VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > Safety
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 08-14-2013, 02:15 AM
CATPart CATPart is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: up up and away
Posts: 312
Default

Birds have the ability to see and avoid and they are quite good at it. Most drones have no situational awareness. I agree with you though, the chances of a strike are low.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-14-2013, 02:46 AM
kiwipete kiwipete is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Birmingham United Kingdom
Posts: 374
Default Beware

Certainly not all modellers are as responsible as you might hope.


► 1:37► 1:37
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u7sXslgo8g

Google, 737 model collision Perth, for more details.

Peter
__________________
RV7 G-PBEC Flying
RV10 Finishing
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-09-2014, 06:27 PM
wrongway john wrongway john is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: TX & CO
Posts: 465
Default

A camouflaged drone just recently nearly crashed into a jetliner in Florida at 2,300?. That along with other incidents in this link:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/09/travel...html?hpt=hp_t2
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-10-2014, 09:54 AM
rzbill's Avatar
rzbill rzbill is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 2,692
Default

The decision makers can't seem to understand the dangers of these UAVs when guided by the likes of Barney Fife or Ken Lay (or a myriad of other examples of idiocy or lack of conscience).

Sure, I think plenty could be operated safely by knowlegable and responsible users. Not worried about them. Its the others that are a problem.

I forsee this playing out similar to gun regulation where the restriction is put on the device (limiting all users) in order to prevent the actions of some people but not being effective for the persons that willfully ignore to law. Exemptions will be put in place for use by the state of course.
__________________
Bill Pendergrass
ME/AE '82
RV-7A: Flying since April 15, 2012. 850 hrs
YIO-360-M1B, mags, CS, GRT EX and WS H1s & A/P, Navworx
Unpainted, polished....kinda'... Eyeballin' vinyl really hard.
Yeah. The boss got a Silhouette Cameo 4 Xmas 2019.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-10-2014, 10:24 AM
RV7A Flyer's Avatar
RV7A Flyer RV7A Flyer is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: US
Posts: 2,251
Default

What worries me is what's going to happen after someone collides with one of these things and the pilot/passengers get hurt or killed...will they call it "pilot error - failure to see and avoid" on the part of the pilot in the air?

What I'm inclined to would be a rule that says if anything bad happens involving an unmanned vehicle, it's the owner of the unmanned vehicle's fault...period. No exemptions for law enforcement, either. Somebody gets hurt or killed because of your drone, YOU are responsible for it.

The idea of local LE agencies flying these things around gives me the willies from an aviation perspective, and the creeps from a privacy perspective.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-10-2014, 07:46 PM
wrongway john wrongway john is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: TX & CO
Posts: 465
Default

When it?s the piloted planes with our butts on the line along with passengers, it?s just not the same kind of level of commitment I expect from the other flying drones behind a desk knowing they still go home in a worse case scenario.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-10-2014, 08:08 PM
Bevan Bevan is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: BC
Posts: 1,674
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RV7A Flyer View Post
...will they call it "pilot error - failure to see and avoid" on the part of the pilot in the air?
Exactly. In VFR airspace, all participants are required to be looking out the window to see and avoid others. How exactly, does the remote drone driver do this? I don't think they can and therefore have no business being in VFR airspace. Now I suppose they could eliminate VFR airspace. Is this what it's going to come to?

Bevan
__________________
RV7A Flying since 2015
O-360-A1F6 (parallel valve) 180HP
Dual P-mags
Precision F.I. with AP purge valve
Vinyl Wrapped Exterior
Grand Rapids EFIS
Located in western Canada

Last edited by craigvince : 05-10-2014 at 11:58 PM. Reason: spelling
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-10-2014, 09:56 PM
Flyingdreamz's Avatar
Flyingdreamz Flyingdreamz is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Eastman, GA
Posts: 23
Default

I deal with Unmanned Aerial Systems almost every day. In fact I may be one of the very few people that have been able to log UAS time legally when operating a UAV under a certificate of authorization. With that said, what about to say is my opinion and does not represent MGSC, the FAA, NASA, or the state of Georgia.

First let’s get the terminology right.
- A drone is something that the air force uses for target practice, they tend to blow up and where they blow does not seem to be too much of the concern of the DOD. (On a Florida highway, for example).
- A RC airplane is one that is a remotely controlled airplane, that is piloted line of sight and under 400 AGL for recreation.
- A UAS or Unmanned Aerial/Autonomous System, is one that is operated for commercial or research purposes that must be operated under a COA or Certificate of Authorization.

