How Lethal is Mavic

[RCFun]

In South Africa UAVs (UASystems here) are classified according to weight, with 7kg being the cutoff point for high probability of lethality if it fell from the sky or hit an airplane and thus requiring a license. (our authorities go on to give examples of typical joules on impact and such, which is quite thorough and makes sense.)

I think it is about probability, not absolutes, it would a freak accident to die from a Mavic falling on you, not a normal situation. The probability is miniscule, even if hit directly. You are much more likely to die on the way to the flight than from the flight itself.
I've been hit by drones a few times, my ego was the only thing that got hurt.

 

[joet]

Crashing directly into a person and the impact alone causing a fatality is the scenario considered here, but not the only one.

BVLOS imparts a lack a situational awareness about what is going on around the aircraft. I find that the Mavic, especially compared to the Phantom, draws much more attention from large birds, who apparently think it is a bird itself, and therefore is apparently more likely to attack it. If the bird attacks anywhere but from the front, the operator won't have any idea until the aircraft is out of control. While taking panoramas within LOS over houses and away from trees, I have already had to maneuver to avoid contact with birds that flew too close for my comfort - and it is telling that even at only 100' AGL it is almost impossible to tell just how close a bird - anything, really - is to the aircraft.

In any crash scenario, there's a number of possibilities. Will it fall on to a busy roadway and cause a fatal accident? Will it fall on someone, perhaps into a crowd? Knock someone off a ladder? Keep in mind that minor damage to a prop could cause the aircraft to crash well away from a "safe" hover location, even more so if it was in motion.

 

[Bivalve]

I've posted on here about the need to respect regulations. My motivation has been from the viewpoint of a commercial pilot that doesn't want one of these things coming through my windshield.

The fact is, though, that I just want people to use common sense. Federal agencies are always going to kneejerk to the most conservative attitude. They have to. But I speed in my car, (everyday) and I fly my mavic beyond line of site. I just do it under 400' (USA) so that I'm not going to put this thing through someone's windshield. Could I get in trouble? Sure. Am I going to kill people? I think I'm more likely to do so driving 5 miles an hour over the speed limit, and I still do that.

This is not a risk free world. Just mitigate the risks that you can, and fly safely. No need to warn everybody in a four mile area.

 

[Cookedinlh]

I've posted on here about the need to respect regulations. My motivation has been from the viewpoint of a commercial pilot that doesn't want one of these things coming through my windshield.

The fact is, though, that I just want people to use common sense. Federal agencies are always going to kneejerk to the most conservative attitude. They have to. But I speed in my car, (everyday) and I fly my mavic beyond line of site. I just do it under 400' (USA) so that I'm not going to put this thing through someone's windshield. Could I get in trouble? Sure. Am I going to kill people? I think I'm more likely to do so driving 5 miles an hour over the speed limit, and I still do that.

This is not a risk free world. Just mitigate the risks that you can, and fly safely. No need to warn everybody in a four mile area.

Well said . . . that really is the biggest issue with drones today . . risk analysis . . and risk mitigation. No one seems to know how to do either rationally and the Fed's only have one response . . make another rule . . to rule something OUT! I am working with COPA (Canadian Owners and Pilots Association) to get them to expose HOW this analysis and risk mitigation is being done . . what is the rational/formula/dataset/methods they are using to determine risk and then we will have some understanding of these misunderstood RULES. . . . Then we might even end up with something rational. Drones/UAVs are already a part of general aviation and should be treated as such not eliminated as some officials seem to want.

 

[czarmar]

I think there's also some privacy issues to talk about as well with BVLOS. Do people really want a drone hovering overhead recording video and not be able to see an operator nearby? I fear with the increasing popularity of drones, a small percentage of idiots becomes a lot of people wanting to check out their neighbor's backyard from 3 miles away. I think that 99% of people don't want to be idiots; I just wonder if the idiots could ruin it for the rest of us.

 

[larkin]

I think drones should be made with center fires guns so they would then fall into the constitutionally protected right to bear arms.

Sent from my XT1650 using MavicPilots mobile app

 

[Cookedinlh]

I think drones should be made with center fires guns so they would then fall into the constitutionally protected right to bear arms.

Sent from my XT1650 using MavicPilots mobile app

I think that's a little over the top . . the only drones that should be able to carry weapons are Military and then governed by the Geneva Convention . . not the gun lobby!

Fortunately that will never happen here in Canada.

 

[iFlyForFun]

Great thread, I enjoyed reading thru it. I would love to add that we are at a crustal
critical junction and the next few years will determine how the outcome will be for all of us. Yes, the ones that buy this $1000 dollar flying machine and don't take the time to read the user manual will be the ones to ruin it for the rest of us. I suspect we will see in depth regulation for all flight scenarios enacted in the future. I suspect that in conjunction we will see significant monetary penalties accessed for breaking the simplest rules. I am not optimistic that Drone flying will be as easy in the future as it is today. One thing we should all keep in mind is public perception. In the end it will be the public who decide our fate. The idiot who hovers his drone over a residential neighborhood at 100' while kids are swimming in a pool or adults are sunbathing will continue do turn the public away from us. We've seen the videos and heard the news reports of Drones being shot out of the air. I have this rule, if I'm flying slow or low enough over someone's property that a person can shoot my drone down then I have to pause and think "hmmm" that may be to low and to slow. Unfortunately, in the end we will have the hell regulated out of us!