Drone crashed into plane in Netherlands today

[Geekser]

I looked but didn't notice if they said how fast the Cesna was flying? If you run into anything - even something plastic at 100 MPH or faster, you can cause a lot of damage -

 

[MROJAS]

Sorry Thomas, no translation available but you can use google translate of course.

And how do they now it had to be a drone.....well they jump to to conclusions don't they?

Police concluded damage couldn't be caused by a bird.

Ruud

The Police should not dictaminate this matters, it's up to the Aeronautical Authorities to do this.

 

[Tentoes]

I'd say it hit something.

 

[midnav]

Hello Midnav,

According to you experience: is it possible to pass a drone through a spinning prop which shows damage or traces of contact and still have a piece left with enough mass and velocity to have the force to create a gash as shown on the photo?
Or is it more likely this is a result of a bullet hit?

Ruud

It’s interesting that birds very rarely are struck by the propeller blades. The reason for this is that the blades while turning 2400 rpm they are also moving forward at 130 knots or so. So the blades follow a helical pattern that large objects such as a goose or drone can pass through without contact. While this isn’t always the case, it most often is. Usually the whole goose comes through the windscreen.

 

[RuudF]

Well Midnav, that is the reason of my question.
The report states that the prop did make contact and some damage is visible.
Knowing this, does this change your answer to my question?

Ruud

 

[63R]

A drone is likely to be the culprit here, its certainly not a bird strike.

 

[63R]

Well Rana,
That is exactly what my question was.
A bullet can leave damage like shown in the photo, but I am not sure if shots fired at a plane flying at 600m (1800 ft) can reach this high altitude and still have enough kinetic energy to make a gash like this.
I refuse to believe a drone is the cause.

Ruud

The object could be stationary and still cause that damage, the aircraft will have been doing over 100 knots plus any accelerations imparted by the prop which it likely hit first., Sorry but your posts show a lack of understanding

 

[jeffcutler]

It is not a question if any drone can reach this altitude: yes they can.
There is plenty of idiots on YT who post their vids of record high en far flights.

But any mini or mavic doesn't have enough mass to cause such a dent.

It has to be bigger and heavier according to me.

But what do you think?
I am aware that we are speculating and the truth probably will never come out.

Ruud

Ask yourself, would you be elated if someone threw a DJI battery at your head? Then realize that a battery by itself could cause that damage, so even if the battery is within the lightweight frame of a MINI or an AIR, the battery will use kinetic energy to plow through the drone and into the plane. I would vote that it could cause that dent. **I do NOT think it was a drone, though. Both vehicles would have to be going really fast and the dent in the plane looks as if it came from the side. Max of 46MPH (ISH) of a regulation drone, and perpendicular speed of 80-200 of the plane....I think it would be a glancing blow, not a v-shaped dent. I don't know....I fly 400ft and under only. (No disrespect with the battery/head analogy, but I wouldn't want to even drop a battery on my toe.)

 

[rcwolpert]

It looks to me like it's from a small remote controlled plane. I used to pilot a Cessna and I'll never forget the time a small remote controlled plane zipped by me about 100 feet below me. Scared the crap out of me! This was near the airport in PA where I was landing, so I was at about 1000 feet.

 

[Raptorman]

As bcfd29 indicated, the photos lack any useful reference data that might make it easier to figure out what happened, but if the dent is more-or-less lengthwise along the fuselage that would almost 100% rule out a meteor strike of any kind -- the direction would have to have a significant vertical component. The fact that there was also prop damage suggests the object hit the plane with little vertical component and that puts a drone squarely in the crosshairs. A bird would leave blood and other biological evidence which, thus far, has not been mentioned so I'm guessing it wasn't a bird.

So, what does that leave us? Well unfortunately for us the default answer unless otherwise proven will be drone and it may well be that it was a drone. There are, however, other possibilities. Planes have hit balloons before, but unless the balloon was also lifting a basket or payload it's hard to see a thin gas bag doing much damage at the 120kn speed this plane was not likely to exceed by much. People throw stuff in the air and sometimes at things like cars and planes, but if someone was able to throw a rock or any other object 600m up they are not someone I'd want to mess with that's for sure ... so, not in the cards.

Unless someone was playing with a backyard mortar I can't see much else that could get that far off the ground. Sadly, until proven otherwise this will be considered a drone strike.


