Near miss with helicopter at South Hollywood beach, Florida.

[lmel2005]

All other factors, hoaxes, etc. aside. If he was under 400', within VLOS, not in controlled airspace, and otherwise flying legally per FAA rules, then the only real question is did he react accordingly?

1) Did he see or hear the aircraft coming his way? Depending on wind and other noises around him, maybe not.

2) If he did see or hear it, did he react accordingly? If he tried to descend, and with the rate of decent for a Mavic, he would have potentially flown right into the path of the aircraft.

3) If he did see it and had enough time to react under the circumstances, could he have climbed in altitude quickly enough to get out of the way of the aircraft. This would have caused him to go above 400' which is allowed during an emergency, and then report it to the FAA upon request per FAA guidelines.

So the big questions are: Was he under 400', within VLOS, not in controlled airspace, and did he see and identify the aircraft in time to react in a safe way? These are questions for the FAA to investigate and decide.

If he was flying within all these parameters and legal, then an inappropriate reaction to descend by an inexperienced pilot may have inadvertently caused a major accident with possible injury or death.

As usual, there are many to condemn before the actual facts are known. I agree with you IF he was flying illegally, BVLOS, using FPV, etc., etc. But we do not have proof or facts at this point and most are assuming they know the fact when they don't.

Think about it! It could have been one of you on the beach while on vacation, Flying Legally, and this happens to. I have read posts on these group where UAV pilots were flying over their own property and a military aircraft, helo, etc, flew past them below 400, 300, and even 200' and had no warning, scaring the **** out of them. Did that automatically make them guilty of flying illegal?

He should be Innocent UNTIL proven guilty.
Wait for the facts!

The "court" has decided. His is guilty, he almost killed thousands, he will kill our hobby too, and everyone 'out there' is an idiot, except the court members.

 

[sar104]

The "court" has decided. His is guilty, he almost killed thousands, he will kill our hobby too, and everyone 'out there' is an idiot, except the court members.

Oh look - another spectacular straw man fallacy.

 

[Underdog1964]

The "court" has decided. His is guilty, he almost killed thousands, he will kill our hobby too, and everyone 'out there' is an idiot, except the court members.

Thousands? I’m pretty sure that helicopter doesn’t hold that many people.
Do elaborate

 

[Stephenmaycol]

I am making a comment so I will be included in updates on this... Talk about a life changing event....... for him, his family, those in the helicopter and possibly more injuries/deaths on the ground.

 

[Rat Bike Rider]

I am a Blackhawk Crewchief and a Mavic pilot. I see birds in close proximity to my aircraft all the time with little or no issues with rotor wash. We fly NOE (25 ft above highest known obstacle) all the time in training. I live within class D airspace. At my house 800 AGL is the standard BUT I see lower aircraft all the time. Who broke the law? That is not my place to say. That is what the FAA is for. Unless u have a copy of flight plans and permissions from tower you REALLY don't know who was right. I can call tower on my phone and get permission. A NOTAM could be issued and the the manned aircraft is wrong.

 

[lmel2005]

I am a Blackhawk Crewchief and a Mavic pilot. I see birds in close proximity to my aircraft all the time with little or no issues with rotor wash. We fly NOE (25 ft above highest known obstacle) all the time in training. I live within class D airspace. At my house 800 AGL is the standard BUT I see lower aircraft all the time. Who broke the law? That is not my place to say. That is what the FAA is for. Unless u have a copy of flight plans and permissions from tower you REALLY don't know who was right. I can call tower on my phone and get permission. A NOTAM could be issued and the the manned aircraft is wrong.

Thank you for your post.

 

[Aerial Gopher]

I didn't read all posts because this is so pathetic people actually discuss this.

Few points if they have not been pointed out before

No registration on air craft.
Bell = north American, = counter clockwise rotor head. Yet this one is clockwise.
Take a look at the rotor head how the blades are attached to it. The leading edge of the blade is NOT the right direction. I'm talking about the curve of the airfoil away from the pin.

For the person that says that looks like that due to shutter speed, I say look at the shadow of the blade as it passes over the fuselage, moving the same direction. Also the "sweep" of the blade says its spinning clockwise, but yet the blade design is such that that is not the leading edge of the blade. Again look at the curve of the blade at the blade root. The side that has the curve going out, is NOT the leading edge. I knew this heli pilots license I got would of taught me something about rotor systems!

This was so fake, that I glanced at it once and figured that out. The rotor system is too visible for that **** camera on the drone to capture.

The heli image is too clear, ie rendered image clear.

The camera / flir gimble is too poorly designed in the rendered model that does not represent a real one. Edges too sharp.

Why does this get 23 pages of posts?

It was faked!!!

The drone video is real, but no helicopter flew by.

 

[Aerial Gopher]

Another thought about the video being fake...why? I don't think a catastrophic incident with a drone is a matter of "if". It's a matter of "when".

