Drone crashes into car on Sydney Harbour Bridge.

[its2loud]

If you want the truth of the matter, Drone Haters have done more damage to personal property than drone owners have.
Calif. man must pay $850 in damages after shooting drone

FAA confirms shooting down a drone can lead to a potential 20 year jail sentence | Daily Mail Online

And many people don't realize that just threatening to shoot down a drone can get you 5 years in prison. There's a Federal Law to prove it.

View attachment 12760

View attachment 12761

My point is that drone owners are subject to more criminal acts than the drone hating public. I'm sick of this bad publicity we get.

Well, if you commit a criminal act with a UAS then you are subject to penalty. Bad publicity comes with bad piloting. If we make good piloting choices, then there wouldn't be bad publicity. Makes total sense. I've never seen a story with the headline "Drone pilot flys legally and safe in open space taking beautiful pictures". I'm sure this type of flying happens all the time. In case you haven't noticed, our news outlets rarely put out a story that is positive and uplifting. It's all fear based reporting. Not just for drones.

 

[mav09]

I agree that the pilot was being stupid, but man is that story sensationalized. If the gimbal had made it "into the motor" then the car wouldn't be running. And a fatality? really? I'm pretty sure you could fly the mavic straight into someone's face in sports mode and, it would hurt like **** and mangle them for life, but I don't think it would kill them.

You try riding a motorcycle at 70mph and let a solid mavic hit you in the face whilst its doing 45mph head on. I'll await the outcome of that.

 

[rowdy1]

It looked like the mavic had already impacted something up higher, and was on the second or third bounce when it hit his car....

 

[Jenee]

Personally, I hope they catch the guy and hang him by his nuts from the bridge .
Because of actions like this we could now end up with some very draconian laws in Australia.
http://www.amas.org.au/hosted/org/67/docs/567885bb/Drones Media Statement 10 May 2017.pdf

 

[Static8]

Personally, I hope they catch the guy and hang him by his nuts from the bridge .
Because of actions like this we could now end up with some very draconian laws in Australia.
http://www.amas.org.au/hosted/org/67/docs/567885bb/Drones Media Statement 10 May 2017.pdf

Yup I agree.. Just like we have in Canada and **** like this really doesn't help my case and my petition I have to change the law in Canada.. We have over 3400 signatures so far and law goes permanent June 1st.. So really sucks when I see vids like this on social media.. **** idiots.. I ride motorcycle and can only imagine if this hit a motorcycle.. Would have likely been first dear by drone...

 

[Static8]

Yup I agree.. Just like we have in Canada and **** like this really doesn't help my case and my petition I have to change the law in Canada.. We have over 3400 signatures so far and law goes permanent June 1st.. So really sucks when I see vids like this on social media.. **** idiots.. I ride motorcycle and can only imagine if this hit a motorcycle.. Would have likely been first death by drone...

 

[quick_dry]

if this dumb crap happened in ten years time when people are already used to delivery drones zipping about the air, and bots on the footpaths - the law in response might have a chance at being level headed because people are so used to them being a part of their lives. But with how increasingly risk averse people are, and how eager to legislate every new thing people are, activities get shut down before they have a chance for people to take them out of the "scary new thing" box.

 

[malepilot]

Maybe the drone was malfunctioning as no one in their right mind would try to fly through the Sydney Harbour Bridge... apart from the fact it's right on the edge of a NFZ out to the heads and as a visitor from the UK even I know that !

I have seen many drone videos on YOuTube of flying over Sydney Harbour Bridge, Opera House and ANZAC Bridge, all are within the same Restricted Zone of Sydney Harbour.

Just too many idiots go against the law and think they are so smart with good skills that can do anything they like. At the end, we the ones who obey the law get affected by their stupidity!

 

[Chris.K]

As a motorcyclist, we are aware of many hazards and many things that could kill us. Riding thru suburban streets, a football miskicked by an 8 year old hitting me in the face is just as dangerous and far more likely.

I agree with many other porters here about the melodramatics getting thrown around here by people hijacking this incident to validate their own agendas.

Personally, I hope they catch the guy and hang him by his nuts from the bridge .
Because of actions like this we could now end up with some very draconian laws in Australia.
http://www.amas.org.au/hosted/org/67/docs/567885bb/Drones Media Statement 10 May 2017.pdf

What's so draconian about those laws ?

 

[quick_dry]

Just too many idiots go against the law and think they are so smart with good skills that can do anything they like. At the end, we the ones who obey the law get affected by their stupidity!

I actually don't think a lot of people realise it is a restricted zone, they know about the airports, but they know it isn't in range of the airport and they know that their app doesn't say it is an NFZ, in their head it must be OK.
Maybe they think flying over the bridge isn't OK because then they're directly over people, maybe they think the bridge itself might be an area not to fly as a security thing.
I just don't think a lot of recreational operators know the overall harbor area is restricted - just difficult to fly in if they have to ground every time a joyflight buzzes in low (and if you're flying under a couple of hundred feet, and well away from the Rose Bay landing area, it doesn't scream "no fly area" most days, it's empty water, just yachts, ferries and the occasional cruise ship).

 

[quick_dry]

apologies for double posting

What's so draconian about those laws ?

I think they're nonsense, and I think those guys would be quick to call nonsense if anyone non agricultural started making rules about how their regional/rural affairs or trucking must be done, and showing a lack of understanding about it.

