What Happens When a Drone Hits an Airplane Wing? - AIN
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- With hundreds of thousands of personal UAVs currently in public hands, the question of will a serious drone strike on an aircraft occur, is no longer a matter of if, but when, in the minds of many experts. While tests on bird strikes have been conducted for decades, what kind of damage a drone would cause was still virtually unknown…until now.
Researchers at the University of Dayton research institute are no strangers to airframe impact testing, and they recently partnered with Sinclair College National UAS Training and Certification Center to determine what could happen to a general aviation aircraft if it hit a recreational drone in mid air.
If you’ve enjoyed this video, please give it a thumbs-up, share it, and subscribe to our channel.
Also, visit www.ainonline.com and check out our e-newsletters for all the latest on the aviation industry.
#aviation #airplane #drone
Music: Candlepower by Chris Zabriskie
Just slap it with flex tape
gee emmz THATS A LOT OF DAMAGE!
I saw this plane in half
GOLDEN COMMENT
How will you do that in mid air
😂😂😂😂😂😂
Birds should be banned
Bobo Momo
Birds should be banned
'
hi B M...
birds are flying free free air...
no banned on birds
Y3s
bestamerica what the fuck are you saying?also it was a joke
Excuse me wtf
bestamerica wooosh
I think we are missing the main point of this video.....
somewhere people are getting paid to fire stuff out of cannons at airplanes.
LMFAO 😂
Indeed. That is the most important thing. That this is actually a THING...
🤟🏻
lol
Typically chickens (like you’d find at the grocery store)
As long as you retrieve the footage from the SD card, that's the main thing
Strange how hundreds of GA pilots are killed every year by their own mistakes, but so far not one person has been killed by a hobbyist drone.
It's a political ploy to regulate.
You forgot to add "yet" at the end
@@AR-zq9hq
Yep.
And it's ideal to keep it that way
The Boss yes, they do ban cars for safety issues.
I thought for sure he was going to launch a rubber chicken for the bird test
So i was out the other day shooting my p4p out a cannon 🤔😂
Ty4sharing.... I don't think I'll ever let my drone go that high... but thank you this needs to be seen for drone Pilots....
Now how accurate is this testing, it is in a closed enviorment with no wind so it is not accurate at all.
Hang on a minute, plane wings can cut straight through structural box steel sections bringing sky scrapers down.
... Yes. Thanks for playing, next.
It's. Called magic
No.......but a couple thousand gallons of burning jet fuel sure can.
@@savagecub the second plane cut about half way into the tower before exploding.
just me
Halfway.....that would correspond to where the wings are which contain the fuel...........but hey if you want to still believe in Santa Claus too that’s ok. God forbid logic should take away anyone’s conspiracy fantasies.
This doesn't take into account the airflow around the wing which would likely help deflect the drone significantly at all.
Firing a drone at a static wing isn't the same as flying a drone into a the wing of a moving aircraft.
Its always interesting how they almost solely use dji's in their representation, that its usualy inexperienced pilots, normal people who go out, buy a 500 doller machine, and do the dumbest things they can just because they bought a muiltirotor
Very rarely do you see the hobby enthusiest with their racing quads or video tri's anywhere near thatle endanger anyone
I dont think we need to bad drones, but i do think we need to educate newcomers into the hobby more, maybe have a thing on the dji that wont let it fully activate untill you take an online course, at least this way people can make better decisions on how to use their machines, these things arents toys and they shouldent be treated as such, but we need to help the newcomers so they know whats dangerouse and what isnt and what are the risks. Just my 2c
Absolutely right. With any crowd, there will be a few bad individuals that give the whole group a bad name. Unfortunately for the R/C community there is a very easy potential for loss of life if an uneducated person gets a hold of the controls.
DJI already geo fences and has several parameters that limits what the aircraft can do. Its actually rather annoying to have to override when using a DJI drone for a commercial job where you have all the appropriate authorizations.
