Drone hit a news helicopter

STKNRUD · Dec 7, 2019

It was the Russians trying to create havoc among users of our airspace.

anotherlab · Dec 7, 2019

I wonder if the scuff marks to the left of the puncture are from what hit the copter or are crease marks in the paint on the stabilizer. If the scuff marks are material from what hit it, like the ABS plastic used for the body of a Phantom 4, that would rule out a bird strike. If it was a bird, there should be some amount "bird residue" inside the the puncture hole.

MacCool · Dec 7, 2019

2edgesword said:
So at this point no one knows what hit the helicopter.

The helicopter hit something at 1100 feet, solid enough to put a hole in the aluminum. Of course it was a drone.

Forester · Dec 7, 2019

TheFoxSaysRingADingDing said:
Los Angeles television station says chopper struck by drone, forced to make precautionary landing

A news helicopter belonging to an ABC owned-and-operated television station was forced to make a precautionary landing on Wednesday night after it struck an object believed to be a drone while flying over downtown Los Angeles.

www.foxnews.com

or someone was flying below the 400 ft. Don’t always blame it on the drone operator. We have fixed wing and heli fly over under 400ft.

Either someone wasn't flying smart or maybe they thought that they could fly 400 feet above the buildings.

sar104 · Dec 7, 2019

Forester said:
or someone was flying below the 400 ft. Don’t always blame it on the drone operator. We have fixed wing and heli fly over under 400ft.

Either someone wasn't flying smart or maybe they thought that they could fly 400 feet above the buildings.

The helicopter was at 1100 ft.

Sandwich · Dec 7, 2019

TheFoxSaysRingADingDing said:
Los Angeles television station says chopper struck by drone, forced to make precautionary landing

A news helicopter belonging to an ABC owned-and-operated television station was forced to make a precautionary landing on Wednesday night after it struck an object believed to be a drone while flying over downtown Los Angeles.

www.foxnews.com

Either someone wasn't flying smart or maybe they thought that they could fly 400 feet above the buildings.

the drone did it...is an easy alibi.
It could have been many things, space junk, or most likely a tool dropped and left by a mechanic on a prior servicing.

firstbase · Dec 7, 2019

BigAl07 said:
I think your last statement is going to be the deciding factor... not UAS debris then our community is going to scream "Not a Drone". But, even if they don't find debris and if they can't determine for sure it was NOT a UAS then it will go down in the minds of John Q. Public (and Allen TBH) as a UAS strike. Once the story went out it's Guilty until proven otherwise.

Totally agree. Doesn't matter who comes out with what on this. As soon as the headline read what it did....it was a drone strike to anyone near the newspaper or website. Yet another loss for the drone community. They pile up.

Sandwich · Dec 7, 2019

Does anyone even consider the turbulences created by a helicopter? The only possible approach that a drone could have on a helicopter is from above the main rotor.

BigAl07 · Dec 7, 2019

Sandwich said:
Does anyone even consider the turbulences created by a helicopter? The only possible approach that a drone could have on a helicopter is from above the main rotor.

Wrong!! Go back to post #15 and see the physics involved. It helps to see it spelled out...

4wd · Dec 7, 2019

I would have suspected icing damage rather than a drone doing that, if not from the helicopter blades, ice falling from an aircraft above is more likely than a small drone somehow getting below the main rotor downdraught to strike there.

The pictures show substantial damage in two places, what parts of a lightweight consumer drone have enough mass to do that - ice far more likely.

Deleted member 93449 · Dec 7, 2019

MacCool said:
The helicopter hit something at 1100 feet, solid enough to put a hole in the aluminum. Of course it was a drone.

Of course it was a drone...

Falling Aircraft Parts

"In the commercial world, Boeing received 200 reports of structural parts falling off its planes between 1989 and 1994. McDonnell Douglas officials said only several incidents occur each year involving their planes."

"It is a rare, rare event that this happens, but it does happen," said Anthony J. Broderick, the FAA's associate administrator for regulation and aircraft certification. "When you measure them in terms of probability, given millions flights, it is very, very low."
The FAA is supposed to investigate every report of a falling object, but Mr. Broderick says tracking down the offending aircraft is "generally impossible."

More Falling Aircraft Parts

"it only happens about four times each year. A U.S. jetliner sustains mechanical trouble so severe that parts break out of the engine housing and rain down on the ground. Normally, such incidents end harmlessly. In the most recent case, a Delta Boeing 737 took off from Fort Lauderdale last Sunday, only to have a turbine in its left engine break down, spitting small metal pieces over Port Everglades. The pilots made an emergency landing with 140 passengers on board."

More Stuff Falling From an Aircraft

"Residents of a town near Rome had a near-miss when debris fell from a plane that encountered technical difficulties shortly after takeoff. The Norwegian Air Boeing 787 was flying from Rome to Los Angeles on Saturday when it ran into problems less than half an hour after its departure. People living in the town of Isola Sacra told the Corriere Della Sera they saw pieces of glowing metal come down from the sky. Many picked up the fragments, which were around three inches long, from the street.
The newspaper reported that if the flight had continued for a few minutes longer, the pieces of "burning debris could have hit the center of town, or the crowded beaches of the Roman coast," adding that it "could have been much worse."

sar104 · Dec 7, 2019

4wd said:
I would have suspected icing damage rather than a drone doing that, if not from the helicopter blades, ice falling from an aircraft above is more likely than a small drone somehow getting below the main rotor downdraught to strike there.

Temperature at the time was around 60°F, humidity around 60%. There was no icing at 1100 ft. The chance of ice falling from an aircraft above, getting through the main rotor, and then doing leading edge damage is very remote.

The pictures show substantial damage in two places, what parts of a lightweight consumer drone have enough mass to do that - ice far more likely.

The small hole could easily be made by a motor unit. If the battery hit it would have done much more damage. The two damage areas are only around 15 cm apart.

MacCool · Dec 7, 2019

4wd said:
I would have suspected icing damage rather than a drone doing that, if not from the helicopter blades, ice falling from an aircraft above is more likely than a small drone somehow getting below the main rotor downdraught to strike there.

The pictures show substantial damage in two places, what parts of a lightweight consumer drone have enough mass to do that - ice far more likely.

? Icing. In Los Angeles. At 1100 feet. That's even less likely than getting hit by ice falling from an aircraft at a higher level. OTOH, a wayward drone cruising around a populous area.....

Clearly, a drone hit that helicopter.

sar104 · Dec 7, 2019

MacCool said:
? Icing. In Los Angeles. At 1100 feet. That's even less likely than getting hit by ice falling from an aircraft at a higher level. OTOH, a wayward drone cruising around a populous area.....

Clearly, a drone hit that helicopter.

A drone may seem like the most likely explanation, but we shouldn't jump to conclusions.

Sandwich · Dec 7, 2019

BigAl07 said:
Wrong!! Go back to post #15 and see the physics involved. It helps to see it spelled out...

not wrong...a consumer drone does not have the mass nor possible velocity to withstand the prop wash of a helicopter.

Joe4flight · Dec 7, 2019

AMann said:
^^^Best idea - waiting for the final FAA report!

One thing for sure; It wasn’t a bird because birds don’t have lights!

I’m no bird expert, But isn’t it possible for a bird to reflect light??? Birds can be red and green, right?

anotherlab · Dec 7, 2019

Sandwich said:
not wrong...a consumer drone does not have the mass nor possible velocity to withstand the prop wash of a helicopter.

It doesn't need either the mass or the velocity. At 180 mph, the helicopter would overtake the object (drone, bird, etc) before the downward force of the prop wash would have pushed that object out of the way.