4 Year Breakdown of the Drone Sightings Data. Some of the data will shock you & has never been reported. Check out the graphs & what you can learn from them.
I'm not sure that it's true to say it isn't getting worse. Recent studies have indicated that the rate of illegal flights in controlled airspace around airports is increasing significantly. The probability of aircraft collisions almost certainly correlates with that rate.However, reality shows that it hasn’t gotten worse. There still hasn’t even been a fatality from drones. Very few hobbies or industries can say anything like that.
People reported a single unmanned aircraft went going crazy before crashing. Of course there was nobody on board, but 45 people were injured or died.However, reality shows that it hasn’t gotten worse. There still hasn’t even been a fatality from drones. Very few hobbies or industries can say anything like that.
The news typically can't get their facts straight, and many articles might include directly conflicting information but anyhow...Can you say that again, but, in english?
Has there been one impact with a part 121 flight? What about the inherently more dangerous part 91 or 135?I'm not sure that it's true to say it isn't getting worse. Recent studies have indicated that the rate of illegal flights in controlled airspace around airports is increasing significantly. The probability of aircraft collisions almost certainly correlates with that rate.
As for overall risk, this activity/hobby/industry is somewhat unusual in that the hazard to the operator is negligible, which is, itself, a big part of the problem. Most activities and hobbies somewhat self-regulate when the lives or health of the participants are on the line. Here the hazard is entirely to others, and when others means manned aviation and a large number of the participants clearly don't understand or care about that risk, there is little alternative to formal regulation. If the FAA simply waits until there is an aviation accident, even just one accident, it would be crucified by public opinion, and would have failed at one of its core responsibilities.
The mass media live by their own golden rule: If it bleeds, it leads. For the most part, they don't know much more than what is handed to them. It's rare when they accurately report a technical topic.Has there been one impact with a part 121 flight? What about the inherently more dangerous part 91 or 135?
Aren't all of these types of aircraft engineered to a degree to take a hit from an object relatively the size of a drone.
Other than a drone being sucked into a jet engine and the lipo igniting, I'm just not convinced there is a REAL threat, bar any unusual situations like an aircraft trying to evade and crashing as a result.
I think there's a lot of fear mongering, part of it being stoked by people with interests to clear the air of hobbyist aircraft that may interfere with future commercial operations
@DrizzyDrones i know what you ,mean but by any stretch of the imagination ,there is no time that flying beyond VLOS can be said to be (responsible safe breaking of it )The only reason its getting “worse “ is because the price of the technology has dropped so much and you can get budget drones that have range and abilitys that a few years ago would cost much more . In turn people aren’t serious or even care about the hobby itself are able to purchase what used to be professional drones now in the toy price range.
when someone spends a lot of money they are less likely to do as much “risky “ behaviour and risk losing their investment.
lets be honest majority of people regularly break or have broken the VLOS law but in my opinion there is responsible safe breaking of it and stupid irresponsible breaking it
I agree and yes you are stating the Facts but realistically what % of dji owners do you honestly think have never flown out of vlos...its very low id bet... I wasn’t saying that its a good thing to be doing i was just pointing out that you Really have two levels of it... u get the real irresponsible ( flying In wind over traffic...over residential..over crowds of people ect) then The more responsibility ones that fly out of vlos over a farm or in the wilderness In non windy conditions . Doesn’t make it allowed but one is much more dangerous than the other and I’d bet money that even if they deny it the % of people who have flown out of vlos is wayyyy more than the % that havent... dji drones have such good range on them really all they’d have to do is lock in a max range and people wouldn’t be able to but putting a range of several miles and telling people they can only go a 1/4 the possible distance is just asking for it ... it’s the law and its not supposed to be broken but if you do be extra careful when doing the preflight checks ..: the right weather and location is much better than total disregard@DrizzyDrones i know what you ,mean but by any stretch of the imagination ,there is no time that flying beyond VLOS can be said to be (responsible safe breaking of it )
the problem of breaking the VLOS rule, is what happens when during the time the drone is out of sight ,a low flying manned aircraft happens to be flying in the same airspace at the same height as the drone ,the onus of avoiding a collision rests with the drone pilot ,but because the drone is out of sight then the drone pilot would not know the plane was in the same airspace
or where it was in relation to the manned aircraft it does not matter whether the manned aircraft is flying in the 400 ft airspace legally or not ,if it hits the drone then ,the drone owner would be in a world of pain ,not because he was at 395 ft but because at the time he was flying out of compliance, i know that in a huge deserted area way out in the back of beyond ,it would be reasonable to think that the chances of an incident with other aircraft, or a crash causing damage to persons or property are very slim ,and its reasonable to think that this flight will be fine as there is no one around ,for miles and miles ,all this is true ,but that does not make it safe or responsible