Please select Into the mobile phone version | Continue to access the computer ver.
Study for Thesis
758 13 2017-2-27
Uploading and Loding Picture ...(0/1)
o(^-^)o
JerryMC2017
lvl.1

Israel
Offline

[size=14.6667px]Hi Everyone,
[size=14.6667px]I am drone pilot for more than 3 years(started on the S800, then S1000, Phantom4 and also the Mavic(and the 3DR Solo in the past...... hope to get my hands on the new inspire...), therefore I decided to run my Thesis on Drones,
[size=14.6667px]Drones are the future of humanity, for patrolling, shipping, lives savings, inspection, transportation and other applications,
[size=14.6667px]As part of my Thesis I decided to run a study regarding pilots main concerns, as a drone pilot my main concern is Hitting someone due to a drone malfunction or even to be liable of 3rd party damages, study results are not confidential, I will be happy to share them, Hopfully many of you will participate so the study will show better understanding regarding your concerns.

[size=14.6667px]This research is meant for this use and your personal detail won't be shared with anyone (you may also answer anonymously.)

[size=14.6667px][color=rgb(63, 63, 63) !important]https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfUur5suCUiv4H794qC6KyxsrsSBKtodsOy8NVOVvkERrPObQ/viewform


[size=14.6667px]Hope its oK,

[size=14.6667px]Thanks!

2017-2-27
Use props
JerryMC2017
lvl.1

Israel
Offline

Hi,  Thanks for participating!  It helps a lot if more people would participate,   Thanks all
2017-2-28
Use props
hallmark007
Captain
Flight distance : 5740837 ft
  • >>>
Ireland
Online

JerryMC2017 Posted at 2017-2-28 06:43
Hi,  Thanks for participating!  It helps a lot if more people would participate,   Thanks all

Mine is similar to yours I have Mavic and p4p, causing some sort of destruction is always a worry, before you fly if you break your mission down and try to avoid as many as the obstacles and dangers as you can, proper preparation is key to safety .

Like you I have my eye set on Inspire 2, I like the idea that there are more and more redundancy being offered by these new drones coming to market, the more safety features added to these drones the safer it will be for all.

Good luck with your thesis..
2017-2-28
Use props
JerryMC2017
lvl.1

Israel
Offline

Hi Hallmark007, thank you for your response,
Do you think that finally drones will get to a point where they safe enough to fly above people (such airplane) with F.R of 10e(-6)?
if so drone price will increase dramatically  
2017-2-28
Use props
Punchbuggy
Captain
Flight distance : 395551 ft
Australia
Offline

JerryMC2017 Posted at 2017-2-28 12:01
Hi Hallmark007, thank you for your response,
Do you think that finally drones will get to a point where they safe enough to fly above people (such airplane) with F.R of 10e(-6)?
if so drone price will increase dramatically

Interesting question, but 'safe' is based on the perception of 'risk'; or more specifically, your risk appetite.

Is a P4/P as safe to fly over people as a plane? When managing risk, you consider the event (people being injured from above), the cause (failure of components, irresponsible pilot, inexperienced or bad pilot, poor environmental conditions, etc), and the consequence (non-lethal injury up to loss of life).

So, cause due to a drone (Possible) - it's built to a price-point so has limited redundancy to props and components but the likelihood of complete failure is low; irresponsible pilots can be managed through penalties, restricted through regulations, or GEO restriction; inexperienced pilots can be educated through training and forums such as this, Beginners Mode on RC; etc). Cause due to a plane (Unlikely) - extreme redundancy is heavily built in and so failure is extremely unlikely; pilots are heavily regulated and must be certified; etc.

As a consequence of a drone event, a drone may only inflict a non-lethal outcome in the majority of cases (Minor). For a plane event, loss of life is extremely likely (Extreme).

So, using a standard risk matrix, the determined risk level of an event caused by a drone is Low, whereas the risk level for a plane is High (predominantly due to the level of consequence - loss of life). Of cause, if we're not talking 'Phantom' but talking a $2 Shop toy, then the likelihood of an event cause increases (to Almost Certain), but the risk level is still determined to be Medium due to a non-lethal consequence.

So will drones be safe enough to fly above people? Well, considering that from a risk management perspective, if you had a low risk appetite then you'd be banning planes from flying above people, not drones.   

And I'm a certified Risk Manager. :-)

2017-2-28
Use props
Geebax
Captain
Australia
Offline

Punchbuggy Posted at 2017-2-28 13:23
Interesting question, but 'safe' is based on the perception of 'risk'; or more specifically, your risk appetite.