Not really, its one authorization code from DJI once you provide a FAA waiver. Its about to get alot easier with the implementation of the LAANC system.
agreed, took my kids to see the fireworks at our local park on the 4th, and about 10 minutes until the start there had to be 30 drones taking off out of the backyards of these 350,000 dollar homes, and they all make a B line for the park flying over hundreds without their craft in sight. makes me sad as a drone pilot because its that sort of behavior the politicians will use against us.
There is a drone brand out there, its top of the shelf drones are limited to use full capability before a certain amount of hours flying. DJI probably will never release its drones like that because some(I think more than a lot) customers wouldn't pay $2000 and not able to use it on full capacity. Money first, safety and everything else second.
The amount of Americans that are more afraid of losing their beloved toys than people losing their lives in a drone-caused accident is unbelievable. Exactly the same as in the gun control debate...
I was flying a piper Cherokee on the approach path to a major airport last month and came within 50ft of hitting someone’s phantom drone.
238 statute miles per hour is really not a reasonable collision speed. Vx (best climb or glide) for a Mooney should be in the range of 80-90 kts, which is about 100 statute miles per hour. Collisions would most likely happen during takeoff or landing, which would be near this speed. The DJI Phantom on the other hand, has a maximum speed of under 50 statute miles per hour. Why not test for the most likely scenario rather than this extreme edge case?
I see value in examining the extremes to have the data but mostly likely senerios should be the primary focus of efforts. This was rather disingenuous in the presentation. I know if a plane where to hit my drone they would be doing something every unsafe or illegal for that scenario to even be possible. The scenarios where a strike is even possible need to be addressed in order to properly gauge the actual level of risk.
If you didn't know it would cause severe damage, you haven't been paying attention to bird strikes or severe weather.
We're worried about drones, but there is a never ending migratory bird Notam at KEUG...
this is why Australia has banned drones close to airports and have them up to 20 metres around cities and 50 meters elsewhere...
They didn't know what the damage would cause but now they know... they are glad that they took the precaution... the only ruling would be "serves the pilot right for flying so low that the drone was able to even get to the aeroplane, would have to be below 50 metres and that isn't exactly cruising or landing/takeoff altitudes, that's more like "fuck the drones, watch out for the poplar trees!"
It's really simple, make it manditory for all drones to transmit ADSB.
In that case you get spammed by traffic alerts
Alert, my 65mm wheelbase 30 gram micro quad is between 5 and 10 ft altitude (about 20 ft below tree lines), all pilots planning to crash should be on the look out for what looks like a Styrofoam cup floating around at up to 10 mph.
That is all, use caution!
@@jakegarrett8109 Made my day.
@@jakegarrett8109 lol that seems like a joke and you're making it up but it is actually so true, most hobbyist drone pilots are flying a sub 250g drone, many even less than 100g flying in the local park well below the tree tops, so the authorities want us to fit transponders and call in every flight!? 😊😁
My grandad used to fly model planes years ago, it was never a problem until all this media hype about drones!
@@pdtech4524 Yeah, I've had a blast with my new 1s brushless whoop (OSD, telemetry, its amazing what it has). I'd love to go fly it outside whooping, but its a 45 minute drive until I'm 5 miles from any airport... Plus where I'm at, there are 4 different airports... Its not like I'm going that high of altitude, these things make a kitchen table look like an immense cavern or cave ready to explore. I would so love to walk outside and fly around the trees and gap some tall grass, but nope, Uncle Sam says no Freedom for you!
If drone flying is prohibited around airports and drone altitude limits in populated ares are 400 feet max, there is basically zero chance of any drone and manned aircraft collision. Agencies and people should not over react against drones. It would take blatant and purposeful negligence to cause such an incident.
That a Mooney M20 wing? Would like to see the experiment repeated on a much much stronger jet wing or a composite wing with a stainless steel leading edge?
Are we forgetting the fact that DJI drones wont fly above 50ft if near the vicinity of an airport?
The drone is not an issue, it's the battery that does the damage
Planes are so soft nowadays, back in 2001 that wing would vaporized that drone like it did 440,000 tons of steel reinforced concrete
This guy is an expert??
Several things...
