Drone VS Aircraft - Mid Air Collisions
07-08-2016, 12:07 PM
#327
"Some weeks earlier, the AMA conducted its own study of the FAA’s data and concluded that the number of incidents that constituted a near-miss were drastically lower than the numbers reported by the media. By excluding the reports that did not include mentions of an NMAC or evasive maneuvers, the AMA found only 3.5 percent of the reports constituted a near miss incident."
"We divided incidents into two categories: Close Encounters and Sightings. We defined Close Encounters as incidents where a drone comes within 500 feet of a manned aircraft, when a pilot declares a “Near MidAir Collision,” when a pilot takes evasive action, or when the pilot uses descriptive language that indicates the drone as being dangerously close (for example: “almost hit” or “passed just above”). A Sighting, on the other hand, is when a drone is spotted above its legal ceiling or in the vicinity of an airport or aircraft, but does not pose a clear potential for a collision"
"We counted 158 incidents in which a drone came within 200 feet or less of a manned aircraft (two-thirds of all Close Encounters in which a concrete drone to-aircraft proximity is given), 51 incidents in which the proximity was 50 feet or less, and 28 incidents in which a pilot maneuvered to avoid a collision with a drone."
"The FAA prohibits the use of unmanned aircraft within five miles of any airport in the U.S. without permission from air traffic control. This is because manned aircraft fly at low altitudes, sometimes for several miles, while on final approach and during take-off. Of the 665 incidents in which a distance from an airport was recorded, 391, or 58.8 percent, occurred within five miles."
- Center for the Study of the Drone, Bard College
"We divided incidents into two categories: Close Encounters and Sightings. We defined Close Encounters as incidents where a drone comes within 500 feet of a manned aircraft, when a pilot declares a “Near MidAir Collision,” when a pilot takes evasive action, or when the pilot uses descriptive language that indicates the drone as being dangerously close (for example: “almost hit” or “passed just above”). A Sighting, on the other hand, is when a drone is spotted above its legal ceiling or in the vicinity of an airport or aircraft, but does not pose a clear potential for a collision"
"We counted 158 incidents in which a drone came within 200 feet or less of a manned aircraft (two-thirds of all Close Encounters in which a concrete drone to-aircraft proximity is given), 51 incidents in which the proximity was 50 feet or less, and 28 incidents in which a pilot maneuvered to avoid a collision with a drone."
"The FAA prohibits the use of unmanned aircraft within five miles of any airport in the U.S. without permission from air traffic control. This is because manned aircraft fly at low altitudes, sometimes for several miles, while on final approach and during take-off. Of the 665 incidents in which a distance from an airport was recorded, 391, or 58.8 percent, occurred within five miles."
- Center for the Study of the Drone, Bard College
07-08-2016, 12:25 PM
#328
Speaking of an open mind......broadbrush generalizations about how challenging a quad to build and fly were thrown out the other day, is a revision on that forthcoming? I think I asked if you could build, wire, program and fly one. You never answered. Could you, or would there be "no challenge". Hydro was good enough to give a partial answer but tried to confuse the issue ad one of desire, rather than technical skill or challenge.
Four 1/8th scale hydroplanes under construction, some being redesigned by me as they are built
One gas scale hydroplane being redesigned and built by me
Two Kadet Jrs being built by me, one with tricycle gear, the other with floats
Everything above is being built from plans, no kits of any sort
With all of that going on, why even look at a quad?
Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 07-08-2016 at 01:00 PM.
07-08-2016, 12:25 PM
#329
"Some weeks earlier, the AMA conducted its own study of the FAA’s data and concluded that the number of incidents that constituted a near-miss were drastically lower than the numbers reported by the media. By excluding the reports that did not include mentions of an NMAC or evasive maneuvers, the AMA found only 3.5 percent of the reports constituted a near miss incident."
"We divided incidents into two categories: Close Encounters and Sightings. We defined Close Encounters as incidents where a drone comes within 500 feet of a manned aircraft, when a pilot declares a “Near MidAir Collision,” when a pilot takes evasive action, or when the pilot uses descriptive language that indicates the drone as being dangerously close (for example: “almost hit” or “passed just above”). A Sighting, on the other hand, is when a drone is spotted above its legal ceiling or in the vicinity of an airport or aircraft, but does not pose a clear potential for a collision"
"We counted 158 incidents in which a drone came within 200 feet or less of a manned aircraft (two-thirds of all Close Encounters in which a concrete drone to-aircraft proximity is given), 51 incidents in which the proximity was 50 feet or less, and 28 incidents in which a pilot maneuvered to avoid a collision with a drone."
"The FAA prohibits the use of unmanned aircraft within five miles of any airport in the U.S. without permission from air traffic control. This is because manned aircraft fly at low altitudes, sometimes for several miles, while on final approach and during take-off. Of the 665 incidents in which a distance from an airport was recorded, 391, or 58.8 percent, occurred within five miles."
