FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

No I don't think so, I am not a full scale pilot so I do not know the correct answer.. Never the less, the drone should have not been seen in the flight path of the airliner ,regardless of altitude or distance.
If the pilot did see the drone (quad) it's too close in my opinion.

Flight Risk

My Feedback: (1)

They just need to equip full scale AC with phasers which can shoot down drones.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

If U look at the ILS RWY 1 at DCA the BADON Intersection is just 13 feet under 1600' AGL and 4.8 NM from the Threshold with another 1007' to the touch down poung. so lwts say 5 NM from BADON INT. 1200/1600 = .75 .75 x 5 NM = 3.75 NM from the touch down poing 3.75 NM 1.15 = 4.31 //statute Miles from tough dow. Now while mesuring from the TD on RWY 1 to the geographical center of the DCA airport we add another 2600'+- and we now have 4.31sm + .5sm and we end up with aproximitly 4.81 sm from the DCA airport. Pretty close to 5 Statute miles. I'd Say.
Still he probably should not of been tha high anyway.

Even if one would get a Circle to Land from RWY 19 (the opposit end) they have to stay at 980 MSL and 1-1/2 miles from the airport.

joancmigneault

How long are y'all going to put down quad copter pilots? WE ARE ALL NOT LIKE THAT! I fly mine (3) responsibly all the time. I take offence at all these accusations.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

joancmigneault

It' not guys like U and the many AMA members that understand Where When and How out TOY's can or supposed to be flown ... The Idea is to sperad the INFORMATION that there are Rules AMA Safery Code and FAR's than must be ad heared to so as not to jeperdize our Hobby/Sport. Every time U R at your LHS talk to them ask them if they ever explain to potential QUAD flyers that there are Rules AMA SC and FAR's to be understood and abided by ... Same with Traffic laws. JMHO

Hydro Junkie

If you fly inside the rules, you're not the one everyone wants to stop flying. You need to look at the guy that doesn't know or care about the rules and feels that the rules apply to everyone else and not him. It's like the guy driving down the freeway at 90+MPH even though the posted limit is 60. He doesn't care about the law and he's playing games with the local law officers, daring them to stop him

DAMN HD, you need to slow down your fingers so I can get in a legit post

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

HJ: Learn to type faster LOL Hydro Junkie that something with warter craft not TOY planes right?

Hey HJ have U ever floen or attended a jet rally on Whidbey Island?

bdoxey

My Feedback: (6)

Yes.

See link for approach plate to Birmingham, AL.

http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1504/00050IL6.PDF

The final approach fix is at 2200 MSL, or 1550 ft above the ground at 4.1 nm (4.7 statute miles). The descent begins there, so at 3 to 4 statute miles 1200 AGL is quite a normal altitude.

This is a very normal ILS instrument approach profile so it would apply at many airports. Many smaller airports without instrument approaches have a light system (VASI) that allows/encourages aircraft to fly the same descent profile as an ILS so the same altitude/distances can apply at most any airport.

Many non-precision approaches include a descent earlier than this - arriving at minimum descent altitude (400 to 600 AGL typically) earlier than a continuous descent to the runway as in an ILS so below 1200 AGL at 3 miles is quite common.

We had an issue here (KBHM) recently with a "drone" reported at 3400 MSL five miles from the airport a while back right on the route to intercept the final approach course. While I am a long time modeler - 40 years - I also fly airplanes for a living, I would like to keep doing both.

Something to think about: Pilots don't spend a lot of time deciding how big a rock we can throw at someone without hurting them. Perhaps the discussion about how big a model aircraft can hit us without hurting is a bit out of bounds.

Bryan

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

bdoxey;
Not meaning to deminish our Quad Copter problem because it is a problem. And it's one that can be corrected with education of those that are flying these TOYS. Being a professional pilot and probably making at least on Approach wherther a visual or Instruments daily, What level of danger would danger would U asses to Quads as opposed to Birds?
Next have U any Ideas how we EDUCATE the public (Our real Problem as I see It) and those that fly R/C TOYS in the NAS, responsibly by the Rules AMA Safety Code and the FAR's when these people don't even know they exist, And no one not Hobby King, Tower Horizon Grate Planes or even the LHS tell a prospective Quad Flyer there are rules that must be followed just like traffic laws. Also ther Conquesses for not following the rules Safety code or FAR's. JMHO