They used the wing off a particularly weak structured aircraft, not your average GA wing.
He states that the aircraft would 'probably be ok' - well assuming the aircraft is at a slow speed critical phase of flight, for example take off and landing (when drone strikes would be more likely) the destruction or deformation of a chunk of wing could be enough to drastically change the lift characteristics and cause a crash.
I have witnessed aircraft return to base with bad bird strikes to the wing sustained in flight, and the low speed handling characteristics have dramatically changed. Not a problem when you start to slow down and discover this, but a huge problem if it were to suddenly happen at low level.
The wing could lose some lift in comparison to the other wing, causing a violent and sudden rolling motion. If the control surfaces to no move quickly enough or deflect far enough to correct this before it is unrecoverable, the aircraft will crash. Wing damage on take off or landing in GA aircraft has caused this to happen in the past.
On a large aircraft there is less of a risk, because control surfaces have a greater effect and a small bit of damage in a large wing would be less dramatic too.
So the bird strike looks like it would have affected the aerodynamics of the plane more.....
Would have been super funny if it was just a drone flying against a wing very slow and then falling to the ground
The test was obviously performed without a LiPo battery. Normally the fuel tank is located in the wing. In reality there could be a fire and if there is enough air in the tank there could even be an explosion.
What about the fire capability of the LIPO battery? That must be factored in as well!
230 mph? These drones are not flying anywhere near that high though. Your main 'risk' is a plane clipping a drone at landing or take off, not when it's at altitude.
Rrrrriiiiight...so a plane wing can't handle getting hit by a drone yet has no problem penetrating steel beams, LOGIC.
They should try it with a steel beam drone going 500+ mph and a stock 747 wing.
I think the point to take away from this is how fragile commercial aircraft really are and the fact that one would never be capable of taking down a steel building. 911 was not an aircraft strike / The wings and engines would have been outside of the buildings / in the street
Just a dumb question
Wouldnt the air or wind infront of that wing pushed that drone up or down since the wings pushed the aur to go up or down that structure?
How much skill do you have to have to hit a aircraft going 600mph tens of thousands of feet up in the air with a drone going at top speed of 20 mph that is made to take pictures
do you still get the view if I leave be4 the 1 min add is over and they wont let me skip it
No drones were harmed in this video.
drone: barely any damage. bird equivalent:" damn near ripped off the wing. DRONES ARE BAD lol.
So in the very unlikely event a plane and drone collide it isn’t likely to cause enough damage to cause the plane to crash. Thanks
Hey the pilot gets a free drone
What happens if drones had a 200 gr c4 planted on it? And if there was 20 drones in way of plane? That's scary to think how terrorists can do it with lowest cost and accessibility! If you're in aviation or some security or intelligence service please consider this type of scenario and find a soloution for it.
Also... Show the FAA the 9/11 "evidence" of a plane supposedly clipping steel light poles yet still able to fly and let them with a straight face say a tiny drone will do squat.
Maybe they should make the drones out of concrete and steel.. this way the drone would just disintegrate and cause no damage to the plane
Now imagine that on a window.
Gatwick airport 2018 anyone?
They are doing everything they can to ban drones. They left out a factor called wind disturbance. The chance it would hit the aircraft with a drone as slim-to-none if you ask me. Flying in just 20 mile an hour winds will show you the effects. Other words the windshear of the plane will most likely just pushed the drone out of the way. So as long as you don't take their machine and fly it up there then shoot the drone at the wing everybody will be just fine.
They need to equipe airplanes with a interference system who ll disable every drones flying in the 100 yards range around any aircraft
Popular drone , popular damage
Now thats a lot of damage
But steel girders get sliced right though! The magic of 911.
NOW THATS A LOT OF DAMAGE
I'd like to know where they got that wing from.
Try cutting that speed in halfbandbtry again. Niether small aircraft nor drones fly at top speed very often. That dgi will do maybe 18-20 mph tops. The aircraft? Maybe 110 in a slight dive with a stiff tailwind.
