Drone Tower Crash

[Digital Down]

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

 

[Skrems]

No back story?

 

[Digital Down]

I lost transmission on the other side of the tower. So I put it on return to home. When transmission resumed a few seconds before I hit the building, I was screaming and pressing cancel to no avail. Surprisingly, the repair is going to cost about $30 and everything besides the gimbal works flawlessly, even considering I fell 30-40 stories after hitting the tallest tower in Arkansas. The gimbal base plate, ribbon and cover were the only parts damaged besides cosmetic scratches. Camera and props work flawlessly.

 

[Skrems]

Outstanding!!! That is crazy the damage was limited. Front collision sensors were off? Looked like input was bring applied to turn right.

 

[Digital Down]

Sensors in low light are very limited, I’m not really sure if they were on regardless because I had to reinstall app before takeoff. For such little damage, it was worth the crash to get footage like that.

 

[Rokitt69]

Action footage! Very little damage!? Wow!

 

[BerndM]

Just another reason to stay away from tall buildings.
This happens all the time to those not heeding the warnings about drone eating buildings.
Sort of the same thing as Charlie Brown's kite eating tree

 

[whichwayisup]

Thanks for providing another stain to the drone pilots reputation. The more and more pilots do this, the easier it makes the argument to ban them.

 

[Tommytucka]

Any damage to the tower? If so who is expected to pay for that?

 

[Brojon]

Thanks for providing another stain to the drone pilots reputation. The more and more pilots do this, the easier it makes the argument to ban them.

No need to play sheriff...
Collision detection doesn't work at all in night time environments.
I've always wondered if mounting a high powered IR LED might help with that.
Anyone know if the Mavic sensors are sensitive to IR?

 

[Dkotinsky]

Moron

 

[Doofus]

Doesn't seem like the brightest thing to do.

What about people/property your drone might have hit on the ground?

 

[Brojon]

Please stop with the recriminations.
While we all have opinions on the course of action it's almost never a good idea to call people names or speculate on possible outcomes.
I liked the post where @BerndM tactfully observed the result was a logical outcomes of the actions.
It's almost New Years - we should try for better habits and better relationships - me included.

 

[gregmhtd]

Too bad the repairs were only $30.00, otherwise a lesson might of been learned. This is why you are not supposed to fly in cities or populated areas, I'm always amazed with peoples lack of common sense when they fly (or where for that matter). I guess someone must still be hitting the quiz skip button on the new DJI app.

 

[Brojon]

Too bad the repairs were only $30.00, otherwise a lesson might of been learned. This is why you are not supposed to fly in cities or populated areas, I'm always amazed with peoples lack of common sense when they fly (or where for that matter). I guess someone must still be hitting the quiz skip button on the new DJI app.

Not sure where you got the reference to "no flying in cities". Even 107 pilots fly in town all the time.
In fact the FAA implicitly recognizes this by saying that you can fly 400 ft over any structure you're withing 400 ft of.

 

[gregmhtd]

Not sure where you got the reference to "no flying in cities". Even 107 pilots fly in town all the time.
In fact the FAA implicitly recognizes this by saying that you can fly 400 ft over any structure you're withing 400 ft of.

call it rules interpretation, more to that cities typically have people and cars, and drone flying should not occur above people. I did read and you are correct that you can fly 400' above a structure if you are within 400' of it, though I think this pertains to rural areas (water towers, antennas, etc), not a high rise building in the middle of a populated city. Just because people fly over a city, doesn't mean they should or that is allowed, FAA fact sheet says you can't operate a drone over a person not involved in the operation, which would be every person who happened to be walking on the city sidewalk below where the drone is flying. Maybe someone can post the rule that says city flying is allowed. If city flying is allowed, would appear to be limited because buildings would hinder line of sight flying. Regardless, operator in this example (if city flying is allowed) didn't maintain distance above the structure or line of site flying, common sense would work wonders!

FAA Fact Sheet
Fact Sheet – Small Unmanned Aircraft Regulations (Part 107)

 

[Nikon1]

Glad your bird only suffered minor damage. No judgement here - but that footage after the crash was stomach turning! Definitely reinforces my decision NOT to live (or fly) anywhere near tall buildings.

 

[Lapeer20m]

Fantastic video footage.

 

[ac0j]

LOL, Another irresponsible pilot argument thread.
No worries, If he hasn't updated his firmware he is good to go right?

 

[Brojon]

call it rules interpretation, more to that cities typically have people and cars, and drone flying should not occur above people. I did read and you are correct that you can fly 400' above a structure if you are within 400' of it, though I think this pertains to rural areas (water towers, antennas, etc), not a high rise building in the middle of a populated city. Just because people fly over a city, doesn't mean they should or that is allowed, FAA fact sheet says you can't operate a drone over a person not involved in the operation, which would be every person who happened to be walking on the city sidewalk below where the drone is flying. Maybe someone can post the rule that says city flying is allowed. If city flying is allowed, would appear to be limited because buildings would hinder line of sight flying. Regardless, operator in this example (if city flying is allowed) didn't maintain distance above the structure or line of site flying, common sense would work wonders!

FAA Fact Sheet
Fact Sheet – Small Unmanned Aircraft Regulations (Part 107)

No it's not interpretation - thousands of 107 pilots run under these rules everyday.
The OP is a hobbyist - the FAA has guidelines - not a rule or anything with the force of law.
Anyway - I'm not going to get drawn into another of these stupid debates - you believe what you want and fly the way you want.