[size=13.3333px]http://avherald.com/h?article=4a97d690&opt=0

This is becoming more frequent everywhere.  Sad, because it could all be avoided.

ALABAMA Posted at 2017-10-2 06:10
This is becoming more frequent everywhere.  Sad, because it could all be avoided.

they gonna mess it up for other people.

If the report is accurate and true, it's  irresponsible pilots like this that's going to make it real tough on the rest of us and may effect the laws here and around the globe.  

Idiots like this are going to get all the responsible drone pilots so tied up in red tape we won’t be able
To fly anywhere.

I normally don't get too worked up about these reports (especially as most of them turn out to be fake), but this snippet in the report raises my eyebrows:

It is noticeable that the drone was along the approach trajectory at 5000 feet MSL above waypoint MILNI which makes it thinkable that the drone was placed there with the intention to create close up shots of arriving air transport aircraft.

And keep in mind this is a 1-meter drone; not a small camera drone.  If the above is true, this guy needs to be locked up.  Maybe his cellmate Biff can give him all the loving attention that he craves.

Irate Retro Posted at 2017-10-2 10:32
I normally don't get too worked up about these reports (especially as most of them turn out to be fake), but this snippet in the report raises my eyebrows:

It is noticeable that the drone was along the approach trajectory at 5000 feet MSL above waypoint MILNI which makes it thinkable that the drone was placed there with the intention to create close up shots of arriving air transport aircraft.

Where do you you read this is a 1m drone?
Or am I missing something?

Montfrooij Posted at 2017-10-2 11:07
Where do you you read this is a 1m drone?
Or am I missing something?

From the avherald link above:

The A330 was on a stabilized ILS approach to runway 34 when the crew got sight of they recognized as a multicopter drone, about one meter in diameter, but were unable to react before passing the drone. The drone passed an estimated about 10 meters/33 feet above the aircraft.

Now whether a couple guys can accurately estimate the size of a drone while they are screaming by at 200 kts, and while one of them is supposed to be flying the plane... well that's up for debate.

Irate Retro Posted at 2017-10-2 11:13
From the avherald link above:

The A330 was on a stabilized ILS approach to runway 34 when the crew got sight of they recognized as a multicopter drone, about one meter in diameter, but were unable to react before passing the drone. The drone passed an estimated about 10 meters/33 feet above the aircraft.

Yes, I missed something.
Thanks!
That is rather worrying (if that is true) indeed.

In a FAA update in all the reported pilot reports of hitting drones in the US none so far has be verified (zero ), this doesn't include however, the hit in Oregon or the helicopter drone impact which are very recently events under investigation.

RMJovo Posted at 2017-10-2 14:21
In a FAA update in all the reported pilot reports of hitting drones in the US none so far has be verified (zero ), this doesn't include however, the hit in Oregon or the helicopter drone impact which are very recently events under investigation.

You know. it takes just one bad hit... and anyway this wasn't a hit, it was a near miss -thank god.

Another one where the drone is larger than any consumer drones and flying at a height consumer drones either cant fly or could only stay for a very short time before running out of battery.

The report says: "It is noticeable that the drone was along the approach trajectory at 5000 feet MSL above waypoint MILNI which makes it thinkable that the drone was placed there with the intention to create close up shots of arriving air transport aircraft.".

Presumably the aircraft enthusiasts that wait at the end of runways to photo aircraft wouldn't be so stupid?  And if it was them then the report wouldn't specifically say "air transport aircraft".
I could believe industrial intelligence, except I cant see what information they would gain that they wouldn't by sitting on the ground at the end of the runway?

Nearly all the problem drones seem to be something other than our consumer drones, they are something else that is breaking the rules and needs chasing down with some armed military helicopters and a proper investigation carried out...

Do not think a pilot can look out a drone when he flies by a +200 km speed. And that he or she can describe what it looks like.

One may wonder that man from the aviation authorities does not require all airplanes to install a forward camera to be connected to the black box. That camera can then be proof of all the drones the aircraft meet on their way, or aprove they are only found in the pilots' imagination. My guess is it does not happen when the pilots are going to behave much better than they do today.   

Regards Leif.

Landbo Posted at 2017-10-3 04:17
Do not think a pilot can reach a drone when he flies by a +150-speed. And that he or she can describe what it looks like.

One may wonder that man from the aviation authorities does not require all airplanes to install a forward camera to be connected to the black box. That camera can then be proof of all the drones the aircraft meet on their way, or disprove they are only found in the pilots' imagination. My guess is it does not happen when the pilots are going to behave much better than they do today.   

I can’t see what a pilot would have to gain by making something up and I assume that even at that speed a drone would look different than a bird.
Just the extra paperwork involved would surely make it a PITA to bother

AlanHd Posted at 2017-10-3 04:21
I can’t see what a pilot would have to gain by making something up and I assume that even at that speed a drone would look different than a bird.
Just the extra paperwork involved would surely make it a PITA to bother

Believed in my naivety, it's a security issue with all the drones the pilots meet on their way. But apparently not since .............................   

Regards Leif.

Landbo Posted at 2017-10-3 04:17
Do not think a pilot can look out a drone when he flies by a +200 km speed. And that he or she can describe what it looks like.

One may wonder that man from the aviation authorities does not require all airplanes to install a forward camera to be connected to the black box. That camera can then be proof of all the drones the aircraft meet on their way, or aprove they are only found in the pilots' imagination. My guess is it does not happen when the pilots are going to behave much better than they do today.   

