Newark airport shut down in US due to drone sightings

[Lapeer20m]

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/01/22/us/newark-drone-sightings/index.html?r=https://www.google.com/

Flights into and out of New Jersey's Newark Liberty International Airport were disrupted Tuesday night after two drones were reported flying over nearby Teterboro Airport.
Federal Aviation Administration spokesman Greg Martin told CNN that the agency stopped flights at the airport after the drones were reported over the smaller regional airport some 15 miles away. Both airports serve the greater metro New York City area.
The two drones were flying at 3,500 feet and have since cleared the airspace over the airport, Martin said.

 

[gnirtS]

3,500ft?
Whats the elevation there? Im calling potential BS on that...

 

[Gringorio]

3,500ft?
Whats the elevation there? Im calling potential BS on that...

Of course, because no drones fly over 400'

 

[DanMan32]

400 vs 3500 is a big difference. I wouldn't think many consumer drones could go that high. DJI has a firmware limit of 500m (about 1500ft) limit from takeoff..

It's possible, but not very probable.

 

[JDawg]

Warning

 

[gnirtS]

Of course, because no drones fly over 400'

Of course they do. But most consumer drones are software limited to under half that 3,500ft and contrary to the internet, very very few people go to the effort of unlocking them.

And the smaller consumer drones, even unlocked would struggle to get to that altitude.

 

[Former Member]

Greyhound is looking better and better.

 

[Gringorio]

And the smaller consumer drones, even unlocked would struggle to get to that altitude.

OK, I admit I am a skeptic of the skeptics, but whether it's an unlocked DJI drone or other drone, why would it "struggle" to get to 3500' AGL when they easily fly to 5+ miles out and back or up to the 500m imposed limit? I'm pretty sure the Mavic, Phantom 4 Pro, or Matrice for example would easily reach 3500' above takeoff with sufficient battery to return to home if there was no imposed limit.

My point being, DJI drone or otherwise, 3500' does not seem unreasonable. Though I am curious about the battery power needed to reach that altitude vs. the battery power needed to reach that distance using a Mavic 2 Pro or Phantom 4 series.

 

[JDawg]

Greyhound is looking better and better.

 

[james_mav]

OK, I admit I am a skeptic of the skeptics, but whether it's an unlocked DJI drone or other drone, why would it "struggle" to get to 3500' AGL when they easily fly to 5+ miles out and back or up to the 500m imposed limit? I'm pretty sure the Mavic, Phantom 4 Pro, or Matrice for example would easily reach 3500' above takeoff with sufficient battery to return to home if there was no imposed limit.

My point being, DJI drone or otherwise, 3500' does not seem unreasonable. Though I am curious about the battery power needed to reach that altitude vs. the battery power needed to reach that distance using a Mavic 2 Pro or Phantom 4 series.

There are a number of YouTube videos of Mavics flying much higher then 3,500 feet.

 

[Sky1]

Or of course they could have made up the whole thing to help gain public support for more restrictions on UAVs

 

[gnirtS]

OK, I admit I am a skeptic of the skeptics, but whether it's an unlocked DJI drone or other drone, why would it "struggle" to get to 3500' AGL when they easily fly to 5+ miles out and back or up to the 500m imposed limit?

Climbing vertically is a LOT more power intensive than flying horizontally or hovering. Try it yourself, look how much the flight time remaining drops when you just climb and keep it held there. And thats without the air getting appreciably less dense as you hit proper altitudes.
Unlocked mavic ones could just about hit 8,000 or so before having to land due to battery - they didnt actually GO anywhere. Sparks and Airs are substantially lower due to the smaller batteries, smaller props and so on.

Ultimately those drones have to be unlocked which is something the vast majority are (i) unaware is even possible and (ii) requires effort on their part to actually do and its an absolutely tiny minority have done it.

Most people own drones that are capped to 500m or so and although they'll go to the max thats it.

So when seeing all these drone reports of drones at 3500ft, 8000ft, 11000ft and 18500ft (figures from the last few "incidents") it pays to be very sceptical indeed.

 

[gnirtS]

Or of course they could have made up the whole thing to help gain public support for more restrictions on UAVs

Or more likely they did see something that was a plastic bag, or a bird, or even bits of weather balloon. All of which is now called a "drone" regardless of facts

 

[Sky1]

A happy birthday balloon

 

[terradriller]

Teterboro surface elavation is 9 feet above MSL. Pilot reported seeing 2 sUAS at 3,500 ft. It’s hard to imagine that at that time of day ( around 5pm and sunset is about the same time) that the pilot could depict the 2 with all of the background lights of the cities.
If this is in fact true then we just got another nail in the hobbies coffin because of 2 bozo’s being stupid.

 

[Sky1]

I've got a lot of miles in jets and can tell you that when you see another jet flying by it is like a flash. A tiny drone at 470 Mph is like seeing a fly while driving a motorcycle.

 

[DanMan32]

Greyhound is looking better and better.

I'd rather go train

 

[DanMan32]

A happy birthday balloon

Could very well be.

 

[Former Member]

I'd rather go train

Double the price and takes twice as long. No, gracias.

 

[Clipper707]

I've got a lot of miles in jets and can tell you that when you see another jet flying by it is like a flash. A tiny drone at 470 Mph is like seeing a fly while driving a motorcycle.

I've got a lot of miles in jets and have yet to be in a jet doing 470mph at 3500 feet.