Sport_Pilot

I don't think I am getting through to you. I believe a 5 pound object very likely will destroy the engine, but it will still have enough thrust to safely land.

Sport_Pilot

I prefer to be anonymous but I am a very experienced and respected engineer.

Sport_Pilot

That it would, but depending on the size it may very well have enough power to safely land.

TimJ

That clearly is not the standard. You can not sit there and say 100%, every time, the engine will still have enough to make it back to base. Truth of the matter is,
it's a game played by the Fickle Finger Of Fate. Much like the videos I've posted in a test scenario, the engines stayed running. Much like the video I posted of a single
piece of flying FOD, the engine was severely crippled.

The argument here is pointless. What should be argued and researched is the amount of bird strikes inside and outside of a 5 mile radius of an airport. Then the amount of Model Aircraft / Multi-Rotor Aircraft strikes inside and outside of a 5 mile radius of an airport.

Sport_Pilot

Again I have admitted that they could damage an engine, and even enough that it would not run. I just don't think a small quad would damage a jet engine enough to stop running.

Sport_Pilot

Did you watch his video's? I don't think you are listening.

No one has made any assertion to the contrary.

Sport_Pilot

The engine was obviously damaged, but still producing thrust. We have no idea of how large the bird was.

Sport_Pilot

The standard is that flocks of small birds not reduce thrust by 25%. medium sized birds not by more than 50%, and large birds to 8 pounds allow the engine to be safely shut down.

The rest is true, but IMO the odds are that when the first airliner hit a sUAV the airliner will be able to safely land. Might not be true of Cessna 150 though.

Sport_Pilot

Looking at the video the second time, the engine was still producing thrust. I saw no visible yaw of the aircraft. But if you look closely at the rudder you can tell the pilot is giving a very small amount of left rudder as the trim tab is pointed to the right. I thought it was the rudder at first but now believe it is the trim tab.

ira d

I think all this discussion about what will or will not stop a aircraft engine is fruitless, I don't think any of us would want to be on a aircraft that struck a 5lb model or anything else
for that matter What would be more productive would be ideas on what can be done to keep models away from full scale planes while at same time not trample on the rights of
responsible modelers.

TimJ

Ira d, you are right. And that can be accomplished through education. The more someone is educated and understands, the less discrimination and fear there will be.

init4fun

Tim you have my apology for misunderstanding you earlier . The mis understanding was on my part and I have amended my earlier post .

Sometimes I loose track of who's who ....

ira d

True education is part of the solution, But I also think the FAA needs to go after the rogue flyers which IMO should have been their mission from the start instead of making rules that
have nothing to do with safety, For example you can't do anything with your model that involves money changing hands like being paid to perform at a airshow.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Yes hound Dog, we had Quite a Ride back then, 1963,64, Those babies thundered down the runway , flaps down and locked, then the fun began, turn on the water, what smoke (Black) you could see from maybe 10 miles away when they launched.
In that time the B-52d carried 275000 LBS of fuel, 18000 lbs of water, that was the EWO load, (Emergency War Order) when we were on Alert Status. Which means the Aircraft is fully loaded with Nuclear Bombs, rockets chaff and Ammo for the Tail Gunner, 50 ca. and 20mm guns. It way awesome to watch them after launch. Learned a lot in those days. I don't remember the dash number of those J-57's just remember the J-57. On alert we used shotgun starters, canisters of propellent about 12"" round, light them off on #2 engine, which would start the start sequence of those engines, created turnover of that engine, which supplied hydraulics , phnumatics, and fuel to the other 7 engines , what a trip, even for the Pilots.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

I forgot to mention, not only the KC-135's had a wild ride but the Third bomber that launched was more interesting, 187 Ft. wingspan, they would rock and roll after the first 2 launched.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Man, you got it! +1

N410DC

One thing to keep in mind: pretty much all modern jets can takeoff, cruise, land with an inoperable engine. Even if the engine is destroyed, there is still a decent chance that a safe landing can be made. Of course, things such as a fire and excess vibration can cause additional problems that may complicate a safe landing.

Rob2160

Sorry, I thought you did in these earlier posts...

Rob2160

If you changed the word "will" to "may" I would agree 100% with this comment.

Nobody can say for a certainty that the engine will continue developing power - it may - but there are too many variables - the same engine and the same drone impacting at different speeds, angles and power settings could produce very different results.

Sport_Pilot

I should have said will most likely have enough thrust to safely land. Or go around, or take off for that matter.

