess now they will. PS: I fly one of these "flying bugs" too.

 

[Brockrock]

As mentioned above a couple of times, manned aircraft are legal to operate as low as they want over areas of "open water", and they are also allowed to do so over "sparsely populated" areas as well. Here is the wording from FAR 91.119: '(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

IMO, with the growth of the UAV industry, this particular regulation needs to very closely looked at and adapted to modern times. At the time it was written, the worst that could really happen while flying very low over the tree tops was maybe a higher number of smashed insects on the wing's leading edges, but now, there are other hazards.

 

[sar104]

As mentioned above a couple of times, manned aircraft are legal to operate as low as they want over areas of "open water", and they are also allowed to do so over "sparsely populated" areas as well. Here is the wording from FAR 91.119: '(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

IMO, with the growth of the UAV industry, this particular regulation needs to very closely looked at and adapted to modern times. At the time it was written, the worst that could really happen while flying very low over the tree tops was maybe a higher number of smashed insects on the wing's leading edges, but now, there are other hazards.

Or alternatively, at some point we'll see a technological solution for deconflicting manned aircraft and sUAS.

 

[jeplane]

I have no idea what you mean by "if that was true". This is trivial to verify for yourself rather than just guessing based on anecdotal evidence:

ADS-B Flight Tracking - FlightAware

FlightAware operates a worldwide network of ADS-B receivers that track ADS-B-equipped aircraft flying around the globe. FlightAware owns and operates these receivers at hundreds of airports around the world in conjunction with airport operators. We also invite customers and professional users...

flightaware.com

I have no idea what you mean by providing a link of flightaware, which explains nothing on how they do not track ALL flights, unless in contact with ATC.
This is not an anecdotal evidence, much to your chagring since everything ends up with a pissing contest with you...

 

[sar104]

I have no idea what you mean by providing a link of flightaware, which explains nothing on how they do not track ALL flights, unless in contact with ATC.
This is not an anecdotal evidence, much to your chagring since everything ends up with a pissing contest with you...

I provided the link because you appeared to be completely unaware of how Flightaware gets its data. Their receiver network simply receives the broadcasts, and has no way of knowing whether a particular flight is in contact with ATC. And it explains one perfectly possible reason for flights not being tracked - the lack of 100% receiver coverage - which is why I said, in my first post on this, that such a flight may show up if it were broadcasting and within coverage.

Your assertion that you have observed flights not showing is virtually the definition of anecdotal evidence, and resorting to ad hom arguments doesn't help your case at all.

 

[jeplane]

Your assertion that you have observed flights not showing is virtually the definition of anecdotal evidence, and resorting to ad hom arguments doesn't help your case at all.

All the flights not showing up, not with ATC, are made out of the Fort Worth area.
Those in the same area, with ATC, are showing up fine.
Both planes are ADSB compliant and ready for 2020.
Thank you for your interest on how Flightaware works!

 

[sar104]

All the flights not showing up, not with ATC, are made out of the Fort Worth area.
Those in the same area, with ATC, are showing up fine.
Both planes are ADSB compliant and ready for 2020.
Thank you for your interest on how Flightaware works!

Interesting, but still anecdotal, and inconsistent with how Flightaware works. And why would they even want to filter out traffic based on that criterion when they have gone to the trouble of setting up a receiver network that can plot flights just based on ADS-B, not radar or other ATC data?

 

[Dave Maine]

All the discussion of technology obscures the fact that manned aircraft have priority. They are not required to avoid you, you are required to avoid them. Human life takes priority over battery powered objects.

 

[jeplane]

Interesting, but still anecdotal, and inconsistent with how Flightaware works. And why would they even want to filter out traffic based on that criterion when they have gone to the trouble of setting up a receiver network that can plot flights just based on ADS-B, not radar or other ATC data?

I agree with you that all ADSB traffic is seen, ATC or not. But yet, here we are. Not all flights show up.

Why do they filter? Evidently displaying hundreds of thousands of flights is deemed not worth it to them.

So back to the OP, it is entirely possible that the plane would not show up on such website.

 

[Kilrah]

They do not filter. As mentioned previously requirements for a flight to show are that the aircraft needs to have its transponder broadcasting (i.e. be in range of a secondary radar), and there being one (if transponder sends out ADS-B / Mode S) or at least 3 (for MLAT, with transponder in standard A/C modes) receiving stations in range. The lower the aircraft is the shorter the range is, so low flights and are less likely to be picked up as are flights in remote areas, and if the pilot has the transponder off which is likely to be the case if he's flying too low the flight won't show up.

 

[jeplane]

Then I do not know why flights flown in a major metroplex area, at altitude, with transponder ON, not with ATC contact do not show up on Flightaware.

 

[Kilrah]

Try others like flightradar24.
They all have different networks of stations, algorithms etc...

 

[DanMan32]

I find flightradar24 flawed. I live near a regional airport that has controlled airspace, yet that airport does not show up on FR24. I even emailed them about it a few months ago, still missing.

I tried tracking small planes seeming to fly low over my house on approach to said airport to get a sense of altitude. VLOS can be deceiving. They either don't show up or do long after they passed in real time and in app.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Just curious- I know you said sun was still up, so it sounds like you were legal, but did you have anti-collision beacons on? Also, was it a float plane by chance?

This is another reason why I am really careful about flying where my view of the skyline is cut off by trees or low hills, it is so easy for planes to just show up out of nowhere from behind them. We have a tanker base in our town and they often come home very fast over the low hills on their approach, so I stay off the ridge tops when I’m flying from below them.

Really glad it worked out for you, sounds like you did the right thing. As for who to call, there is an FAA line to report issues with planes, but it sounds like you really both were at the same place at the wrong time while doing the right thing, although flying an airplane that low above water at sunset is extremely risky as far as having a birdstrike. I wouldn’t do it.

Nope, it was a land based. The lake I was at is very close to me and I've never seen or heard an aircraft land or take off in the 8 years I've been here

 

[vciavarelli]

Should that be YOU nearly hit a Cessna ?

No, the Cessna has to maintain altitute at least 500' AGL.
"An aircraft must maintain an altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure. "

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Just to answer a few questions and comments. Yes, it is a medium sized lake, houses surround the perimeter of it along with some private and public beaches with a large open field part of a state park on one corner where I usually see kites and stuff in the summer. It's not uncommon to see parasailers in the summer also, but not too many, it's usually small boats and set skis.