The police have now said the plane struck the drone over Richmond Park at an altitude of 580m.  Richmond Park is within the LHR Class D controlled airspace, the highest point in the park is at about 50m asl.

It's official now. Yahoo news is posting this story.  

No drone parts have been found so far.

Maxi3D Posted at 2016-4-18 18:38
It's official now. Yahoo news is posting this story.

LOL...... So the fact it's on the front pages of most of the UK national press and all news sites like the BBC and London Standard didn't make it official then?    Righto, I'll make Yahoo News my go-to source for accurate news

There's still no proof this was a drone; you'd have to be doing well to spot one when flying at 200 mph...  But the altitude it's reported at (580 metres over a park that's 50 metres above sea level) does make it look like a drone being flown at it's max altitude....

This is where DJI need to up their game both in anti-dickhead technology and also supplying supplying quotes for the press to make use of. Otherwise we're going to get stupidly over the top laws introduced.  

Shame though, as we don't ban cars, motorbikes or other vehicles that can cause accidents by being driven badly. Yet suddenly "proper control of drones" is the utmost urgency.....

Ian

wellsi Posted at 2016-4-18 14:39
LOL...... So the fact it's on the front pages of most of the UK national press and all news sites l ...

If you want to know about how the general public's opinion towards our hobby, just read the comment section on Yahoo news regarding this story.   

Maxi3D Posted at 2016-4-18 20:10
If you want to know about how the general public's opinion towards our hobby, just read the commen ...

I actually saw it reported on Bloomberg today at work, which I thought a bit mad.  I think any news website's comments section will make it clear what we all already know; the public hate us

If the plane hit a drone there would be pieces of drone everywhere at that velocity, and probably a big bang if the battery was pierced.  I'd say he's on drugs!

wellsi Posted at 2016-4-18 20:19
I actually saw it reported on Bloomberg today at work, which I thought a bit mad.  I think any new ...

The public hate us until they meet us apparently, at least in my experience.  I've only ever had good responses.  I expect people will start to hate us properly if regulations aren't brought in to curb the idiot factor.

Ribfeast Posted at 2016-4-18 23:54
If the plane hit a drone there would be pieces of drone everywhere at that velocity, and probably a  ...

The view from Australia was obviously clearer than from the flight deck !  I think it is fair to say that a British Airways pilot was probably not "on drugs" - nobody (other than the pilot) knows what the pilot saw - the pilot believes he saw a drone - I don't believe British Airways pilots are in the habit of wasting police time  - I know who I am inclined to believe but I am sure time will tell.

terjetyl Posted at 2016-4-18 13:43
Doesn't matter too much if this was a drone or not, thing is that it will happen sooner or later a ...

I don't want DJI to tell me, where I am allowed to fly and where not.
The regulations around the world are way to different, to keep track.
So, for example, if I check with German Air Navigation Services I may be allowed to fly very close to an international airport (in Germany). There is no way for DJI or any other manufacturer to know about those arrangements.
I agree with nomad65 - the regulations (no-fly-zones) are in place. It is well known, that you better not fly around LHR, LAX or FRA (just to name a few). If one does, he/she should be severly punished.
And, noticed at the edge, a Phantom, Yuneec Q500 or a Blade 350 weigh less than 2 kg (take of weight), a Canada goose weighs 3 - 6 kg.

chris_t Posted at 2016-4-19 08:37
I don't want DJI to tell me, where I am allowed to fly and where not.
The regulations around the w ...

Most Canada Geese are not made of plastic, metal and they tend not to have Lithium Ion batteries in them either. You have no way of knowing what damage a drone would do to a jet engine, until proper tests are done it is pure conjecture.  As for not wanting to be told where you can and cannot fly unfortunately some idiots need to be "told" because they are not capable of sticking to the rules or applying a modicum of common sense.

J.N Posted at 2016-4-18 22:53
Yes i can. if suck inside a reactor

Nope. A 1 kg drone will not take down a modern aeroplane.
Rolls royce tests their engines. 3 cannons shoot up a ton of hail in 30 seconds which means. 33 kg per second and 11 kg per cannon.