"Serious drone strike on an aircraft" is a no starter for a truly unbiased video. The term is "mid air collision" you should know this on the channel. "Drone strikes on [fill the blank]" is what the US government does in Afghanistan.
And I'm to believe that airplanes dropped the world trade center
Or just use radio waves to make drone and airplanes communicate with each other on
Then rather than spending millions on anti aircraft just fly drones or get birds to fly
TL;DR the guy reckons our thousand dollar plus drones should be built crappier cos drones tend to accidentally shoot from 400ft to 10,000ft in a matter of moments
Sounds like you should make planes tougher.... I mean just look what that can of Spam did to the wing
wow didn’t see that coming
At what altitude where you simulating your test at? I better not see jets traveling that fast while under 1500ft agl, a test that simulates real life conditions under 1500ft is needed. Most civil aircraft travel between 60-100mph ground speed at low altitude and are small light weight aircraft.
With no fly zones written into most drones, so we arent able to fly within 5 miles of an airport. Curious, what are the chances of a drone flying under 400 ft over 5 miles from an airport, colliding with a plane ?? Better chances winning the lottery.
To drone operators:
Keep in mind many a/c fly just 1000ft above any given area, some jobs require low flights, some pilots like to fly literally under the radar. Be careful.
Drones are limited to 400ft max unless they've been hacked. Something like this should rarely occur. To date there have never been any civilian drone strikes. th-cam.com/video/ABhmcuy7gFg/w-d-xo.html
R.i.p dji drone
We need to start regulating birdflight and start convicting birds of flying through the sky that will solve all our problems!
Not so much the wing... how about the engines?
Well if I’m flying my drone and a commercial jet ruins it you can bet I’m suing!
Sorry, but this is a misleading test. The test uses a Mooney M20 wing and DJI Phantom 2 drone. The late model Mooney M20 has Max. Structural Cruising Speed of 174 KCAS (www.aopa.org/go-fly/aircraft-and-ownership/aircraft-fact-sheets/mooney-m20), which is just over 200 MPH. The DJI Phantom 2 has a Max. Flight Speed of 15 m/s (not recommended by the manufacturer - www.dji.com/phantom-2), which is 33.5 MPH. So the test conducted shows these two aircraft at their max speeds directly towards each other and the resulting damage... so what's missing is the odds of these conditions occuring in a real environment. Also, while this test shows that damage will occur, it also shows survivability if this accident occurs. However, this test does not automatically mean all other aircraft will sustain this type of damage or worse as the tester reasons because higher speed aircraft and large airframe commerial aircraft likely use different materials, thickness of materials and structural construct. This would require testing other wings to get conclusive results.
Great Video 👍🏿 Loved it
Now fire a plane at a drone wing
Just reinforce the leading edge of the airfoil then the drone would just damage the surface and keep it from damaging the components inside
Well, it's obvious that planes shouldn't have wings.
*_Problem solved_*
Kimiri3640 no he got the joke, he was predicting what someone somewhere would be wanting to say so that woosh doesn’t count yet lmao
Ding Ding r/wooosh
Right and they are secret military complex they don't use wings no more! Just be glad you can still go out and buy a rubber Wheels with some fossil fuel be happy and pay $4 a gallon, and keep thinking it's fossil fuel cuz it's a lie... the freaking Earth produces it X gasoline tanker I got out of it the bunch of bullsh○•
@@Contrailing r/woooosh
@@istoleurfaceha3527 r/woooosh
The test is slightly misleading. While the closing speed of 238 mph might be realistic in some unlikely circumstances (see below) it is the airplane's wing that flies fast with the drone being more or less stationary. A wing travelling fast through the air causes specific airflow strong enough to create lift keeping the plane airborne and that airflow would tend to very strongly deflect the drone either up or down, away from the wing's leading edge so a direct strike like that (perfectly aligned with wing's chord line) is highly unlikely.
Drones operated legally fly below 400 ft or within 400 ft of a structure and away from airports. Planes operated legally don't fly at 200 mph+ that close to the ground or structures except perhaps for landing/takeoff where drones can't fly so for legal drone and plane operations 238 mph closing speed is not realistic. If you don't care about the rules then, well, you can do a lot more damage with a box cutter for instance.