Brian

 

[SB Condor]

It was a bird carrying a rock! LOL! Seriously though, I could not see any Mavic leaving a dent in a piece aluminum like that, it would just shatter in little pieces. It deformed a small area. Any drone with enough mass would leave a bigger area of damage.
So, traveling about 140mph, static drone in the way...hum... VERY strange!

 

[AMann]

Rapidly climbing drone vs a forward flying plane - I think the vectors for a front/side hit add up. Damage to the prop could result in a thrown battery or motor as well.

 

[Tentoes]

Rapidly climbing drone vs a forward flying plane - I think the vectors for a front/side hit add up. Damage to the prop could result in a thrown battery or motor as well.

Yea, I think that's likely what happened. Damage was due to battery or maybe a motor hitting the cowling. That's not very heavy aluminum there.

 

[SB Condor]

Yea, I think that's likely what happened. Damage was due to battery or maybe a motor hitting the cowling. That's not very heavy aluminum there.

It would have to have been accelerated by the prop. The crease was deep and localized. Something from another aircraft? Maybe he is not being completely honest and may have come in contact with something while flying low?!? I work next to a small airport and we aren't exactly liked by pilots. Easer to get insurance money for an alleged drone strike than an oops at low altitude. Not saying this is what happened, but all things have to be considered. Funny that the assumption is a drone at that altitude. Just from shear chance, I don't think you could hit a plane at 600+ feet if you tried to everyday for a year. Just saying.

It's not above the media to jump to conclusions and make an assumption into a fact that results in reactionary legislation. I say prove it or call it an unexplained fluke.

 

[Mazdaman323lx]

Fake news

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

 

[GB1Yorkshire1]

It is not a question if any drone can reach this altitude: yes they can.
There is plenty of idiots on YT who post their vids of record high en far flights.

But any mini or mavic doesn't have enough mass to cause such a dent.

It has to be bigger and heavier according to me.

But what do you think?
I am aware that we are speculating and the truth probably will never come out.

Ruud

I think that you probably underestimate exactly what damage a drone could do to either a light aircraft or commercial plane.
Though the total weight is relatively small a solid mass like a battery or motor hitting the thin aluminum skin could cause this damage!
It’s not unknown that birds have penetrated the windshield. A drone or bird hit by an object traveling at 150 kn is a lot of inertia.

 

[TomSull]

Seriously, there are thousands of tiny meteorites that strike the earth every year. Just one of these could probably make a dent like that one. But it is easier to just say a drone did it, even though there is no evidence other than a dent.

I also don't understand the photo that was posted of the dent. That looks like it is on the front of the plane, yet the landing gear rotation is perpendicular to the dent, according to the photo. Almost like the strike was on the side of the plane.

Hmmm, if the meteorite/space junk hit the propeller, it might deflect it to that part of the plane, BUT that location is not directly accessible from above as it's in the sloping curve of the body, with no direct upward path from the impact location. Also, any idea of how fast the plane was flying at the time? If it were going at full cruise speed, even a mini might be able to make that dent into aluminum.

 

[Starz]

Title should read”UFO damaged a fixed wing”.
And the key here is the “U”.

 

[Conservative Nihilist]

A piece of Styrofoam can rip a shuttle wing open. So all bets are off as far as your guessing.

It is indeed possible for a drone to inflict the damage shown on the fuselage of that aircraft, not due to the speed of the drone, but on account of the aircraft's speed, even if the drone was in a stationary hover while in the path of the approaching aircraft.

That said, bird strikes have been known to demolish aircraft windscreens, and wreak serious damage on jet turbine blades, so it is by no means certain that a drone is the culprit in this particular instance.

 

[KurtpH]

I was able to freeze the broadcast of the item on my tv and I took a picture of the damage.
Judging by the size of the screw in the picture my initial estimate of the size was way to big.

I now think a maximum of 2 cm damage is visible somewhere behind the landing gear because a wheel is visible.

Please see the photo enclosedView attachment 116834

This photo appears to shown the left wheel coming at us. While I’m no expert, the only surface that seems to me that this could be is the surface right behind the prop. And the prop took no damage? Highly unlikely I would think. I’m thinking it had to be something moving really fast, but light.