Private Drone almost caused a 'serious incident' with search helicopter

[xspwhite]

"Private Drone almost caused a 'serious incident' with search helicopter"

I could not get the article to load, But I am curious what the "serious Incident" refers to?
Is it that fabled "what if" scenario?
Has it been shown that a drone CAN actually cause a serious incident?
Is the chance of a dented rotor blade a serious enough incident, to make it not worth risking to save children?
I mean, they test these jet engines to strict FAA requirements, If they can handle the tests that they were doing almost 20 years ago, I would think they are much tougher now. A drone should not be a '"SERIOUS" threat although I do concede they are a MINIMAL threat.

We dont really know if there was a drone. It could have been a bird or something. No evidence was shown in the article about any exsistance of a drone.

 

[AMann]

We dont really know if there was a drone. It could have been a bird or something. No evidence was shown in the article about any exsistance of a drone.

I wish there was a facepalm emoji here because I’d think it was the pilot that reported such a thing, especially since the Sheriff reported it to FAA and a TFR was issued.

 

[xspwhite]

That seems unlikely but, in any case, they've put up a TFR now:

View attachment 64703

You would be surprised what these pesky reporters will do to try and get a story.

 

[sar104]

You would be surprised what these pesky reporters will do to try and get a story.

Yes - I'd be very surprised if they did that.

 

[xspwhite]

Yes - I'd be very surprised if they did that.

Theres an old Don Henley song that explains how the news reporting business works.

 

[AMann]

Yes - I'd be very surprised if they did that.

So... FAA read their story and a TFR resulted. There’s more to it, I’m just guessing since I have no evidence any of rhis even happened.

 

[sar104]

So... FAA read their story and a TFR resulted. There’s more to it, I’m just guessing since I have no evidence any of rhis even happened.

Most likely a drone was seen, either by the ground personnel or the UH-60 crew. And most likely it was someone trying to help. When news organizations show up at searches, which they generally do, especially for high-profile events like this one, they tend to liaise pretty closely with the IMT. I've never seen rogue drone use by news organizations. And any certified pilot is going to know not to interfere with helicopter operations, especially if he/she wants to remain employed.

 

[tleedom]

"Private Drone almost caused a 'serious incident' with search helicopter"

I could not get the article to load, But I am curious what the "serious Incident" refers to?
Is it that fabled "what if" scenario?
Has it been shown that a drone CAN actually cause a serious incident?
Is the chance of a dented rotor blade a serious enough incident, to make it not worth risking to save children?
I mean, they test these jet engines to strict FAA requirements, If they can handle the tests that they were doing almost 20 years ago, I would think they are much tougher now. A drone should not be a '"SERIOUS" threat although I do concede they are a MINIMAL threat.

It is apparent by this statement you were never a helicopter pilot or crewman. It is not the engine that is a concern it is the exposed flight controls and rotor systems (main and tail). Turbine engines have debris screens to protect the inlets, but exposed flight control push pull tubes and hydraulic lines are not completely protected. Not to mention the entire tail rotor assembly is just "hanging out there". Engine failures are survivable but flight control failures rarely are. I will concede that the term "Serious Incident" is subjective (depends on which end of the threat you are on).

 

[ac0j]

It is apparent by this statement you were never a helicopter pilot or crewman. It is not the engine that is a concern it is the exposed flight controls and rotor systems (main and tail). Turbine engines have debris screens to protect the inlets, but exposed flight control push pull tubes and hydraulic lines are not completely protected. Not to mention the entire tail rotor assembly is just "hanging out there". Engine failures are survivable but flight control failures rarely are. I will concede that the term "Serious Incident" is subjective (depends on which end of the threat you are on).

I guess I am one of the minority here. I am not either pilot or crew of a heli. So I will ask you, as a professional, how often do small plastic things, (or ANYTHING) strike your "weak zones" and cause YOU to have a serious incident then?
Daily?
Weekly?
Monthly?
Yearly?
once in the last ten years?
or Never as of yet?

 

[AMann]

I guess I am one of the minority here. I am not either pilot or crew of a heli. So I will ask you, as a professional, how often do small plastic things, (or ANYTHING) strike your "weak zones" and cause YOU to have a serious incident then?
Daily?
Weekly?
Monthly?
Yearly?
once in the last ten years?
or Never as of yet?

Once was enough for me. And it was a stupid survey vest that flew out as the doors were off.

 

[ac0j]

One was enough for me.

Not really an answer to my question. So I will assume you have had a long career and you are not dead, so...... Once in a lifetime, a single almost severe incident, NOT involving a 1.5 pound plastic drone would be your answer then?

 

[AMann]

Not really an answer to my question. So I will assume you have had a long career and you are not dead, so...... Once in a lifetime, a single almost severe incident, NOT involving a 1.5 pound plastic drone would be your answer then?

Im not a pilot, just a client that used to do fieldwork involving helicopter transportation to the field sites. FAA has a database of air accidents, most heli accidents are due to mechanical failures and hitting ground obstacles. Google it.

 

[ac0j]

Im not a pilot, just a client that used to do fieldwork involving helicopter transportation to the field sites. FAA has a database of air accidents, most heli accidents are due to mechanical failures and hitting ground obstacles. Google it.