Also designed to take on 11 kg birds

I want DJI and other manufacturers to tell me where I can and can't fly. If I'm travelling the world using my P3 it's going to be a ball ache for me as an individual to look up all the potential no-fly zones where as the drone industry and local aviation authorities could easily keep each other updated and block places in the app.

Also, everyone saying that a drone wouldn't bring down a passenger jet, what if the plane in question wasn't a massive Boeing and instead was a Bombardier Dash 8 or something similar, would people still be as confident that a 1kg drone wont bring it down if it hit the Propeller?

AirSnaps Posted at 2016-4-19 10:18
I want DJI and other manufacturers to tell me where I can and can't fly. If I'm travelling the world ...

download an APP called UAV forecast this works on your location and shows you NFZ

If it was a drone that hit the plane and the person purposely flew near the airport he/she should be locked up. No sympathy for the idiot.

AirSnaps Posted at 2016-4-19 11:18
I want DJI and other manufacturers to tell me where I can and can't fly. If I'm travelling the world ...

If you're travelling the world, you have to inform yourself about the regulations on site. If you're really travelling the world you should know about the many, many different regulations. So while gathering the information about the location you're about to fly at, you can easily get the additional info, wether it's a NFZ or not.
Do you also want the automobile industry to tell, where you're allowed to drive your vehicle?
That is not the manufactures responsibility, it is yours / mine / ours!!

mark.mwilliams7 Posted at 2016-4-19 10:20
download an APP called UAV forecast this works on your location and shows you NFZ

UAV Forecast only has some NFZs on it, many are missing - look at Central London for example nothing mentioned - the problem with apps like this is that whilst they are helpful if the data is not complete it cannot be relied upon.

chris_t Posted at 2016-4-19 11:11
If you're travelling the world, you have to inform yourself about the regulations on site. If you' ...

If there's a restricted zone that it's illegal for me to enter in my vehicle then yes I think the cars sat nav should inform me that I'm approaching it. Just as the car informs me if I've left a door slightly open or lets me know if I'm about to reverse into a post I hadn't seen. All these things help me to be a better and safer driver and it's the same for drones, if the app tells me that I can't fly in this area then I'd have to be an idiot to override that and continue to fly there.
If you rely on individuals to research the area they are in then you run the risk of people being misinformed, if the drone, or car in your analogy, gets it's info from a central database and informs you of current restrictions then there's less chance of error in my view. If it was possible for cars to stop people driving the wrong way down a motorway then I'd want that implemented, not because I'm planning on doing it or that I think I'd ever accidentally do it but it does happen so why not implement the technology if it's available?

birdingbilly Posted at 2016-4-19 09:08
Most Canada Geese are not made of plastic, metal and they tend not to have Lithium Ion batteries i ...

Would be an interesting test!

AirSnaps Posted at 2016-4-19 10:18
I want DJI and other manufacturers to tell me where I can and can't fly. If I'm travelling the world ...

Wouldn't it be better for you to take responsibility yourself, like any other aircraft/car/bike user?  Can you even imagine how big a job it would be to co-ordinate a central worldwide no-fly zone database?

Have a look at NOTAM info to see how much info there is for the UK & how often it changes...that's a very small part of the world!

For DJI to incorporate all of that for the whole world, it would certainly increase the cost of a Phantom by an appreciable amount.

AirSnaps Posted at 2016-4-19 13:37
If there's a restricted zone that it's illegal for me to enter in my vehicle then yes I think the c ...

I think you should stick to buses & trains with that attitude.  Would you drive at night without headlights if the satnav was that reliable?

nigelw Posted at 2016-4-19 15:23
Wouldn't it be better for you to take responsibility yourself, like any other aircraft/car/bike us ...

It would be better if everyone took responsibility for themselves but the fact is that people don't so I'd rather the technology was included to stop idiots from flying in places they shouldn't.

I don't see why it would be so difficult to maintain, in every country there must be an agency that manages  or administers the no fly zones so that agency just needs to make sure they keep their information current and drone manufacturers just need to regularly check these agencies information. It's 2016 for crying out loud, I can stream TV from the other side of the world, I can browse the internet on my phone, I can switch the heating on at home from the office but it's impossible for drone manufacturers to get an up-to-date list of NFZs.

nigelw Posted at 2016-4-19 15:25
I think you should stick to buses & trains with that attitude.  Would you drive at night without h ...