Rob2160

I wouldn't argue with that.

rgburrill

At 400' on landing a two=engine "heavy" is about 30 seconds from touchdown. And most likely still on autoland. So with losing thrust on one side the pilot has 30 seconds to figure out what the problem is, take control of the aircraft which is already yawing and losing altitude, determine where he is with respect to the end of the runway and correct everything and land safely. All the while you are having fun with your little toy.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

On a 3 degree Glide Slop and a 1000' touch down past thresh hold the
distance from the runway end would be 7632.454' - 1000' = 6632.5' from
the run way end (Threshold) or 1.256 miles from the runway end at 400'.
Don't forget that the 5 mile radius is figured from the geographical center of
the airport that can be over another mile of two father than the 1.256 miles
from the runway end. i.e. U should allow at least 1.5 miles + the 1.25 to be
certain to below all aircraft at 400'.

This is the other problem flying near air ports with instrument approaches.
Now don't for get on a circle to land after the instrument approach could be
even lower than 600' AGL as far out as 5 miles visibility permuting.

U can see that flying any where with in the 5 mile radius from an air port is
a bad idea especially under IFR conditions when U won't see a plane till it pops out
of the bottom of the clouds.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Her is what wick has to say about AUTO LAND SYSTEMS can find the pertinent FAR's on Auto landing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland
[h=1]Autoland[/h] From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[TABLE="class: metadata plainlinks ambox ambox-style ambox-Tone"]
[TR]
[TD="class: mbox-image"]

[/TD]
[TD="class: mbox-text"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
In aviation, autoland describes a system that fully automates the landing procedure of an aircraft's flight, with the flight crew supervising the process. Such systems enable aircraft to land in weather conditions that would otherwise be dangerous or impossible to operate in.
[h=2]Contents[/h]

• 1 Description
• 2 History
  • 2.1 Background
  • 2.2 The development of autoland
  • 2.3 Autoland for civil aviation
• 3 Autoland systems
• 4 Accidents
• 5 See also
• 6 References
• 7 External links

[h=2]Description[/h] Autoland systems were designed to make landing possible in visibility too poor to permit any form of visual landing, although they can be used at any level of visibility. They are usually used when visibility is less than 600 meters RVR and/or in adverse weather conditions, although limitations do apply for most aircraft—for example, for a Boeing 747-400 the limitations are a maximum headwind of 25 kts, a maximum tailwind of 10 kts, a maximum crosswind component of 25 kts, and a maximum crosswind with one engine inoperative of five knots. They may also include automatic braking to a full stop once the aircraft is on the ground, in conjunction with the autobrake system, and sometimes auto deployment of spoilers and thrust reversers.
Autoland may be used for any suitably approved Instrument Landing System (ILS) or Microwave Landing System (MLS) approach, and is sometimes used to maintain currency of the aircraft and crew, as well as for its main purpose of assisting an aircraft landing in low visibility and/or bad weather.
Autoland requires the use of a radar altimeter to determine the aircraft's height above the ground very precisely so as to initiate the landing flare at the correct height (usually about 50 feet (15 m)). The localizer signal of the ILS may be used for lateral control even after touchdown until the pilot disengages the autopilot. For safety reasons, once autoland is engaged and the ILS signals have been acquired by the autoland system, it will proceed to landing without further intervention, and can be disengaged only by completely disconnecting the autopilot (this prevents accidental disengagement of the autoland system at a critical moment) or by initiating an automatic go-around. At least two and often three independent autopilot systems work in concert to carry out autoland, thus providing redundant protection against failures. Most autoland systems can operate with a single autopilot in an emergency, but they are only certified when multiple autopilots are available.
The autoland system's response rate to external stimuli work very well in conditions of reduced visibility and relatively calm or steady winds, but the purposefully limited response rate means they are not generally smooth in their responses to varying wind shear or gusting wind conditions – i.e. not able to compensate in all dimensions rapidly enough – to safely permit their use.
The first aircraft to be certified to CAT III standards, on 28 December 1968,[SUP][1][/SUP] was the Sud Aviation Caravelle, followed by the Hawker-Siddeley HS.121 Trident in May 1972 (CAT IIIA) and to CAT IIIB during 1975. The Trident had been certified to CAT II on 7 February 1968.
Autoland capability has seen the most rapid adoption in areas and on aircraft that must frequently operate in very poor visibility. Airports troubled by fog on a regular basis are prime candidates for Category III approaches, and including autoland capability on jet airliners helps reduce the likelihood that they will be forced to divert by bad weather.
Autoland is highly accurate. In his 1959 paper [SUP][2][/SUP] John Charnley, then Superintendent of the UK Royal Aircraft Establishment's (RAE) Blind Landing Experimental Unit (BLEU), concluded a discussion of statistical results by saying that "It is fair to claim, therefore, that not only will the automatic system land the aircraft when the weather prevents the human pilot, it also performs the operation much more precisely".
Traditionally autoland systems have been very expensive, and have been rare on small aircraft. However, as display technology has developed the addition of a Head Up Display (HUD) allows for a trained pilot to manually fly the aircraft using guidance cues from the flight guidance system. This significantly reduces the cost of operating in very low visibility, and allows aircraft which are not equipped for automatic landings to make a manual landing safely at lower levels of look ahead visibility or runway visual range (RVR). Alaska Airlines was the first airline in the world to manually land a passenger-carrying jet (Boeing 737) in FAA Category III weather (dense fog) made possible with the Head-Up Guidance System.[SUP][3[/SUP]