- Center for the Study of the Drone, Bard College
"We divided incidents into two categories: Close Encounters and Sightings. We defined Close Encounters as incidents where a drone comes within 500 feet of a manned aircraft, when a pilot declares a “Near MidAir Collision,” when a pilot takes evasive action, or when the pilot uses descriptive language that indicates the drone as being dangerously close (for example: “almost hit” or “passed just above”). A Sighting, on the other hand, is when a drone is spotted above its legal ceiling or in the vicinity of an airport or aircraft, but does not pose a clear potential for a collision"
"We counted 158 incidents in which a drone came within 200 feet or less of a manned aircraft (two-thirds of all Close Encounters in which a concrete drone to-aircraft proximity is given), 51 incidents in which the proximity was 50 feet or less, and 28 incidents in which a pilot maneuvered to avoid a collision with a drone."
"The FAA prohibits the use of unmanned aircraft within five miles of any airport in the U.S. without permission from air traffic control. This is because manned aircraft fly at low altitudes, sometimes for several miles, while on final approach and during take-off. Of the 665 incidents in which a distance from an airport was recorded, 391, or 58.8 percent, occurred within five miles."
- Center for the Study of the Drone, Bard College
07-08-2016, 12:42 PM
#331
No, I didn't try to confuse the issue. I do have the skills needed to build one, just no desire to do so. Simple as that. To me, a quad isn't worth the time what I look at the bigger picture:
Four 1/8th scale hydroplanes under construction, some being redesigned by me as they are built
One gas scale hydroplane being redesigned and built by me
Two Kadet Jrs being built by me, one with tricycle gear, the other with floats
Everything above is being built from plans, no kits of any sort
With all of that going on, why even look at a quad?
Four 1/8th scale hydroplanes under construction, some being redesigned by me as they are built
One gas scale hydroplane being redesigned and built by me
Two Kadet Jrs being built by me, one with tricycle gear, the other with floats
Everything above is being built from plans, no kits of any sort
With all of that going on, why even look at a quad?
07-08-2016, 12:43 PM
#332
there is no challenge at all, for some one who can read and follow simple directions.
there is no programming ability required for any of the popular flight controllers.
the most difficult part of the entire operation of an MR is getting the ESC for each motor plugged into the proper port on the flight controller.
and yes, i have built a few, some from "kits" some from "scratch"
and sport, none of mine weigh less that 5 pounds at take off. some weigh in the 18-22 pound range.
the unit itself builds very similar to an erector set.
there is no programming ability required for any of the popular flight controllers.
the most difficult part of the entire operation of an MR is getting the ESC for each motor plugged into the proper port on the flight controller.
and yes, i have built a few, some from "kits" some from "scratch"
and sport, none of mine weigh less that 5 pounds at take off. some weigh in the 18-22 pound range.
the unit itself builds very similar to an erector set.
07-08-2016, 12:45 PM
#334
I don't need to understand that, have enough going on trying to balance aerodynamics with hydrodynamics with weight to get a workable CG on three boats, that's plenty enough for me
07-08-2016, 01:10 PM
#335
however the percentage of MR folks that build their own electronics is approximately the same as that of traditional r/c folks that build their own electronics.
very low.
and, even with the build it yourself flight controllers, the hardest part is still getting the right ESC plugged into the right port.( not counting needing magnification for doing the solder work.)
Last edited by mongo; 07-08-2016 at 01:13 PM.
07-08-2016, 01:31 PM
#337
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
I actually was was going to stay away from that because it really has no bearing on the topic. When we get to that level we are in a hobbiest classification and neither you nor I are the issue. It's the people that walk into Best Buy or Circuit City and walk out with a drone and the assumption they can fly wherever they please that is the issue. However since you appear to think I am lacking in some sort of manner,
40% Extra 330, 150cc twin 2 stroke power. 10 amps of RX battery power feeding a power distribution box that incorporates servo synchronization for the 13 500 oz digital servos. Airplane was given to me after being landed in a vineyard, it's all composite and was repaired, painted and I have been flying for 3 years. Results from the last contest and the aerobatic sequence flown.
Self designed Macchi 202 Warbird racing airplane. YS 115 4 stroke powered. Fiberglass fuselage from my fabricated molds, foam wing using my own airfoils. Score sheet shows airplane and I in second place with a few notables farther down the page.
Reed Falcon pictured with a modern Pattern airplane at the last pattern contest I competed in. The Falcon was an all wood build, the kit cowl and wheel pants were ABS so they were used to make molds to manufacture glass/CF parts. Covering is Monokote. I placed 4th with my " underdog " little
Bipe.
Helicopter I helped design in 1994. No stabilization other then a mechanical rate gyro on the tail.
Motor and speed control for the current project.
Could I build and fly your MR? Yea I think so. Do I have interest in doing so? Nope, as I said not enough challenge.
40% Extra 330, 150cc twin 2 stroke power. 10 amps of RX battery power feeding a power distribution box that incorporates servo synchronization for the 13 500 oz digital servos. Airplane was given to me after being landed in a vineyard, it's all composite and was repaired, painted and I have been flying for 3 years. Results from the last contest and the aerobatic sequence flown.
