Remote ID wouldn't have prevented this mid-air

[Cw4bray]

Expensive !!!!
Fortunately no loss of life,... this time.

 

[sar104]

Why do you think remote ID would not have helped?

 

[Cw4bray]

Why do you think remote ID would not have helped?

In reading the NPRM, I didn't see anywhere, that any form or type of ATC would be related to remote ID. Remote ID as it's been defined, won't provide automatic conflict resolution. Geo fencing or sterile airspace won't prevent collisions because of human error and non-standard or nonparticipating remote ID aircraft. There needs to be vector analysis solutions automatically applied, based on some form of onboard radar like this; Aircraft Birdstrike Avoidance Radar | DeTect, Inc..

 

[sar104]

The NPRM is a bit vague, but the included discussion implies that local ATC would receive data either from direct broadcast or the USS. Additionally, for all low level operations such as this, I'd expect the helicopter to be monitoring local sUAS broadcast directly.

 

[Cw4bray]

The NPRM is a bit vague, but the included discussion implies that local ATC would receive data either from direct broadcast or the USS. Additionally, for all low level operations such as this, I'd expect the helicopter to be monitoring local sUAS broadcast directly.

Thanks for the dialog. Even if the NPRM wasn't a bit vague and assuming that ATC would be in the loop that wouldn't cover the vast majority of the country's class "G" airspace. I'd also think that a helicopter pilot would be too busy to monitor sUAS broadcast while talking / flying police / fire ATC frequency's simultaneously with being "outside" in a VFR environment. I'd imagine a system like that would work about as good as a radar detector in a car. A lot of false alarms and close calls, due to X band K band, laser, to the point a pilot wouldn't trust or use it.

 

[sar104]

Thanks for the dialog. Even if the NPRM wasn't a bit vague and assuming that ATC would be in the loop that wouldn't cover the vast majority of the country's class "G" airspace. I'd also think that a helicopter pilot would be too busy to monitor sUAS broadcast while talking / flying police / fire ATC frequency's simultaneously with being "outside" in a VFR environment.

I would guess that aircraft operating at low AGL will end up with equipment or apps to monitor Remote ID broadcasts - one more data source to watch, but likely with automated warnings.

 

[Cw4bray]

I would guess that aircraft operating at low AGL will end up with equipment or apps to monitor Remote ID broadcasts - one more data source to watch, but likely with automated warnings.

That might work for ENG, HEMS, LE, fire and others in the big city. But the big city is just a small bit of real estate. The vast majority of airspace doesn't have radio or internet reception. How's that going to help the utility guy setting poles in the mountains or the applicator over farm land ?
I can't imagine a requirement anytime in the next few years to have a new receiver in any cockpit. Even if it could be an App on a phone, it won't work in the mountains and on the farm. FAA or company ops-spec probably won't allow cell phone App. notifications in flight, unless an approved EFB is written in ops-spec..

 

[sar104]

That might work for ENG, HEMS, LE, fire and others in the big city. But the big city is just a small bit of real estate. The vast majority of airspace doesn't have radio or internet reception. How's that going to help the utility guy setting poles in the mountains or the applicator over farm land ?
I can't imagine a requirement anytime in the next few years to have a new receiver in any cockpit. Even if it could be an App on a phone, it won't work in the mountains and on the farm. FAA or company ops-spec probably won't allow cell phone App. notifications in flight, unless an approved EFB is written in ops-spec..

Actually an app on the phone is one mechanism by which broadcast messages are intended to be received. No internet connection required - that's the entire point of the broadcast. See page 138 of the NPRM.

 

[Motorcycle Rider]

Helicopters are a LOT tougher than most people think.
That is a very heavy drone as well at ten pounds.

 

[Cw4bray]

Actually an app on the phone is one mechanism by which broadcast messages are intended to be received. No internet connection required - that's the entire point of the broadcast. See page 138 of the NPRM.

That would be good if phone reception exists. There are still vast regions of flat land in the mid west that don't have phone reception even at 1000' AGL. The mountains are even worse, regarding phone reception. This system won't work in these vast areas. The engineers designing a new system shouldn't look at it as trying to catch a terrorist who's taking a picture of a waterfall with an evil drone, instead they should put safety and collision avoidance first. Incorporate an onboard receiver that sees mode 3a traffic as well as remote ID traffic signals and make communication directly between aircraft and sUAS. Then automatically change altitude of the sUAS to resolve collisions. This would work even, without phone reception. It could also simultaneously broadcast on-line to catch the bad guys with their drones. Human ATC in a tower, relaying instructions is not the answer for safety.