Currently UASs are not allowed to operate in the national airspace system unless under a COA, even when under a COA, they cannot conflict with any manned air traffic. For example, Middle Georgia State College does UAS testing at Heart of Georgia RGNL airport in Eastman. We have the tower restrict access to the delta airspace until we can recover the aircraft (in most cases it is the twin-jet PTERA). Once we vacate the runway, the tower will then will allow the traffic outside the delta back in. (wait is about 5-10 minutes)

LEGAL UAS/UAVs will not be allowed to fly beyond line of sight in other then controlled airspace until 2020 when the ADS-B requirement comes in to play. Most UAV/UAS manufactures already are testing auto sense and avoid with ADS-B and TIS.

Now, regarding to what you see in the news. What you see are not legal UAVs, they are not being operated under a COA, and are normally some RC guy who is violating AC 91-57 which governs unmanned and model aircraft. Also DOD UAVs are different, they are not what we in the industry call UAVs, they are not made to operate in a space with other aircraft. UAVs in the industry are all designed with the purpose of flying in the same airspace as manned aircraft.

The FAA is also scrambling to meet a deadline set by congress. Congress, who has cut the funding for NEXGEN many times, told the FAA they have to permit UAVS in the national airspace system by 2015. Well the only way to do this properly is with NEXGEN in place. Currently there have been a few type certificates given however, the FAA is still limiting these aircraft to the same rules that RC aircraft have been limited too.

Remember that safety is in everyone’s best interest. For the pilot on the ground flying the UAV, for the pilot in the airplane flying and for the controller on the ground. Currently there is more of a chance of you hitting a bird then you hitting a UAV. In addition, in order to legally fly a UAV for commercial purposes post 2015, you are requires to be an instrument rates commercial pilot in either fixed or rotor wing manned aircraft.

If anyone would like more information, or have questions, please ask. If you have a comment or concern I can’t address, chances are I know someone that will.
__________________
Dakoda Neilson
Middle Georgia State College Student (Dual Major- Aerospace Operations Fixed-Wing and Unmanned Aerial Systems)
MGSC UAS Research and Development President
Middle Georgia State College Student Built RV-12 Project

Private Pilot ASEL with Instrument
UAS Pilot- 1.2 TT
E-Flite RV-9 RC model
Future RV-8/10 Builder

Last edited by Flyingdreamz : 05-10-2014 at 10:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-10-2014, 10:51 PM
kjlpdx kjlpdx is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: lake oswego, OR
Posts: 161
Default

I have seen videos of kids sending their drones up thru the clouds just to see what it looks like above [2500' agl]. this is no different than the 14 year old with a laser, "hey, let's go point them at landing airliners and see what happens". I'd like to see software limits of 200' agl mandated to help enforce regulations.
__________________
RV-6A 1500+hrs since 1997
O-320 D2J, FP, slo-bld
49 states, Bahamas, Canada
2014 - PAID
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-10-2014, 11:00 PM
RV7A Flyer's Avatar
RV7A Flyer RV7A Flyer is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: US
Posts: 2,251
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyingdreamz View Post
UAVs in the industry are all designed with the purpose of flying in the same airspace as manned aircraft.
I think this is what concerns many of us. Whether autonomous or remotely controlled, *how* are they going to abide by the "see and avoid" rule? And if they fail in that regard, and an accident results, whose fault is it going to be? The software architect who designed the autonomous system's "see and avoid" behavior, or the pilot of the 172 who hit the UAV?

Quote:
Remember that safety is in everyone?s best interest. For the pilot on the ground flying the UAV, for the pilot in the airplane flying and for the controller on the ground.
Clearly, safety is a primary concern for *most* of the stakeholders (including pilots, UAV pilots, controllers, etc.). I'm not so sure about some entities, though, such as local/state LE agencies (I have what I think is a healthy distrust of LE in some respects) who may not have the overall system experience/knowledge that pilots, controllers, UAV designers/engineers/pilots do.

Sooner or later, there will be a conflict between a UAV and a GA pilot (with any luck, it won't cause an accident), and my concern is that the GA pilot will get hit with an enforcement action for "failure to see and avoid" while the UAV pilot (being, in all likelihood, a local, state or federal LE officer or employee) will not be held responsible.

Color me skeptical...
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:17 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.