Self designed Macchi 202 Warbird racing airplane. YS 115 4 stroke powered. Fiberglass fuselage from my fabricated molds, foam wing using my own airfoils. Score sheet shows airplane and I in second place with a few notables farther down the page.
Reed Falcon pictured with a modern Pattern airplane at the last pattern contest I competed in. The Falcon was an all wood build, the kit cowl and wheel pants were ABS so they were used to make molds to manufacture glass/CF parts. Covering is Monokote. I placed 4th with my " underdog " little
Bipe.
Helicopter I helped design in 1994. No stabilization other then a mechanical rate gyro on the tail.
Motor and speed control for the current project.
Could I build and fly your MR? Yea I think so. Do I have interest in doing so? Nope, as I said not enough challenge.
I know this will be a generalization, but it's based solely on my personal experience on here and in meeting some folks around the country at flying events. I don't believe that even half of the folks who consider themselves "traditional modelers", and...this is an important distinction, have never touched an MR or understand whats involved in them but completely dismiss them as simple, could so much as build a frame, let alon wire 8 motors and 8 escs, install the control board, and program it.
You do have an impressive group of aircraft there, love the pattern ship the best. Picked up a Great Planes Groovy two years ago and love flying that thing. It's been set up for electric flight.
Finally, just as a point of clarification, I don't own nor fly a MR, quad, or Drone. Or heli for that matter. Don't really care for any of them. I am in awe of the technology involved, and the flying skills that some of these pilots have (manual flight, no gyro), but they do absolutely nothing for me. I'm a plank man all the way.
Off to prep for our annual electric event this weekend. I'm only bringing two planes because I've learned there won't be much time for flying with parking, cooking, etc etc.
Hope everyone has a great weekend, ciao.
07-08-2016, 01:36 PM
#338
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
You wanted me to show where college studies are bad. Well the global warming studies are bad. There are studies that hamburgers are bad for you, others that they are good for you. Low fat diet is good, low fat diet is bad. Basically the studies come out which ever way the people giving out the grant money wants it to come out. And most grant money goes to college's and university's. There is a huge industry for bad science.
Next up they'll say Bacon is good for us. (we already knew that though, extra crispy. lolololol)
Again, the key to these so called reports is who is writing them, but more importantly, who is funding them.
07-08-2016, 01:38 PM
#339
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
No, I didn't try to confuse the issue. I do have the skills needed to build one, just no desire to do so. Simple as that. To me, a quad isn't worth the time when I look at the bigger picture:
Four 1/8th scale hydroplanes under construction, some being redesigned by me as they are built
One gas scale hydroplane being redesigned and built by me
Two Kadet Jrs being built by me, one with tricycle gear, the other with floats
Everything above is being built from plans, no kits of any sort
With all of that going on, why even look at a quad?
Four 1/8th scale hydroplanes under construction, some being redesigned by me as they are built
One gas scale hydroplane being redesigned and built by me
Two Kadet Jrs being built by me, one with tricycle gear, the other with floats
Everything above is being built from plans, no kits of any sort
With all of that going on, why even look at a quad?
Actually, I couldn't agree more. I just picked up a 4.5 meter ASK 21 and the Carbon Z T-28. And that was behaving myself...I passed on a few others. To me the airplanes are far more interesting.
07-08-2016, 01:43 PM
#341
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
LoL....I'll just leave this here. Seen a pattern ship do any of this lately?
07-08-2016, 02:26 PM
#343
Recent studies showed butter was actually good for the heart, and lowered cholesterol. No really. LOL.
Next up they'll say Bacon is good for us. (we already knew that though, extra crispy. lolololol)
Again, the key to these so called reports is who is writing them, but more importantly, who is funding them.
Next up they'll say Bacon is good for us. (we already knew that though, extra crispy. lolololol)
Again, the key to these so called reports is who is writing them, but more importantly, who is funding them.
Funny how the funding always yields the desired results.
07-08-2016, 03:19 PM
#344
The gas scale I'm working on right now, engine alone, is over $900. Tuned pipe is over $100, don't know about the rest. Now, add the cost of all the hours it takes to redraw, lay out, cut out, dry fit and fine tune parts, epoxy them together, paint and fine tune how it runs and I'm looking at a seriously expensive boat. You can figure, at $25 an hour for drawing time, I'm already in it for over $500
07-08-2016, 03:32 PM
#345
07-08-2016, 05:42 PM
#348
07-08-2016, 07:36 PM
#349
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
The gas scale I'm working on right now, engine alone, is over $900. Tuned pipe is over $100, don't know about the rest. Now, add the cost of all the hours it takes to redraw, lay out, cut out, dry fit and fine tune parts, epoxy them together, paint and fine tune how it runs and I'm looking at a seriously expensive boat. You can figure, at $25 an hour for drawing time, I'm already in it for over $500
07-08-2016, 07:41 PM
#350
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
well, there is this
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GQTLS6l28fo
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GQTLS6l28fo
I like this one better....I think Tyler is getting up there in age, 17 or 18, can't rememberhttp://<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Lkw7lnU_beQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>