"regardless of size"
- that cheerson thing that fits in your palm, register it
- you there with the bluetooth phone app controlled little coaxial helicopter you bought at the servo, register it
- paper aeroplane with that wifi controlled twin prop clip-on thing, register it, that things a menace to life and liberty.

"individual geo fencing"
so every drone must have GPS?

"drone shields"
righto, why don't they just install force fields on all the planes, or have tractor beams installed at airports? Why don't they talk to ACMA about their "drone shields", and what a great idea it is to have some hulking great radio jammer operating across all the ISM space where aircraft are trying to navigate... how many voters care about drone shields when their wifi won't work? medical devices are getting jammed? or devices on the small GA planes are ******* up - imagine if they opt for the GPS denial versions, that jammer shielding you from the drone is going to jam the little plane's GPS too (or will we have automated drone jamming turrets to fire off those rifle shaped things the Senator's grandson showed them on The Youtubes that time)

I think elements of that media release suggest they don't really understand what they're dealing with.

 

[Chris.K]

I think they're nonsense.

I do too...but draconian ? Don't think so.

 

[code_ultra_zyl]

If there is a silver lining to this: The Mavic is relatively small compared to other drones up there, this makes is less likely to kill or injure someone than a larger drone. Smacking a car? It would have dented it, but otherwise... the driver is safe as can be (unless they swerve, or some such).

 

[its2loud]

If there is a silver lining to this: The Mavic is relatively small compared to other drones up there, this makes is less likely to kill or injure someone than a larger drone. Smacking a car? It would have dented it, but otherwise... the driver is safe as can be (unless they swerve, or some such).

Actually, it's quite the opposite. With larger UAS's at least you can see them before they hit you, in most cases. Since the Mavic is so small it poses a bigger threat since drivers or pedestrians may not see it before impact. There is no silver lining. Do you know how you would react to an object smashing into your windshield while driving 40mph? I doubt that you do. The element of a surprise impact could most likely cause you to hit another vehicle, object, or pedestrian. To say "the driver is safe as can be" is the same kind ignorance and attitude that will continue to tarnish the freedoms and privileges we have has UAS pilots. Wake up folks! This is serious S!**. If we don't start taking this "hobby" and all of its potential dangers seriously there won't be any hobby left.

 

[Chris.K]

no hobby left ? really ? lol

 

[its2loud]

no hobby left ? really ? lol

At least not one that doesn't require licenses, regulated and overseen NFZ, enforced penalties, and mandated flight tests. I'm not being overly dramatic here. These are things that are currently being discussed amongst law makers. I enjoy my flying freedom. I certainly do not want that taken away from me because a few thousand morons decided to ignore some rules because they didn't feel like they were necessary and that the drones they were flying weren't dangerous.

 

[Chris.K]

i think having a sensible discussion about this is a good thing. its important to debate the situation and listen to all perspectives. but there is an element of melodrama that does not lend itself to us having that sort of discussion.

what sort of freedom do you have now ? do you always fly LOS ? is that freedom ? id prefer to register it, have NFZ's regulated and enforced and even licencing for the ability to "legally" fly outside LOS. the vast majority of people do this anyway...even those that say they don't.

talk of fatalities is being totally melodramatic. in a big way.

just my opinion.

 

[its2loud]

I do always fly LOS. I have no problem with it. I have the freedom of being able to fly without submitting a flight plan. I have the freedom of being able to fly without having a visible tail number. I have the freedom of rolling up to a legal location and fly without submitting a request first. I have the freedom of being able to fly without contacting ATC. I'd say those are some pretty good freedoms.

 

[Chris.K]

so there you have the reason this should be debated rather than having people speaking from pulpits. flying LOS is not freedom to me AT ALL. that is completely untenable and laughable that regulators think this could be effectively implemented. couldn't care less about a licence plate. isn't my opinion just as valid as yours ?

submitting a flight plan, (pre flight), aint gonna happen so its just another nonsense rule regulators will bring in but no one will ever comply with. just like LOS.

 

[rsands]

Give it time and they will be monitored heavily. I personally think the rules are strict and in some cases far too strict. The FAA had research done for damage from a drone crashing onto a person and they even admitted the risk is much less than what they had thought but the blades can still slice skin - bit different from death! The Mavic and all DJI most likely is programmed to stop the motor as soon as the motor reaches resistance spikes.

The guy flying over the bridge was stupid - however CASA could do a better job on their website detailing this restricted airspace. On their Facebook page they have a great graphic that shows it clearly - on the website (or at least not easily seen) it is nowhere to be seen. Their new app by Drone Compiler will help but I downloaded it and even it is completely wrong in what it says.

e.g. R578B williamtown restricted airspace is only active by NOTAM (usually Monday-Friday) but the app says different. I have done many hours towards my PPL and hence understand a bit more about air traffic and rules and as such I agree some basic training should be required - a simple tutorial is enough. But really, as CASA have said - catching the person is close to impossible. Rules are rules and whilst most abide by them someone is always going to break them. Many break them safely but always some idiot prepared to go to the extremes.

Banning them is not the answer and restricting further is not the answer - people will just break them even further. We have to remember in Sydney how many drones are flown daily - ALOT! How many crash into a bridge? A few. How many have killed someone? None. How many have injured someone not involved in the flying? I would *guess* none as if it had happened we would all know about it.

That is not to say we just remove all rules and go back to a free for all but peoples ideas about these "toys" is way off. They are sophisticated devices and are extremely safe.

I cannot see a small drone bringing down a plane, a plane is going much slower on approach and takeoff and climbs rapidly on takeoff out of the height restrictions.