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

i dont thinl our country has any say what the drones do in other countrys>>we need more action herethen just talk> try not to buy any models or supplies from any one see how fast they stop selling drones>

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Come on now [email protected]; caulm down ... Just cause U don't fly Quads" doesn't mean they should not be allowed to fly. U don't go fly your 40 percenter in frone of an air liner and neither should any one....If U really care and would like to be effective speak with the propioter of your LHS (Local Hobby Shop) if U trully don't buy aevery thing mail order. Speak to them and try to get them to explain to tne no Educatated purchacing a QUAD that are (Rules safety codes and FAR's) that They are responsible to know and abide by. This benifits all of us R/C flyers the FAA the General Public and the LHS and the person that will ultiminitly be responsible for the proper operation of they new R/C Quad. If U can't approach our problem of the UN educated not even knowing there are (Rules Safety Codesand FAR's) that they have to follow then U are the problen not a soluition.
I' don't believe That U are the problem but if U continue badmouthing an part of our R/C Hobby/Sport whet choice do I have in what I believe. Go back into many of these Forums and look at the Ideas I've tried to get accross to my fellow R/Cers that it's a matter of education not banning Quads out right. Long time ago I thought that maybe thay should BAN Fomies and 3D flyers cause they made the runway enviroment unsafe for othrs taking off and landing. Problem solved most gave up Fomies for real TOY airplanes and the 3Ders must have gotton board with hanging around and doing nothing really difficult. Now we have the problem with the pattern and IMac guys .... Just Kidding put that noose away PLZ.

bradpaul

Thanks Bryan, For me that confirms that the drone pilot was an stupid idiot! As busy as Dulles Airport is (1000 to 1200 flights per day) the drone pilot had to know he was in the approach and had to be flying there deliberately.

Education will only help with the ignorant, not the stupid..............

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

hound dog sorry u took things the wrong way>>but let them fly the drones>> talk has been going on for a year now what has really been done?with all the rc flyers you would think we could stop all the talk about them and do more action?

franklin_m

Actually, not unusual at all. I've attached two images, one is a standard 3 degree glideslope and the corresponding AGL altitudes by mile. I've also attached an excerpt from an IFR approach showing that at 5.8 miles the aircraft has already descended to 1500 MSL. Since the touchdown point is 44 MSL, I'm guessing he starts the approach at around 1450 AGL about 5 miles or so from the field. So to be at 1200' at 4 or 3 would bevery reasonable.

While I’m sure many know this, for those that don’t, here’s how to calculate aworst case a 3 degree cone around any airport: take the distance from the airport in nautical miles (that's what airplanes use) multiplied 6076 (feet/nm) multiplied by the sine of 3 degrees. Using that calculation, an airplane at 3nm on a perfect three degree glideslope could be as low as 954 feet (note: excel’s sine function requires the angle to be in Radians – in that case, the calculation is (nautical miles x 6076) x sine (3 x 3.14/180). What you'll see is that even as far as five miles away, airplanes on instrument approaches could be as low as 1590 feet AGL, well within capabilities of many quads and RC planes.

Most real world approaches bump up the altitudes up a bit from a perfect 3degrees, but that’s a worst case. Oh, if someone asks why not use tangent of the angle, the reason is that mileage measurement in the airplane on a VOR/DME or TACAN approach is line of sight from the airplane - so sine makes for a more precise calculation.

Honestly, many quite small airports have instrument approaches, which is why I'm personally a fan of limiting RC ops to 400' AGL. I know that's not popular, but from a risk management standpoint, it keeps them away from the overwhelming majority of full scale operations and vastly reduces the risk to the traveling public.

Rob2160

The one thing that gets overlooked in these discussions are the IFR circling areas around airports.

I agree with your numbers for an ILS approach or a visual approach on the PAPI - 3 degrees (IE 300 feet per nautical mile distance from the runway)

But airports can have a variety of instrument approaches and some of these allow for visual circling - The size of the circling area is based on aircraft performance (landing speeds) in 5 categories.

Look at Category E in the following diagram and see how the 4.5 nautical miles (about 5.2 miles) is calculated.

An aircraft circling in this area after an instrument approach could be at 400 feet AGL at 5 miles from the airport.

In other countries these circling areas can be even larger - Eg - Australia - Category D is 5.28 Nautical miles (9.8 kilometres) which means an aircraft can legally be flying at 400 feet nearly 10 kilometres from the runway.