If someone's heading into a restricted zone and no one tells them it's a restricted zone then that could be because they're lazy and didn't research it or did research but got bad information, an accident in that they didn't know exactly where they were at the time or them just being idiotic. If the Sat Nav or DJI app tells them that they are entering a restricted zone then you take away the risk of bad research and lazyness and just leave the idiots.


Surely that's a better situation then just saying everyone has to do their own research and then wondering why the hobby is getting a bad name because people keep flying close to airports. All I'm saying is I want the app to tell me and others when they are in or close to a NFZ for everyone's safety. Somehow equating that with driving in the dark with the lights off is ludicrous.

AirSnaps Posted at 2016-4-19 16:37
If someone's heading into a restricted zone and no one tells them it's a restricted zone then that ...

Yes, it's certainly possible, but who's going to pay for it?  If I was the government considering implementing it, the first place I'd look for the money is through a licence payment, which would be very expensive.  Then you need to get the whole world to buy into it!  Good luck with that in a third world country (or many first world countries).

Also, if you expect the tech to do the work for you, will you be bothered to go & check your flight path for obstructions?  Overhead power lines?  Gatherings of people?  Other drone users?  Or will you just fire it up & fly without a care in the world & potentially hit an air ambulance or SAR helicopter?

labroides@yahoo Posted at 2016-4-18 09:50
So  what's known?
An Airbus A320 is believed to have hit something at an unknown altitude at an und ...

I read about the incident here (Daily Mail).  Aside from a bunch of what-if and by-the-way reporting there was some information which seems to be missing from other reports.

The BA jet was between five and ten minutes away from landing at Heathrow's Terminal 5 when it was struck at 12.50pm.
Hardly near the airport.  According to the FlightRadar24 screengrab, that would have put the aircraft at 5000 to 8000 feet at over 200 knots.

A  BA spokesman added: 'Our aircraft landed safely, was fully examined by  our engineers and it was cleared to operate its next flight.

In other words, no damage.

A Heathrow  spokesman said last night: 'BA flight 727 from Geneva reported being  struck by an unknown object as it entered its final approach towards  Heathrow. The aircraft landed safely at Terminal 5.

The pilot knows he has had a collision with AN OBJECT hitting the front of the plane.  Pilot called police after landing to report collision 'with drone'.

Better than calling them and saying "I hit something."  It is in fact a UFO, but it's easier to get the police to investigate DRONES.

I'm not sure why I only seem to hear of near misses near Heathrow and not other places in the world.  There are either a lot of idiots living nearby or a lot of potential terrorists testing out their newest weapon.  If it does prove to be a drone, the pilot should face the full force of the law.

leanlinao Posted at 2016-4-19 10:43
Nope. A 1 kg drone will not take down a modern aeroplane.
Rolls royce tests their engines. 3 canno ...

What happens when a bird hits a plane?
Bird Strike Committee USA, an "aviation wildlife hazard management community" calculates that a 5.4kg Canadian goose hitting a plane going 150mph (241kph) generates the equivalent force of 454kg dropped from a height of three meters.

As well as the size of the bird, the seriousness of the collusion can depend on where it hits the plane.

If it gets sucked into an engine , that engine will certainly shut down. Planes are able to fly on a single engine and glide if both are unresponsive. Depending on the skill of the pilot , he or she should be able to put the plane down somewhere safely - although the ride will be extremely uncomfortable for the passengers.

endotherm Posted at 2016-4-19 17:43
I read about the incident here (Daily Mail).  Aside from a bunch of what-if and by-the-way reporti ...

I really wouldn't read the Daily Fail.

Poor drone, bloody planes want banning.

endotherm Posted at 2016-4-20 02:43
I read about the incident here (Daily Mail).  Aside from a bunch of what-if and by-the-way reporti ...

"The BA jet was between five and ten minutes away from landing at Heathrow's Terminal 5 when it was struck at 12.50pm."