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Her is what wick has to say about AUTO LAND SYSTEMS can find the pertinent FAR's on Auto landing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland
[h=1]Autoland[/h] From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[TABLE="class: metadata plainlinks ambox ambox-style ambox-Tone"]
[TR]
[TD="class: mbox-image"]

[/TD]
[TD="class: mbox-text"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
In aviation, autoland describes a system that fully automates the landing procedure of an aircraft's flight, with the flight crew supervising the process. Such systems enable aircraft to land in weather conditions that would otherwise be dangerous or impossible to operate in.
[h=2]Contents[/h]

• 1 Description
• 2 History
  • 2.1 Background
  • 2.2 The development of autoland
  • 2.3 Autoland for civil aviation
• 3 Autoland systems
• 4 Accidents
• 5 See also
• 6 References
• 7 External links

[h=2]Description[/h] Autoland systems were designed to make landing possible in visibility too poor to permit any form of visual landing, although they can be used at any level of visibility. They are usually used when visibility is less than 600 meters RVR and/or in adverse weather conditions, although limitations do apply for most aircraft—for example, for a Boeing 747-400 the limitations are a maximum headwind of 25 kts, a maximum tailwind of 10 kts, a maximum crosswind component of 25 kts, and a maximum crosswind with one engine inoperative of five knots. They may also include automatic braking to a full stop once the aircraft is on the ground, in conjunction with the autobrake system, and sometimes auto deployment of spoilers and thrust reversers.
Autoland may be used for any suitably approved Instrument Landing System (ILS) or Microwave Landing System (MLS) approach, and is sometimes used to maintain currency of the aircraft and crew, as well as for its main purpose of assisting an aircraft landing in low visibility and/or bad weather.
Autoland requires the use of a radar altimeter to determine the aircraft's height above the ground very precisely so as to initiate the landing flare at the correct height (usually about 50 feet (15 m)). The localizer signal of the ILS may be used for lateral control even after touchdown until the pilot disengages the autopilot. For safety reasons, once autoland is engaged and the ILS signals have been acquired by the autoland system, it will proceed to landing without further intervention, and can be disengaged only by completely disconnecting the autopilot (this prevents accidental disengagement of the autoland system at a critical moment) or by initiating an automatic go-around. At least two and often three independent autopilot systems work in concert to carry out autoland, thus providing redundant protection against failures. Most autoland systems can operate with a single autopilot in an emergency, but they are only certified when multiple autopilots are available.
The autoland system's response rate to external stimuli work very well in conditions of reduced visibility and relatively calm or steady winds, but the purposefully limited response rate means they are not generally smooth in their responses to varying wind shear or gusting wind conditions – i.e. not able to compensate in all dimensions rapidly enough – to safely permit their use.
The first aircraft to be certified to CAT III standards, on 28 December 1968,[SUP][1][/SUP] was the Sud Aviation Caravelle, followed by the Hawker-Siddeley HS.121 Trident in May 1972 (CAT IIIA) and to CAT IIIB during 1975. The Trident had been certified to CAT II on 7 February 1968.
Autoland capability has seen the most rapid adoption in areas and on aircraft that must frequently operate in very poor visibility. Airports troubled by fog on a regular basis are prime candidates for Category III approaches, and including autoland capability on jet airliners helps reduce the likelihood that they will be forced to divert by bad weather.
Autoland is highly accurate. In his 1959 paper [SUP][2][/SUP] John Charnley, then Superintendent of the UK Royal Aircraft Establishment's (RAE) Blind Landing Experimental Unit (BLEU), concluded a discussion of statistical results by saying that "It is fair to claim, therefore, that not only will the automatic system land the aircraft when the weather prevents the human pilot, it also performs the operation much more precisely".
Traditionally autoland systems have been very expensive, and have been rare on small aircraft. However, as display technology has developed the addition of a Head Up Display (HUD) allows for a trained pilot to manually fly the aircraft using guidance cues from the flight guidance system. This significantly reduces the cost of operating in very low visibility, and allows aircraft which are not equipped for automatic landings to make a manual landing safely at lower levels of look ahead visibility or runway visual range (RVR). Alaska Airlines was the first airline in the world to manually land a passenger-carrying jet (Boeing 737) in FAA Category III weather (dense fog) made possible with the Head-Up Guidance System.[SUP][3[/SUP]