Drone may have caused B-17 and P-63 collision at Wings Over Dallas

[Don Testme]

An object was seen, be it a bird or even another plane off in the distance. Another plane 2000ft behind the video would look small and perhaps look like a UAV. 3D space makes collisions very difficult. For a drone to hit a "warbird" and cause the pilot to lose control and then hit another manned aircraft would be like the odds of winning a lottery ticket. Get the idea out of your heads that it was a drone. You all are falling into the trap of the general public. If something hits a plane or helicopter it must be a drone. And said drone must have caused a serious malfunction in the manned aircraft. If drones could bring down manned aircraft so easily, birds would be doing the same and much more often. Flying manned aircraft would be impossible considering how many large bird strikes there are.

Also, terrorists would be using drones in mass, if it were that simple to bring down manned aircraft. Terrorists even know it's almost impossible to disrupt a manned aircraft with a consumer drone. If it were easy, terrorists would be buying these things in large amounts and closing almost every airport and taking down passenger aircraft all day. They could essentially disable our entire air transport system. But they don't. Why? Because drones aren't capable of it.

 

[lookout]

Also, terrorists would be using drones in mass, if it were that simple to bring down manned aircraft. Terrorists even know it's almost impossible to disrupt a manned aircraft with a consumer drone. If it were easy, terrorists would be buying these things in large amounts and closing almost every airport and taking down passenger aircraft all day. They could essentially disable our entire air transport system. But they don't. Why? Because drones aren't capable of it.

Maybe this is their rationale?

 

[DARKSeifer]

Also, terrorists would be using drones in mass, if it were that simple to bring down manned aircraft. Terrorists even know it's almost impossible to disrupt a manned aircraft with a consumer drone. If it were easy, terrorists would be buying these things in large amounts and closing almost every airport and taking down passenger aircraft all day. They could essentially disable our entire air transport system. But they don't. Why? Because drones aren't capable of it.

Drones can bring down a plane, but should be custom-made (it has to be fast and explode on impact and ideally used on the landing stage of the plane because intercepting a plane with a drone midair is impossible unless you make a jet powered VTOL or rigid wing) and terrorist in general don't go too techie, they just pick a van and roll over people, pick a gun and shoot or just strap some C4 to their bodies at then go boom.

It's just a matter of time, one day a drone will kill someone in an accident, and a drone with an explosive attached will be used on a terrorist act... and what? The problem is not the tool, is the person behind it. 1.3 million people die each year to car accidents worldwide, cars and vans are a common tool for terrorist attacks and yet everybody use them on a daily basis and nobody needs to emmit RID at 2Km around their car.

On the later years we've reached the point that every flight incident has been caused by drone, it's always a drone till proven contrary. They just want to ground our hobby to clear the <120m airspace for the big companies to exploit freely. All the rules we have now, the RID thing, the bad publicity, the karens (now armed with karen apps), the only purpose they seek is to kill the RC hobby (well, at least the flying part of it XD).

I think we should stop calling our flying tripods "drones" and use reserve the word "drone" for military equipment like the predator, that way we would draw a clear, big bold line between what is a flying camera or a model and what is a flying weapon.

 

[MA2 317]

NTSB Preliminary Report.


Another video...

.

 

[lookout]

A real reenactment of war birds.

 

[AnzacJack]

Flying manned aircraft would be impossible considering how many large bird strikes there are.

what do you consider a "large" bird
I remember A9-291 a P3 Orion. The aircraft had an nasty incident off the west coast of Australia. A flock of pelicans flying line astern struck the radome. The first bird punctured the radome and destroyed the radar. The next two penetrated the forward pressure bulkhead, destroying the instrument panel, covered the flight deck crew in blood, guts and feathers and spraying bits of pelican down as far as the sono package.
Large birds do plenty of damage

 

[AnzacJack]

Also, terrorists would be using drones in mass, if it were that simple to bring down manned aircraft. Terrorists even know it's almost impossible to disrupt a manned aircraft with a consumer drone. If it were easy, terrorists would be buying these things in large amounts and closing almost every airport and taking down passenger aircraft all day. They could essentially disable our entire air transport system. But they don't. Why? Because drones aren't capable of it.

they dont need to bring down aircraft. Penetrating airspace regularly at airports would cause just as much disruption as we say in London a little while ago. Terrorists could do lots of things easily but fortunately, dont.

 

[Crow Horse]

But they don't. Why? Because drones aren't capable of it.

I disagree. Consumer drones do have the capability to damage a manned aircraft severe enough to bring it down. There are videos on You Tube that demonstrate this. They can easily penetrate a leading edge of a wing or windshield/windscreen. That damage could potentially be catastrophic. Not to consider drones and manned aircraft in the same airspace as hazardous would be irresponsible.

 

[Don Testme]

I disagree. Consumer drones do have the capability to damage a manned aircraft severe enough to bring it down. There are videos on You Tube that demonstrate this. They can easily penetrate a leading edge of a wing or windshield/windscreen. That damage could potentially be catastrophic. Not to consider drones and manned aircraft in the same airspace as hazardous would be irresponsible.

From what I have read of these drone and manned aircraft impacts, the manned aircraft always had the ability to maintain full control of itself. The "emergency" landing is a protocol for any impact, including bird strikes. They don't land due to loss of control. If you have heard of such an incident (where control is lost), please post the link for me. Thanks.

