The menace of personal drones - part 2

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,567
6
81
I want to move up the timeline for the prediction I made in my previous thread on this topic. In that thread, I predicted "within two years" a commercial airliner would be brought down, with hundreds of lives lost, by a personal drone. Based on the incidents reported in a new Washington post article, I think it will be within the next six months. Really, it's become that bad.

I've tried to edit down the size of the story here, including only the most alarming information, but the full story is worth a read, which basically reports incidents involving what I assume are just careless drone flyers. But you can be dead sure that terrorists are going to take advantage of the technology. And if they can reach altitudes of 12,000 feet and higher with large-sized drones . . ., well, use your imagination.

On Sunday, a swarm of small rogue drones disrupted air traffic across the country on a scale previously unseen in U.S. skies.

At 8:51 a.m., a white drone startled the pilot of a JetBlue flight, appearing off the aircraft’s left wing moments before the jet landed at Los Angeles International Airport. Five hours later, a quadcopter drone whizzed beneath an Allegiant Air flight as it approached the same runway. Elsewhere in California, pilots of light aircraft reported narrowly dodging drones in San Jose and La Verne.

In Washington, a Cessna pilot reported a drone cruising at 1,500 feet in highly restricted airspace over the nation’s capital, forcing the U.S. military to scramble fighter jets as a precaution. In Louisville, a silver and white drone almost collided with a training aircraft. In Chicago, United Airlines Flight 970 reported seeing a drone pass by at an altitude of 3,500 feet.

All told, 12 episodes — including other incidents in New Mexico, Texas, Illinois, Florida and North Carolina — were recorded Sunday of small drones interfering with airplanes or coming too close to airports, according to previously undisclosed reports filed with the Federal Aviation Administration.

Before last year, close encounters with rogue drones were unheard of. But as a result of a sales boom, small, largely unregulated remote-control aircraft are clogging U.S. airspace, snarling air traffic and giving the FAA fits.

Pilots have reported a surge in close calls with drones: nearly 700 incidents so far this year, according to FAA statistics, about triple the number recorded for all of 2014. The agency has acknowledged growing concern about the problem and its inability to do much to tame it.
.
.
.
U.S. officials have said they are growing more concerned about the possibility that terrorists might seek to use small drones. In a July 31 intelligence bulletin, the Department of Homeland Security said it had recorded more than 500 cases since 2012 in which unauthorized drones have loitered over “sensitive sites and critical installations.”

According to the FAA documents, military aircraft flying near U.S. bases or in restricted areas have also reported close calls with drones on at least a dozen occasions this year.

On July 10, the pilot of an Air Force F-15 Strike Eagle said a small drone came within 50 feet of the fighter jet. Two weeks later, the pilot of a Navy T-45 Goshawk flying near Yuma, Ariz., reported that a drone buzzed 100 feet underneath.

Pervasive intruders

Despite a prohibition against small drones flying within five miles of airports or above 400 feet, the FAA documents show that the robotic aircraft have become pervasive intruders, hovering near runways and busy air traffic corridors.

Pilots are also spotting the small drones at altitudes previously unheard of — higher than 10,000 feet. On May 30, crews from Caribbean Airlines and JetBlue separately reported seeing a drone with colored lights at an altitude of 12,000 feet about 25 miles southeast of John F. Kennedy Airport in New York.

The FAA reports are brief and preliminary in nature. In some cases, follow-up investigations determined that objects pilots had assumed to be drones were in fact something else.
.
.
.
No incident has resulted in a midair collision. But in dozens of cases, pilots reported that drones flew within 500 feet of their aircraft, so close that they usually had no time to react.

On March 21, the crew of Delta Air Lines Flight 874 told air traffic controllers in New York that a small drone passed within 50 feet of the airliner’s left wing near LaGuardia Airport. One month earlier, on Feb. 24, a Delta flight heading toward Los Angeles reported that a red and black drone coming from the opposite direction overflew the Boeing 757 by 100 feet.

In an incident near Los Angeles International Airport, American Airlines Flight 287 reported on June 8 that a blue and silver drone appeared 50 feet off its left side, just above the wing.