The operator faking it just to look cool is quite dumb and will be easily found out through analysis.

Some other entity faking it to try and make drones look more dangerous than they really are is a complete waste of time. An accident will eventually happen all by itself.

There's not a whole lot that would make sense in faking such a video.

Yes, one very good reason. Views. That generates ad revenue. The other guy posts a video analyzing it, saying g it's real, when everyone can see its faked and that generates discussion and comments on youtube. This is viewer engagement, generates even more ad revenue.

Motive Clear now?

 

[Aerial Gopher]

Ok so I do see some writing in this image, on the engine cowling cover. There is black writing on the grey. But I still cant believe this helicopter can fly with the blades spinning the wrong way.

The trim tab on the blade is perfectly seen when they show how the sweep of the blade is there due to the shutter effect. But the trim tab is not on a leading edge of the airfoil. Unless bell came out with a different design. ?

All that effort and he made the blades spin in reverse.. now it's funny!

 

[Weaponized]

Yes, one very good reason. Views. That generates ad revenue. The other guy posts a video analyzing it, saying g it's real, when everyone can see its faked and that generates discussion and comments on youtube. This is viewer engagement, generates even more ad revenue.

Motive Clear now?

The audience interested in drones is rather small. Roughly 770k IF every drone operator in the country clicks on it. If a generous (20%) number of them did that doesn't exactly equate to "viral" considering that a puppy wearing a dress would generate 10x that number.

If the goal was add revenue, they'd have gotten far more hits had they said that the Russians interfered with a helicopter. I watched the video several times and I skipped right over the ads.

And to be clear I'm not commenting on the authenticity of it (I truly don't care) and will wait for the experts at the FAA to figure out. Being "right" on an internet forum about its authenticity doesn't exactly make anyone an expert. Odds are that even in a room full of preschoolers...50% of them will get it right.

 

[Underdog1964]

Been watching this thread for a bit and just want to know one thing.

Instead of endlessly debating whether videos like this are real or fake, why aren't we just assuming it's real and using it as a cautionary tale for flying safely?
Even if it is fake, would being a little more cautious really be a bad thing?

 

[AnzacJack]

I didn't read all posts because this is so pathetic people actually discuss this.

And yet you have added 3bposts to what you call the pathetic discussion...does this make you pathetic?

Also that trim tb looks like it is on trailing edge to me and that those rotors are configured to spin counter clockwise when looking down on them.

 

[sar104]

I didn't read all posts because this is so pathetic people actually discuss this.

Few points if they have not been pointed out before

No registration on air craft.
Bell = north American, = counter clockwise rotor head. Yet this one is clockwise.
Take a look at the rotor head how the blades are attached to it. The leading edge of the blade is NOT the right direction. I'm talking about the curve of the airfoil away from the pin.

For the person that says that looks like that due to shutter speed, I say look at the shadow of the blade as it passes over the fuselage, moving the same direction. Also the "sweep" of the blade says its spinning clockwise, but yet the blade design is such that that is not the leading edge of the blade. Again look at the curve of the blade at the blade root. The side that has the curve going out, is NOT the leading edge. I knew this heli pilots license I got would of taught me something about rotor systems!

This was so fake, that I glanced at it once and figured that out. The rotor system is too visible for that **** camera on the drone to capture.

The heli image is too clear, ie rendered image clear.

The camera / flir gimble is too poorly designed in the rendered model that does not represent a real one. Edges too sharp.

Why does this get 23 pages of posts?

It was faked!!!

The drone video is real, but no helicopter flew by.

Look more closely and tell me again which way that rotor spins? You can clearly see the leading and trailing edges.



And where are you hoping to see the registration?

 

[Simmo]

doesn't that show two (right) rotors one way, and the other two the other way???

 

[AnzacJack]

No .the 2 on the right hand side you are looking at trailing edge, and the 2 on the left you are looking at the grey strips on the leading edges

 

[Simmo]

No .the 2 on the right hand side you are looking at trailing edge, and the 2 on the left you are looking at the grey strips on the leading edges

Yeah Gotchya bud. Just when I looked at Sar's blow up, I thought I saw this....

 

[Aerial Gopher]

Yes. They are opposite. Nothing adds up here. The blade on the right side of the image is correct orientation, and so is the front one. But the left side of image, (right side of aircraft) is the wrong way, well by bell design it is wrong but the video shows this rotor assembly spring the wrong g way, ie. Spinning clockwise when looking from top down. Also they have the sweep of the aircraft right side blade as if the rotation was clockwise, which works with the airfoil orientation as shown in this image, but is not what Bell Helicopters builds and still is the opposite of the other blade. Ie flipped leading and trailing edges.

Someone spent a lot of time for this video and I cant believe they glossed over the rotor system like this.