A 1m sized drone could be seen and recognised as a drone if it was very close, a Phantom size drone would be almost indistinguishable from a fat bird - just a small white object.

In this case they were looking out for it and knew approximately where it was because of the report from the previous aircraft which would have helped.

I find it surprising that these large high flying drones that hang about near airports are almost never seen on radar.  Even if the radar does not pick them up at the time, they should be identifiable in the radar logs but apparently never are.  Maybe these are actually stealth spy drones, deliberately invisible to radar?

Nigel_ Posted at 2017-10-3 04:45
A 1m sized drone could be seen and recognised as a drone if it was very close, a Phantom size drone would be almost indistinguishable from a fat bird - just a small white object.

In this case they were looking out for it and knew approximately where it was because of the report from the previous aircraft which would have helped.

There I thought it is even more strange that permission can be granted for the subsequent aircraft to land. Normally you simply close the airport until you are 100% sure the drones or birds have disappeared. Not I want to say that story smells, it's unfortunately stinking of untruth. That's why I want to watch video.

One should be able to see both the larger birds and the drones on the radar you have to cover the surrounding area around the airport. That radar should run at a fairly high frequency, so why they can not be seen I do not know.  

Regards Leif.

Landbo Posted at 2017-10-3 05:29
There I thought it is even more strange that permission can be granted for the subsequent aircraft to land. Normally you simply close the airport until you are 100% sure the drones or birds have disappeared. Not I want to say that story smells, it's unfortunately stinking of untruth. That's why I want to watch video.

One should be able to see both the larger birds and the drones on the radar you have to cover the surrounding area around the airport. That radar should run at a fairly high frequency, so why they can not be seen I do not know.  

If you can't see them then you don't know that they have gone, and a normal drone would only be able to stay at that altitude for a few minutes before going down to get a new battery and returning 20 minutes later, so closing the airport would be pointless.

Nigel_ Posted at 2017-10-3 06:42
If you can't see them then you don't know that they have gone, and a normal drone would only be able to stay at that altitude for a few minutes before going down to get a new battery and returning 20 minutes later, so closing the airport would be pointless.

You can not count on that Nigel. The drones can also be made with a gasoline/nitro engine and the flight time is suddenly a lot different from batteries.

As I read the story from Zyrich, referred to as "drone" should be seen within a few minutes. Normally, all traffic will stop at the first message and will not be opened again until you are sure the reported thing is gone, which takes at least 20 minutes. But of course, do not know the exact procedures in Zyrich.

Regards Leif.

Landbo Posted at 2017-10-3 07:14
You can not count on that Nigel. The drones can also be made with a gasoline/nitro engine and the flight time is suddenly a lot different from batteries.

As I read the story from Zyrich, referred to as "drone" should be seen within a few minutes. Normally, all traffic will stop at the first message and will not be opened again until you are sure the reported thing is gone, which takes at least 20 minutes. But of course, do not know the exact procedures in Zyrich.

How can they be sure it is gone when they can't see it?  And even if they do know it is gone and they reopen, it might pop back up before the next flight arrives!

If it had a gasoline engine then it would show up on radar easily.

I don't think flights arrive into Zurich every minute anyway.  I've flown in and out of Zurich many times, I would guess about every 5 - 10 minutes was typical so there would be a very good chance that a quadcopter would be gone by the time the next aeroplane arrived.

Nigel_ Posted at 2017-10-3 07:35
How can they be sure it is gone when they can't see it?  And even if they do know it is gone and they reopen, it might pop back up before the next flight arrives!

If it had a gasoline engine then it would show up on radar easily.

This is a question I do not know much about in Zyrich airport. But I've heard that in Copenhagen airport they sending their shooting mand out with binoculars to see if there is a free lane. And the police are also driving around to see if there is anything.

You should not be sure, as a combustion engine typically fills significantly less than a LiPo battery with the same capacity over half an hour and thus has a significantly smaller surface to reflect radar waves.

Even though there are only 4 aircraft flying on average per hour, there is nothing to prevent the two of them landing right after each other with the safety distance Zyrich requires in the square.

Regards Leif.

Landbo Posted at 2017-10-3 10:35
This is a question I do not know much about in Zyrich airport. But I've heard that in Copenhagen airport they sending their shooting mand out with binoculars to see if there is a free lane. And the police are also driving around to see if there is anything.

You should not be sure, as a combustion engine typically fills significantly less than a LiPo battery with the same capacity over half an hour and thus has a significantly smaller surface to reflect radar waves.

This drone was over 1Km above ground, sending the police out with binoculars is not going to help!

I would expect radar to see a solid aluminium engine with steel crankshaft etc. a lot more easily than a battery containing liquid electrolyte containing lithium ions.

Nigel_ Posted at 2017-10-3 11:03
This drone was over 1Km above ground, sending the police out with binoculars is not going to help!

I would expect radar to see a solid aluminium engine with steel crankshaft etc. a lot more easily than a battery containing liquid electrolyte containing lithium ions.

Nigel, it's only speculation about how. That's why I want to see video of what a plane meets. As it is now, it is unfortunate that the story of Danish storyteller Hans Cristian Andersen wrote many many years ago. The one where a single feather suddenly becomes five hens.  

https://www.andersenstories.com/ ... s_no_doubt_about_it   

Regards Leif.