I understand what your saying and I agree but the comment at the end was garbage and unnecessary.
The concern is not for legally operated drones. If you're flying your drone legally, you're not going to get involved with the normal flight-path of an airplane. However, there are lots and lots of documented incidents where idiots are flying their drones where they shouldn't, including near airports during take-off and landing or near wildfires where firefighting aircraft are trying to make water/retardant drops.
@@Genthar so you want to tighten up laws because some assholes don't follow current laws? Yup. Sounds legit.
These researchers are funding whores... And fear pays the best.. So thats what they do..
You always design for the worst and hope for the best.
This shows the worst case scenario if such an event were to occur.
Ban airports, therefore no one can accidentally fly a drone near an airport.
Jizzy wizzy 😍
So the airplane gets a free drone inside its wing
Phantom - don’t get excited, it’s only a P2S. That’s like the iPhone 3 of drones.
Lol yep
@@rickhutch2 😂
Phantom i think the drone still wil fly 😂😂
So what we learn here is that planes should be banned from flying where drones are 🤔
I will be conducting the impact of drones will have on UFOs. Can someone send me some DJI drones to be tested ? Thank you.
Send me your address, and they are as good as on their way! I would like to see the results!
WAU MEDIA just send me your shipping information and a credit card for the shipping
Interesting..🤔 You have a UFO but no drones?
@@changvang5907 oof 😂😂
Ahhhh some kidss
Its 2018......why they are testing with a Phantom 2?😅
Why not a Mavic Pro?
Makes sense to use the cheapest & most common "armaments". The AK47 isnt new either, its used coz its cheap & common & effective. Cost-per-benefit is important in war :(
edit: wait, i forget this might just be some untrained quadcopter pilot accidentally getting in the way of a plane. War isn't the only relevance for these tests.
Some say the rouge Phantom 2's are still flying around uncontrolled, and have never touched the ground, that they wander the air space like ghosts.
Ok, got it😅
Because this was a politically biased test. To prove their point more effectively they used a larger multirotor against an aircraft that flies much faster than most GA aircraft.
@@MatHolliday ok but the Phantom 2 has only a range from 300 Metres.....and how you want to fly 500-1000 m high?
Damn! I hope no one fires a drone out of a cannon perfectly at the leading edge of a stationary aeroplane wing.
“Phantom 2 is a popular drone for hobbyists”.....umm no. It’s 2018.
They're still popular - secondhand. They're lovely and cheap now. :)
Nope still popular
I have seen what birds can do, the damage by the drone is not surprising but informative. I saw a C-310 that had a bird strike to an engine nacelle. The upper cowling just peeled off. Fortunately he had another engine to get him home. Canada Goose if I remember correctly.
With a ratio of 2.7 million birds per every 1 drone in the sky birds are a way bigger problem!
@@johnslugger no most birds are very small, don't fly high and try to avoid planes. The problem with drones are all the idiots "flying" them. No knowledge of the rules, don't care about the ramifications of their actions, just looking for likes on TH-cam.
These videos are why drones get a bad reputation. As far as I know there has been no drone aircraft incidents where the aircraft was in any structural distress. As a pilot myself, drones are last thing I worry about when I fly. There are 100's of unreported close calls with aircraft and other aircraft. It is the misconception of drones being autonomous, that scares people. The drone regulations are clear to keep both aircraft and drones apart. Didn't some nut case steal an aircraft in the Northwest earlier this year and endanger 1000's of lives?
Drones are not a hazard and should be portrait as such.
You are correct that there has been no actual reported drone strike yet. I personally am not as sanguine about that as you are.
th-cam.com/video/HtArLIXZXRI/w-d-xo.html
It is nice to see some aircraft pilots do not see every drone as a missile, intent on destruction. Thank you.