Is a P4/P as safe to fly over people as a plane? When managing risk, you consider the event (people being injured from above), the cause (failure of components, irresponsible pilot, inexperienced or bad pilot, poor environmental conditions, etc), and the consequence (non-lethal injury up to loss of life).

Nice summation.
2017-2-28
Use props
Labroides
Captain
Flight distance : 9991457 ft
Australia
Offline

Punchbuggy Posted at 2017-2-28 13:23
Interesting question, but 'safe' is based on the perception of 'risk'; or more specifically, your risk appetite.

Is a P4/P as safe to fly over people as a plane? When managing risk, you consider the event (people being injured from above), the cause (failure of components, irresponsible pilot, inexperienced or bad pilot, poor environmental conditions, etc), and the consequence (non-lethal injury up to loss of life).

Will cars ever be safe enough that you would travel in one at 100 km/hr with oncoming traffic at the same speed only a metre or two away in the next lane?
2017-2-28
Use props
Punchbuggy
Captain
Flight distance : 395551 ft
Australia
Offline

Labroides Posted at 2017-2-28 15:00
Will cars ever be safe enough that you would travel in one at 100 km/hr with oncoming traffic at the same speed only a metre or two away in the next lane?

Hmmm, I don't think I need to do a detailed analysis of the risk level for that one...
2017-2-28
Use props
RedHotPoker
Captain
Flight distance : 165105 ft
Canada
Offline

It's a fun time, for sure... Ha



RedHotPoker
2017-2-28
Use props
JerryMC2017
lvl.1

Israel
Offline

What a great analysis!,
You are saying that the likelihood of complete failure is low, what is the meaning of complete failure?
Lets go 2 years forward, there will be more than 1 million "2 years old" drones up in the air, most of them (for hobby) wont run through maintenance program, am I right?,

2017-3-1
Use props
Punchbuggy
Captain
Flight distance : 395551 ft
Australia
Offline

JerryMC2017 Posted at 2017-3-1 14:19
What a great analysis!,
You are saying that the likelihood of complete failure is low, what is the meaning of complete failure?
Lets go 2 years forward, there will be more than 1 million "2 years old" drones up in the air, most of them (for hobby) wont run through maintenance program, am I right?,

Jerry, my view of 'complete failure' is one which causes the risk event i.e. which results in a drone falling from the sky - failed engine, broken prop, close-down of drone 'smarts' (such as a CPU failure), etc.
I can't comment on the other, but logically the older and more use a drone gets, the greater the likelihood of a hardware failure.
2017-3-1
Use props
Geebax
Captain
Australia
Offline

JerryMC2017 Posted at 2017-3-1 14:19
What a great analysis!,
You are saying that the likelihood of complete failure is low, what is the meaning of complete failure?
Lets go 2 years forward, there will be more than 1 million "2 years old" drones up in the air, most of them (for hobby) wont run through maintenance program, am I right?,

'Lets go 2 years forward, there will be more than 1 million "2 years old" drones up in the air,'

I doubt that will happen. In 2 years they will either be at the bottom of a waterway, crashed and broken, or 'yesterday's toy'.
2017-3-1
Use props
JerryMC2017
lvl.1

Israel
Offline

Did anyone hear about the person that flew a drone on contraction site, the drone crushed into a crane and than fall on top of a worker and injured him?
Some friend told me about it but couldn't find the artical...
2017-3-4
Use props
JerryMC2017
lvl.1

Israel
Offline

Punchbuggy Posted at 2017-3-1 14:55
Jerry, my view of 'complete failure' is one which causes the risk event i.e. which results in a drone falling from the sky - failed engine, broken prop, close-down of drone 'smarts' (such as a CPU failure), etc.
I can't comment on the other, but logically the older and more use a drone gets, the greater the likelihood of a hardware failure.

Hi Punchbuggy, I would like to discuss about thing someone wrote me in privet message,
He wrote that as Airplanes don't need parachutes also drones don't need as well, I wrote him the following answer:
Regular aircraft doesn't come with parachute(most of them...) but the main differences between drone and an airplane are:
1.Fix wing can glide outside dangerous places,
2.Probability for failure of airplane is around 10E-9, probability for failure of drone is around 10E-2 to 10E-4(rare..)
lets assume that in 5 years there will be 1,000,000 drone flying each hour...(all over the world, for delivery, inspection, police patrol, photography etc.), it means that each hour around 100 drones will crush, am I right?
High end drones that cost more more than 50K will be much more reliable but "regular" drones such the M600, M200, INSPIRE etc. will stay around 10E-4, otherwise the cost will increase dramatically, what than?   

What do you think?
Thanks,
Jerr
2017-3-5
Use props
Advanced
You need to log in before you can reply Login | Register now

Credit Rules