I have googled it. 88% is by human error.
The ONLY drone vs heli incident that has been reported was FAR from a "serious incident"
A dorne could not get to a rotor from below due to prop wash, a drone could not get to a tail rotot but from the intake side, IF it would have made it through the propwash. The one phantom collision recorded a dent in a rotor blade, and junk in the engine intake, ONLY found after landing and inspecting. That would lead a person to believe that the helo was flying LOWER than the drone to have drawn the drone into the rotor. Not smart piloting by either operator, but proof that it is not a "serious threat"

 

[Former Member]

It is apparent by this statement you were never a helicopter pilot or crewman. It is not the engine that is a concern it is the exposed flight controls and rotor systems (main and tail). Turbine engines have debris screens to protect the inlets, but exposed flight control push pull tubes and hydraulic lines are not completely protected. Not to mention the entire tail rotor assembly is just "hanging out there". Engine failures are survivable but flight control failures rarely are. I will concede that the term "Serious Incident" is subjective (depends on which end of the threat you are on).

Thank you for your service. Dont let anyone discount what you have done to help make this country safer.

 

[AMann]

I have googled it. 88% is by human error.
The ONLY drone vs heli incident that has been reported was FAR from a "serious incident"
A dorne could not get to a rotor from below due to prop wash, a drone could not get to a tail rotot but from the intake side, IF it would have made it through the propwash. The one phantom collision recorded a dent in a rotor blade, and junk in the engine intake, ONLY found after landing and inspecting. That would lead a person to believe that the helo was flying LOWER than the drone to have drawn the drone into the rotor. Not smart piloting by either operator, but proof that it is not a "serious threat"

SAR helos often fly right above the treeline, as do fire and other working helicopters. If there’s a drone filming them, it would be easy to be above one and still be under 400’ AGL. We often flew this way when doing bighorn sheep netting, picking up and dropping sling loads and doing radio telemetry projects.

 

[BigAl07]

It is apparent by this statement you were never a helicopter pilot or crewman. It is not the engine that is a concern it is the exposed flight controls and rotor systems (main and tail). Turbine engines have debris screens to protect the inlets, but exposed flight control push pull tubes and hydraulic lines are not completely protected. Not to mention the entire tail rotor assembly is just "hanging out there". Engine failures are survivable but flight control failures rarely are. I will concede that the term "Serious Incident" is subjective (depends on which end of the threat you are on).

Very well said and VERY ACCURATE!

 

[Torcan]

'Absolute miracle': Missing Northern California girls found safe

Both girls found safe
Leia and Caroline Carrico found alive and well by a Piercy Volunteer Fire search team approximately 1.4 miles south of their residence near Richardson's Grove.

 

[tleedom]

I guess I am one of the minority here. I am not either pilot or crew of a heli. So I will ask you, as a professional, how often do small plastic things, (or ANYTHING) strike your "weak zones" and cause YOU to have a serious incident then?
Daily?
Weekly?
Monthly?
Yearly?
once in the last ten years?
or Never as of yet?

With the exception of a seagull (the approximate size of a Mavic Pro?) diving under my rotor into my copilots windshield while we were traveling at 100kts I have not encountered other external debris. I have attended the funerals, and recovered bodies from crash sites of others that have, though none by a drone. The only reason my copilot wasn't killed by that "minimal" threat is because he was looking down at the radio and it glanced off his helmet, but he did spend some time in the hospital for a concussion and neck trauma.

I have googled it. 88% is by human error.
The ONLY drone vs heli incident that has been reported was FAR from a "serious incident"
A dorne could not get to a rotor from below due to prop wash, a drone could not get to a tail rotot but from the intake side, IF it would have made it through the propwash. The one phantom collision recorded a dent in a rotor blade, and junk in the engine intake, ONLY found after landing and inspecting. That would lead a person to believe that the helo was flying LOWER than the drone to have drawn the drone into the rotor. Not smart piloting by either operator, but proof that it is not a "serious threat"

FAA definitions:
Serious injury: Any injury which requires hospitalization for more than 48 hours.
- An example would be a piece of glass embedded in the eye of a pilot whose windshield was hit by a drone.

Substantial damage: Damage or failure which adversely affects the structural strength, performance, or flight characteristics of the aircraft, and which would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component.
- An example would be a drone causing a single blade strike on a UH-60 SAR aircraft requiring emergency landing and the field replacement of a rotor blade $50k (blade alone).

So yes I think those would fall under "Serious threat". At what cost would you require an incident to be to get the label of "Serious"

As expected most of the accidents that involve external sources happen to military aircraft which are not tracked by the FAA.

Actually there is no "Prop Wash" directly under or over a helicopter in normal flight, susceptible to the same forces as fixed wing in forward flight (forward flight being past the transnational lift phase of flight (the point at which hover becomes flight)). so as in my bird strike if it had gone over the windshield it very easily gone back into the tail rotor.

'Absolute miracle': Missing Northern California girls found safe

Both girls found safe
Leia and Caroline Carrico found alive and well by a Piercy Volunteer Fire search team approximately 1.4 miles south of their residence near Richardson's Grove.

Good news for all.

 

[GS40]

Drones (or threads) about them causing incidents, crashing into planes and helicopters, and Closing down Airports,
have finally reached clickbait status i feel.

 

[4wd]

It's the formulaic headline which puts hackles up.
"a drone almost caused a serious incident" - but no further details from which we can assume the "almost serious incident" means one was reported in the general area, or something was seen which was immediately assumed to be a drone.
Probably nowhere near a helicopter let alone "causing a serious incident".

It could be argued the intent is to remind uses not to fly where emergency operations are ongoing, even if trying to help - fair enough but that doesn't make it OK to imply drones almost caused a serious incident when nothing happened at all.
If there really was almost a serious incident they would have reported some details presumably.