 

[Cw4bray]

Helicopters are a LOT tougher than most people think.
That is a very heavy drone as well at ten pounds.

Agreed, as long as it impacts a MRB mid span. Just don't hit a pitch change link or a windshield. Ten pounds through a windshield impacting a face or chest at 130 kt. or 150 mph imposes a staggering force with enough kinetic energy to disable a pilot. What is amazing is the number of windshields replaced when operating in a bird migration flyway route. Several operators will stop flying for a week or two every year at night during migration..

 

[Motorcycle Rider]

A flock of Canada Geese flew into me years ago, spooky experience. Two passengers sustained minor injuries, but it could have been so much worse. Helicopter windshields are extremely tough, especially if compared to the very fragile windshields in cars.

 

[sar104]

Helicopters are a LOT tougher than most people think.
That is a very heavy drone as well at ten pounds.

That's a light utility helicopter. At any reasonable speed the Skyranger would have destroyed the windshield if that had been the impact site. But it sounds like part of the drone caught the main rotor and then the tail rotor, both of which had to be replaced. It could have been much worse.

 

[sar104]

That would be good if phone reception exists. There are still vast regions of flat land in the mid west that don't have phone reception even at 1000' AGL. The mountains are even worse, regarding phone reception. This system won't work in these vast areas. The engineers designing a new system shouldn't look at it as trying to catch a terrorist who's taking a picture of a waterfall with an evil drone, instead they should put safety and collision avoidance first. Incorporate an onboard receiver that sees mode 3a traffic as well as remote ID traffic signals and make communication directly between aircraft and sUAS. Then automatically change altitude of the sUAS to resolve collisions. This would work even, without phone reception. It could also simultaneously broadcast on-line to catch the bad guys with their drones. Human ATC in a tower, relaying instructions is not the answer for safety.

I'm obviously not explaining this well. You don't need phone reception - the idea is that the broadcast will use a wifi protocol.

 

[Cw4bray]

A flock of Canada Geese flew into me years ago, spooky experience. Two passengers sustained minor injuries, but it could have been so much worse. Helicopter windshields are extremely tough, especially if compared to the very fragile windshields in cars.

Were you flying a float plane or a helicopter ? Those Canadian's are massive ! 14 lb. or one stone !!! Now that's some energy. All three that I've hit in the last 10 years were at night, with goggles you can usually see them right before impact but not enough time to react.

 

[Cw4bray]

I'm obviously not explaining this well. You don't need phone reception - the idea is that the broadcast will use a wifi protocol.

Okay, I missed that part and didn't see it in the NPRM. Sorry about that. Good idea ! Curious about pairing the wifi signal to a foreign phone when or if the phone is not in discover mode or already paired and talking to it's own DJI product.

 

[E90RAW]

Expensive !!!!
Fortunately no loss of life,... this time.

WOW....$100,000 drone GONE. And 10 pounds. Yikes. Here in NC they were "practicing" search and rescue with a drone off the coast and the battery died. Drone lost at sea. $100,000. I don't feel so bad risking my meager $1500 drone.

 

[sar104]

Okay, I missed that part and didn't see it in the NPRM. Sorry about that. Good idea ! Curious about pairing the wifi signal to a foreign phone when or if the phone is not in discover mode or already paired and talking to it's own DJI product.

Yes - I'm not completely clear how that is intended to work. Presumably the app in question will need direct access to the wifi radio. Not possible under current iOS versions, but doable on Android I suspect.

 

[Deleted member 114292]

Even if Remote-ID used ADSB as we speak you can buy a receiver that will connect to your phone via BT for reasonable sum. Even without maps the range, altitude, closing velocity etc can be known.

 

[Cw4bray]

Even if Remote-ID used ADSB as we speak you can buy a receiver that will connect to your phone via BT for reasonable sum. Even without maps the range, altitude, closing velocity etc can be known.

That sounds like a better idea/solution than the current remote ID proposal.
I'd like to see automatic collision avoidance that is human-error, fool proof even for a juvenile delinquent. ADS-B won't work if the other aircraft doesn't have it installed, those are the planes operating down low, in our environment. ADS-b would address the proposed ID issue and provide some situational awareness. There are methods to de-clutter if an overload is anticipated, I see no reason not to include it, as a dual channel system.