Elsewhere, regional carrier Air Wisconsin reported May 10 that a drone whizzed “right off the nose” of the passenger plane at an altitude of 5,000 feet near Charlotte. Nine days later, another Air Wisconsin flight reported that a drone passed within 10 feet of the aircraft outside Philadelphia.

.
.
.
‘Only a matter of time’

No city has seen more illicit drones than New York. Since March, pilots flying into or out of LaGuardia and Kennedy airports have reported encounters with drones 33 times, according to the FAA reports.

In an interview, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said that “the number of near misses is astounding” and predicted that it would be “only a matter of time” before a crash occurs.

Schumer pledged to introduce legislation requiring manufacturers to install technology on all drones to prevent them from flying above 500 feet, near airports or in sensitive airspace. Such technology, known as geo-
fencing, relies on satellite navigation to pinpoint a drone’s location.

“Every day without this law increases the chances that a bad accident will occur,” he said.

DJI, the world’s leading seller of consumer drones, began programming such technology last year into all models sold in the United States. Brendan Schulman, the firm’s vice president of policy and legal affairs, said the software upgrade and public education efforts have proven effective.

“The vast, vast majority of drone users are flying safely and responsibly,” he said. “The real issue is that there are a handful of outliers.”
 

JimKiler

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2002
3,555
205
106
What is the distance a normal drone has to for radio controlling it? 1,000 feet or more like 10,000 feet? If true I had no idea a drone could fly 10,000 feet and still get a signal from the controller.
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
16,432
12,814
146
What is the distance a normal drone has to for radio controlling it? 1,000 feet or more like 10,000 feet? If true I had no idea a drone could fly 10,000 feet and still get a signal from the controller.

Depends. Out of the box some of the DJI models can go multiple thousands of feet. With better antennas I've seen people online fly 6 mile round trips via FPV.
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,567
6
81
What is the distance a normal drone has to for radio controlling it? 1,000 feet or more like 10,000 feet? If true I had no idea a drone could fly 10,000 feet and still get a signal from the controller.
A quick search of the web indicates to me that control ranges of up at least five miles are possible.

For public-band RF control at long range, modules such as the Xtend 900 1 Watt RSPMA by digi work well at 5+ miles, giving between 10 kbps and 115 kbps data rates, with very low power requirements. At 18 grams, they wouldn't be classed as "bricks".

And I'd be willing to bet that innovative technology will be able to extend (or already has extended) that range much further.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
32,940
7,009
136
Drones make perfect guided missiles, or IEDs.
It's just a matter of time til high value targets (people) are never seen in public again. We just cannot protect them.
 

Aikouka

Lifer
Nov 27, 2001
30,383
912
126
A quick search of the web indicates to me that control ranges of up at least five miles are possible.

Except most of the commercial units only go for around a kilometer to a mile. Is it plausible that someone could have been controlling it at that level? Sure, but one potentially dangerous situation that could've been the cause of the 10,000 foot drone is referred to as fly away. It's pretty much exactly what it sounds like -- you lose control of your drone during ascension and it continues to fly straight up (or really in any direction). Those iPhone-controlled Parrot AR Drones were notorious for fly away problems. They even featured it occurring in an episode of Modern Family. :p
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,326
126
Wow, I am a big proponent of drones but that is an outstanding number of near misses. Every other manufacturer needs to follow DJI's lead and get out in front of this issue before Congress takes it out of their hands.

12K feet is absurdly high for a quad, I didn't realize they could get near that altitude. I could see a fixed wing platform maybe getting that high but never would have thought a quad...
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,946
2,326
126
What is the distance a normal drone has to for radio controlling it? 1,000 feet or more like 10,000 feet? If true I had no idea a drone could fly 10,000 feet and still get a signal from the controller.

It had to be on autopilot, you can't see the RC aircraft at that height even if the controllers radio could reach it.
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
16,432
12,814
146
It had to be on autopilot, you can't see the RC aircraft at that height even if the controllers radio could reach it.

An immersion 600mW TV transmitter and directional or mushroom antenna can send video back from several miles. So you could do it using First Person View video.