 

[Don Testme]

they dont need to bring down aircraft. Penetrating airspace regularly at airports would cause just as much disruption as we say in London a little while ago. Terrorists could do lots of things easily but fortunately, dont.

I wonder why. They could seriously cause airports to be shut down all day with those cheap 50 dollar drones. All they would have to do is fly one into the airports flight corridor and let it hover there and walk away. Why they don't? I don't know. Yes, we are all very fortunate they don't. Happy holidays.

 

[Don Testme]

Drones can bring down a plane, but should be custom-made (it has to be fast and explode on impact and ideally used on the landing stage of the plane because intercepting a plane with a drone midair is impossible unless you make a jet powered VTOL or rigid wing) and terrorist in general don't go too techie, they just pick a van and roll over people, pick a gun and shoot or just strap some C4 to their bodies at then go boom.

It's just a matter of time, one day a drone will kill someone in an accident, and a drone with an explosive attached will be used on a terrorist act... and what? The problem is not the tool, is the person behind it. 1.3 million people die each year to car accidents worldwide, cars and vans are a common tool for terrorist attacks and yet everybody use them on a daily basis and nobody needs to emmit RID at 2Km around their car.

On the later years we've reached the point that every flight incident has been caused by drone, it's always a drone till proven contrary. They just want to ground our hobby to clear the <120m airspace for the big companies to exploit freely. All the rules we have now, the RID thing, the bad publicity, the karens (now armed with karen apps), the only purpose they seek is to kill the RC hobby (well, at least the flying part of it XD).

I think we should stop calling our flying tripods "drones" and use reserve the word "drone" for military equipment like the predator, that way we would draw a clear, big bold line between what is a flying camera or a model and what is a flying weapon.

That has always been a big fear of mine. A terrorist strapping a pipe bomb to a drone with some sort of mechanism that would cause it to explode on impact. It would make a great movie plot. I just fear it could really happen. It just seems too easy for terrorists not to do something like this. Lets hope it never happens.

Oh, I just thought of something worse. Imagine some nut job, flying a bomb strapped drone onto a school. Scary to think about such things. I hope I never see it in my lifetime or any time beyond that.

 

[Don Testme]

what do you consider a "large" bird
I remember A9-291 a P3 Orion. The aircraft had an nasty incident off the west coast of Australia. A flock of pelicans flying line astern struck the radome. The first bird punctured the radome and destroyed the radar. The next two penetrated the forward pressure bulkhead, destroying the instrument panel, covered the flight deck crew in blood, guts and feathers and spraying bits of pelican down as far as the sono package.
Large birds do plenty of damage

And still, they were able to maintain control and land the aircraft.

 

[AMann]

So much conjecture, I am surprised nobody has mentioned UFO’s yet. I think the truth is out there already though, the lack of visibility is the best cause theory so far.

 

[Don Testme]

So much conjecture, I am surprised nobody has mentioned UFO’s yet. I think the truth is out there already though, the lack of visibility is the best cause theory so far.

UFO

 

[Don Testme]

Video and article discussing what happens when this guy flies a relatively cheep drone into a planes prop. He should have used a larger drone, but I think he mentioned he couldn't afford one.

Drone Strike. What Happens When A Drone Hits An Airplane Propeller?

Drone strike. What happens when a drone strikes the propeller of an airplane? Well, not that much really as you can see in this Youtube video

dronexl.co

 

[AnzacJack]

And still, they were able to maintain control and land the aircraft.

through pure luck

Bird strikes have been estimated to cost the civil aviation industry alone upwards of $1 billion a year, and have resulted in the loss of 276 lives, as well as the destruction of at least 108 aircraft

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266163494_Fatalities_and_destroyed_aircraft_due_to_bird_strikes_1912-2002

 

[Crow Horse]

From what I have read of these drone and manned aircraft impacts, the manned aircraft always had the ability to maintain full control of itself. The "emergency" landing is a protocol for any impact, including bird strikes. They don't land due to loss of control. If you have heard of such an incident (where control is lost), please post the link for me. Thanks.

I don't think we should minimize the potential for disaster. The damage is significant.

This could have been catastrophic.....

 

[CactusJackSlade]

Personally I really dislike this sort of speculation. A black dot on a frame of the video (or wherever it came from). If you watch the entire video from multiple angles the P-51 pilot made no erratic maneuvers and simply made a stable arc until they collided. I would be flabbergasted if this were the case and even if there was a collision of drone/P51 I doubt that was enough to cause this. I bet when they review this in computer simulators the P51 pilot probably just did not see the B-17 below.

 

[lookout]

There used to be a joke about a Mazda miata and some truck in a collision. Little dent on the truck and big boo boo on the miata, if that was a miata. Are you sure that was a miata? I can't tell what it used to be.

 

[lookout]

through pure luck

Bird strikes have been estimated to cost the civil aviation industry alone upwards of $1 billion a year, and have resulted in the loss of 276 lives, as well as the destruction of at least 108 aircraft

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266163494_Fatalities_and_destroyed_aircraft_due_to_bird_strikes_1912-2002

Birds are kind of like deer more dense than a flying piece of literal plastic daggers.