How many drone pilots know that?

franklin_m

Good point; I'd ask "How many RC pilots know that?" There's a fair number of these "drone" reports that are not NOT quads. Yet another reason why a cap on RC Ops at 400' AGL makes abundant sense.

In my mind, that will be the next shoe to drop if there continues to be conflicts. FAA will turn 91-57 from voluntary compliance to mandatory compliance.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Help me know Every circling after an approach that I can find in my Approach plates seems to have a a max of 1-1/2 miles and Non as low a 400' AGL most of these are to get to a runway that does not have a working instrument approach to the active runway because of wind ect.
Also there is an APE that made for androiad and IPhones that showsall the airports and their 5 mile radius and their extensions for Instrument approaches and I thought all the location of the Registered AMA fields here on a forum that showed all the places R/C flight would not be permitted above 400'.
There has never been any kind of problem (if only negligible) since so many people not familiar with R/C TOYs started flying because of Fomies and now Stabilized flight systems with GPS and route programing. Again it a matter of Educationg the Ignorant. Now the stupid are Unfix-able, I agree but they are Incarceration-able.

Hydro Junkie

A hydro is a shorter way of referring to a hydroplane which, to the uninformed, is a boat that actually flies over the water using ground effects to support it while at racing speeds. The boats are, for lack of a better way to put it, an airfoil with stabilizer floats along both sides. I race 1/8 scale and smaller classes of hydros in the Pacific Northwest, hence the name. As far as the jet rallies, never been to one though, years ago I did see some flying from the Coupeville runway complex the Navy maintains for carrier landing training.
This will probably have some asking why I would be in this thread. I'm building several boats AND AIRCRAFT at the moment and want to be able to fly the planes when done. The people that are recklessly operating(I can't call it flying since electronics are actually doing that) these quads are endangering my right to fly my planes when completed, thus making the possibility that my models will be relegated to shelf queens a real issue

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Hydro: you hit the nail on the head! That is what this is about. Please take a look at the very first post of this thread, it says the same thing.

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Franklin: I was guessing about the altitude, I was correct and did not reply. I did edit my post because I did not know for sure, what the correct answer was. I figured 300FT per mile, in a decent was normal, but really not sure. So for 4 miles the decent would be around 1200ft,AGL at the 300 ft. decent rate. Is that correct?. I think so.

PLANE JIM

My Feedback: (109)

let our toys bring down a airplane with people being hurt or killed-it will not matter how high we were or how low we were or where we were flying it. We will be at fault.

ira d

What would you propose that should be done? Anyway it's really up to the FAA if anything is going to be done.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

U hit the problem on the head but we must make it knowen whatwhen and where thses R/C Toys are allowed to be flown. If Laws were in place , Like Drunk Drivers no one tries to eliminate automobiles When Drunks Kill People the Drunk / Roug R/C Quad flyers will have to asume the responsibility for their actions, Not all R/Cers for what one idiot does.

That's exactly why the Rouge Quad Flyers and everyone that sells Quad have to be Educated on Where When And How Quads may be flown. I've Proposed here many times, that, Like New Zealand has, that any one flying anything R/C within 5 KM or miles what ever have a special LICENSE proving they know the rules and Safety Code and the FAR's. Many people here have taken me to task for this but when the Preferable SHEIT hits the fan and all R/C Flying Toys are Banned. Well let's just hope it doesn't happen.

Making R/C Quads Illegal is like Banning Guns it don't work. So if We can't get together and come up with some REAL Solution to the Rouge R/C Pilot other than BAnning Quads then we deserve what ever Sheit storm be falls us and all R/C Flyear.

Guess we can take off the wings and run them up and down the runway or drag them.
The Roundy Round car guys sure ain't gona allow a 40 precenter with a 222 cc QUAD cylinder on their track where they still run .21 CU Engines, and have a good time doing it and they can do it right next to the Airport Fence.

ira d

Well said, And I do think education or the like thereof is part of the problem but I also think the the FAA needs to turn up the heat on the the rogue flyers and pretty much leave alone
those of us that fly at dedicated flying sites.

Stealthjet

Very soon San Francisco will band all quad copters to fly around the area of the San Francisco bridge, they are requesting permission from the FAA to make it legally binding to any violators.