Edit: here's a 3.8 mile example

http://youtu.be/6aqFo6l48HI
 
Last edited:

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,567
6
81
Wow, I am a big proponent of drones but that is an outstanding number of near misses. Every other manufacturer needs to follow DJI's lead and get out in front of this issue before Congress takes it out of their hands.

12K feet is absurdly high for a quad, I didn't realize they could get near that altitude. I could see a fixed wing platform maybe getting that high but never would have thought a quad...
An under-development, Kickstarter-funded gas-and-electric-powered drone may be available by May of next year for $1500.

So German inventor Holger Willeke took a different approach with his Yeair drone, unveiled on Kickstarter today. Instead of relying solely on batteries and electric motors, it uses a mixture of battery power and good old-fashioned combustion engines. The result? A quadcopter that can do 60 mph, carry nearly 12 pounds, and stay airborne for 60 minutes straight.

The article doesn't say how high this drone will go, but if it can carry 12 pounds for an hour at 60 mph, then with a more modest payload I'm guessing it would be able to reach a fairly substantial altitude.
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
16,432
12,814
146
True. But could make it illegal to own or fly them. Meaning if you get caught you go to jail, fines, etc

How about we start with criminal penalties first for interfering with a flight before we go and ban all flying quads. It's not like we banned cars as soon as the first drunk asshole plowed into a pedestrian.

And so far that hasn't happened.

Hell they haven't even banned laser pointers due to assholes pointing them at planes. They just arrest them.
 

JimKiler

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2002
3,555
205
106
It had to be on autopilot, you can't see the RC aircraft at that height even if the controllers radio could reach it.

That was my next question since 10K feet is so high how would you see it.

I hope Amazon and others do not use drone delivery as it sounds like a god way to kill someone when they fall out of the sky and hit someone.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
stock-photo-boy-hiding-in-bed-under-the-covers-123868771.jpg
 

Pipeline 1010

Golden Member
Dec 2, 2005
1,895
689
136
Using that logic we should have already banned vans and cargo trucks as they have been used in many successful terrorists attacks like the Oklahoma bombing.

No kidding. Ban all the stuff that terrorists "might" use possibly for a future attack that may or may not occur. Guns, vans, fertilizer, knives, rope, hoses, martial arts, pools, dogs, flowers, clothing, helicopters, rocks, toilet paper, eggs, bats, and that white guy in Hayabusa's image. Ban them all. Then, and only then can we truly be safe.
 

JoLLyRoGer

Diamond Member
Aug 24, 2000
4,154
4
81
How about we start with criminal penalties first for interfering with a flight before we go and ban all flying quads. It's not like we banned cars as soon as the first drunk asshole plowed into a pedestrian.

And so far that hasn't happened.

Hell they haven't even banned laser pointers due to assholes pointing them at planes. They just arrest them.


This one is a hot-button for me...

I believe the FAA intends to pursue this course of action as indicated by this article:
http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=83445

And I hope they get some real traction on the issue. The hardest part is without any type of tail number or other identifying information, and without some type of system in place it will remain insanely difficult to pin down the drone operator.

For now all pilots can do is remain vigilant to see and avoid and continue to report.

I suppose one regulatory albeit heavy-handed solution would be to require drones come equipped with WAAS-GPS & ADS-B in/out so (which in 2020 will become mandatory for any aircraft operating where a mode C transponder is now currently required)

So basically:
a) ATC and ADS-B in equipped aircraft will know where the drone is before it's a near miss situation.
b) The drone would know where other aircraft are and could be programmed to "see and avoid" by itself
c) Give ATC & FAA positive ID of the drone enabling authorities to enforce punitive actions against operators who violate our airspace system
d) The cost driving factor(s) of WAAS-GPS & ADS-B would place the price point out of the hands of your average-joe kid with a GoPro which would in turn also cut down dramatically of the number of people who could afford to "pay to play" and by extension further reducing the probability of an incident.

Yeah that would suck for a lot of drone enthusiast an probably kill off the hobby for the most part, but if people can't learn to be responsible and self-regulate then you'll find my sympathy somewhere between shit and syphilis. The last thing I want is to be on short final with my wife and/or kids on board just to have a drone strike turn my Cessna into a falling coffin.