Also there is WAY too much detail in there that was captured by a **** mavic camera? Sorry those blades are at around 420 rpm that will be a blur. There is no shutter effect that the mavic would create to cause the look os slow spinning blades. The camera is that bad that it will look like a blur. The 420 rpm will have the tips of the blades going so much faster.

I have filmed MANY rotors with cameras, you will see the warped blade and the tip is ALWAYS looking like its falling behind in rotation. So this video shows clearly that it has a clockwise rotating rotor system, which is not what the design of this Bell Helicopter is.

FYI I work with many helicopters and see this all the time, I'm not compiling my answers from Google searches or guesses based on no experience.

 

[Aerial Gopher]

Look more closely and tell me again which way that rotor spins? You can clearly see the leading and trailing edges.

View attachment 44549

And where are you hoping to see the registration?

Registration would be on the tail boom or engine cowling. On the engine cowling there looks to be writing on it, but they would never be allowed to put black on grey, it would not be contrasted enough. So the blurred darker grey cannot be the registration

 

[AnzacJack]

Yes. They are opposite. Nothing adds up here. The blade on the right side of the image is correct orientation, and so is the front one. But the left side of image, (right side of aircraft) is the wrong way, well by bell design it is wrong but the video shows this rotor assembly spring the wrong g way, ie. Spinning clockwise when looking from top down. Also they have the sweep of the aircraft right side blade as if the rotation was clockwise, which works with the airfoil orientation as shown in this image, but is not what Bell Helicopters builds and still is the opposite of the other blade. Ie flipped leading and trailing edges.

Someone spent a lot of time for this video and I cant believe they glossed over the rotor system like this.

Also there is WAY too much detail in there that was captured by a **** mavic camera? Sorry those blades are at around 420 rpm that will be a blur. There is no shutter effect that the mavic would create to cause the look os slow spinning blades. The camera is that bad that it will look like a blur. The 420 rpm will have the tips of the blades going so much faster.

I have filmed MANY rotors with cameras, you will see the warped blade and the tip is ALWAYS looking like its falling behind in rotation. So this video shows clearly that it has a clockwise rotating rotor system, which is not what the design of this Bell Helicopter is.

FYI I work with many helicopters and see this all the time, I'm not compiling my answers from Google searches or guesses based on no experience.

Your a funny guy. I worked in the military for 20 years on a range of aircraft. In that time I worked with many dudes that could also claim that they had vast experience on aircraft. And you know what, some of those blokes where bloody idiots.

 

[sar104]

Yes. They are opposite. Nothing adds up here. The blade on the right side of the image is correct orientation, and so is the front one. But the left side of image, (right side of aircraft) is the wrong way, well by bell design it is wrong but the video shows this rotor assembly spring the wrong g way, ie. Spinning clockwise when looking from top down. Also they have the sweep of the aircraft right side blade as if the rotation was clockwise, which works with the airfoil orientation as shown in this image, but is not what Bell Helicopters builds and still is the opposite of the other blade. Ie flipped leading and trailing edges.

Someone spent a lot of time for this video and I cant believe they glossed over the rotor system like this.

Also there is WAY too much detail in there that was captured by a **** mavic camera? Sorry those blades are at around 420 rpm that will be a blur. There is no shutter effect that the mavic would create to cause the look os slow spinning blades. The camera is that bad that it will look like a blur. The 420 rpm will have the tips of the blades going so much faster.

I have filmed MANY rotors with cameras, you will see the warped blade and the tip is ALWAYS looking like its falling behind in rotation. So this video shows clearly that it has a clockwise rotating rotor system, which is not what the design of this Bell Helicopter is.

FYI I work with many helicopters and see this all the time, I'm not compiling my answers from Google searches or guesses based on no experience.

I have no idea what you are looking at. All four blades clearly have leading edges for CCW rotation, and the video is consistent with that. Your simple description of imaging artifacts of rotors does not hold for rolling electronic shutters, since the image distortion depends on direction of motion in the image, exactly as demonstrated in this video.

As for the apparent motion, it is close to what would be expected for 420 rpm. At that rotation rate the rotor is turning at 7 rps (2520°/s), which at 30 fps is 0.233 rotations per frame, or 84° per frame. That means, since there are four blades, 90° apart, that at that rotation rate the blades should appear to be spinning backwards at 6° per frame, or 180° per second, which is 0.5 rps. In the video the blades actually appear to be spinning backwards (CW) at 7.8° per frame, which is forwards (CCW) at 90 - 7.8 = 82.2° per frame, equating to 411 rpm CCW.

In terms of motion blur, if the camera had no ND filters then the shutter speed at f 2.2 on the MP in full sunlight was likely to be 1/2000 s or faster, which, for 420 rpm on a 5 m rotor gives around 200 m/s tip speed and a blur of about 10 cm. That's also consistent with the images.