That's very vague and doesn't provide much information, but if those numbers are true that makes it even less likely to have been a drone.
Examining a recorded track for a recent passenger jet flight, I note at 5 minutes before touchdown the plane was:
5 mins out ... 5000 ft altitude,  speed = 223 kts,  distance from airport = 16 nautical miles
10 mins out ... 9500 ft altitude,  speed = 277 kts,  distance from airport = 30 nautical miles

labroides@yahoo Posted at 2016-4-20 00:29
"The BA jet was between five and ten minutes away from landing at Heathrow's Terminal 5 when it wa ...

it is nonsense.  :@

Richmond Park is less than 5 miles from Heathrow, if it was going to land as shown on that map that would be 27L runway and the park is still way below that route.

A passenger plane that close to a runway, it will be within 1000-1300 ft high at a speed of no more than 140-145 nautical miles cruising speed.  Unless it was a Euro Typhoon Fighter Jet, no passenger airplane can land at those figures to runway within 5 miles range. Well, it can but don't..!  

There is a boogie man on that plane and telling fibs (lies).  

what pilot of plane saw

J.N Posted at 2016-4-20 01:34
What happens when a bird hits a plane?
Bird Strike Committee USA, an "aviation wildlife hazard man ...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jTKfFxwpbUUthat is a real bird test but yeah that's a 747/777 so 0% deformation and 0% thrust loss so it wont even be felt. faa requires max 50% thrust loss so only small aeroplanes like private jets are gonna have issues with vultures or 1 kg drones but if it was a 10 kg drone on a small aeroplanes engine the engine will definitely shut down and flying with no thrust causes a lot of imbalance, gliding always depends on the pilot and plane design.

Anyway it doesnt have to happen so the best solution is having airplane paths with max altitude limit like 120m and airports with no fly at all. 500m for the rest

flydodom Posted at 2016-4-20 11:09
it is nonsense.  

Richmond Park is less than 5 miles from Heathrow, if it was going to land as s ...

Is there a source which identifies Richmond Park as being involved in the investigation?  I've only seen it mentioned here.  As far as I can see, flying a drone from there seems legal, unless they got it up over 500m.  Then it would have been blind luck that it was at the exact altitude and position at the right time in its 20 minute flight window to hit the nose of the plane.  A bit like hitting a bullet in flight with another bullet.

endotherm Posted at 2016-4-20 12:11
Is there a source which identifies Richmond Park as being involved in the investigation?  I've only ...

Height limit in UK is 121m not 500m - Richmond Park is in the Class D LHR controlled airspace - blind luck ! There is a plane flying that approach every 2 mins - the Met Police released the info about Richmond Park, it was actually just to the north of the park.  If it was a drone it was being flown  illegally  and stupidly no matter how you try to dress it up and defend it.  And contrary to some of the daft opinions on here the BA pilot was neither blind, drunk or on drugs.

For those who said that a drone is not dangerous for an airplain. just take a look and remember birds are not made of carbon, fiber, magnesium, or metals.

birdingbilly Posted at 2016-4-21 00:03
Height limit in UK is 121m not 500m - Richmond Park is in the Class D LHR controlled airspace - bl ...

Could I legally fly a drone in Richmond Park at all, especially below 120m?  I am assuming yes, as it is more than 5.5km from the airport and below the flight altitude for approach.  I could well be wrong -- I am looking at this case a long way away and have no local knowledge of the area and specific knowledge of your laws.  My comment about flying over 500m was in relation to the reported time of impact - 12:50pm - which makes the flight 5 to 10 minutes out from the airport.  At that distance the plane would have been at 5000 - 8000 ft and a drone would have needed to deliberately be flown over the 1600ft ceiling.  I think all that it shows is that the reported time/distance/altitude/location all show massive inconsistencies.

is there a video that shows a drone hitting this plane?? on youtube I checked the link and it was old footage from 2011
no sign of a drone just a plane landing with an engine trouble?? I saw this once at Edinburgh a plane take off over the forth
with engine trouble loosing altitude so the pilot turned it around and landed again. until I see a vid of a drone physically hitting a plane
Im not buying it

I'm a little sceptical on the ports of this drawn it in an aeroplane, imagine you're the pilot sitting in the cockpit travelling 200 and something miles per hour plus looking up so little window and identifying it was a drone that it it where is the remains of the drone and it was reports of no damage done to the plane surely that if you did it hit a drawn they would be remains and wreckage of the drone plus I would've thought it would've left a mark on the plane or was it a seagull that it it...!