I don't know ANYONE who worries about "autonomous drones", they worry about irresponsible drone OWNERS. And your "it's never happened do it's never going to happen" logic is both stupid and dangerous. ANYTHING that flies is a potential hazard, and if you can't accept that, then maybe you shouldn't be flying. BTW, there have been SEVERAL confirmed collisions betwen drones and airplanes & helicopters. A commercial airliner collided with a drone back in 2017 over Canada, and in 2018, a DJI drone collided with an Army Blackhawk helicopter near Brooklyn, damaging one of the rotor blades. The owner of the drone, 58 year old Vyacheslav Tantashov, was located after components with serial numbers were traced to Tantashov. Would you like some salt for that crow you're eating?
"the drone did not shatter"
Shows drone imploding into loads of pieces
They meant that drone didn’t shatter around rather it went straight inside wing.
@@ronixdash123 come on man (or woman), don't ruin the joke
@@archismarathe1589 - that was in no way considered a joke. Completely unfunny. Rather inept comment really.
@@mandywalkden-brown7250 judging by your name and profile picture, not surprised.
TH-cam suggested your video. I have worked with people who used that type of drone, but I don't recall them flying very high. 20 minutes of battery would be hard to get to 10,000 feet. I saw one flying in a straight line on a low wind day at about 800 feet above sea level going 2.5 miles out to inspect a target, but it was a stretch to get it back and did go into a crash upon the landing. I am not very familiar with civil aviation nor the wing you tested, but it's sobering footage as it's likely to influence regs on drones.
That's a lot of damage
LOOK AT ALL THAT DAMAGE
I sawed this wing in half!
*YEE DOGGY!*
I’m Phil swift
Judging by how the drone looks now, I would say that is a lot of damage!
Aluminum goes right through steel and concrete and plastic goes right through aluminum.
Good one right and they make us believe 911
Plastic drones can't melt steel beams
@@DanOutdoorsUK Then why did i see the nose of the plane come out the other side on the news?
Hint.... CGI.
That's a lotta damage - but luckily, Flex Tape come super wide, so you can easily patch large holes.
To show the power of Flex Tape, he sawed this aircraft in half! And repaired it with only Flex Tape! _Phil Swift flying an airplane_ "NOT ONLY DOES FLEX TAPE’S POWERFUL ADHESIVE HOLD THE AIRCRAFT TOGETHER, BUT IT CREATES A SUPER STRONG AIR TIGHT SEAL, SO THE INSIDE IS COMPLETELY DRY!" _Yee-dogge_
Just cut, peel, stick and seal! Imagine everything you can do with the power of Flex Tape!
you could fire wet toilet paper at a wing with that cannon and it is gonna damage it. jesus. Also, I love how that "bird" was "boneless" lol
I am a pilot. I fly Cessnas etc... I also happen to have been flying model aircraft since before my teens. I've almost struck a bird twice both of which were very large. While the test done is plausible the speed involved in the test is unlikely especially for the type of aircraft involved. Also I wouldn't say a Mooney is indicative of the strength of a general aviation aircraft considering the Mooney is light and built to be faster while the most common flying GA aircraft are built tougher. I've laid my hands on many a plane and a Mooney is closer to a fabric plane then a Cessna.
so nice to hear an actual pilot not fall for this obvious anti-hobbyist propaganda video. thanks for your professional input! 👍
My current plane has a six foot wingspan and I doubt it would even penetrate a windscreen. The heaviest component is the battery and I don't fly super huge ones.
On an additional topic. Research guy wants drones to be more "frangible" so you want our sturdy crash tolerant drones to simply break.
All this arguing about altitudes airspaces is simple to fix. If you want to fly a drone high or by an airport it needs to broadcast its location.
@@HammerLeaf there's risk in everything. the question is, how much. in this case the chance of a manned aircraft hitting a hobbyist's toy is extremely low. "logic" would tell you that when people follow the rules and guidelines set forth by the FAA, as everyone has been doing already for many years, there's no need to throw millions of responsible hobbyists under the bus in a deceiving attempt to give the sub 400' airspace to commercial drones.
Planes being downed by Drones - ZERO. Planes being downed by birds - DOZENS. Reality vs your Logic - Reality WINS.
That is my feelings as well droneXcursion
The amount of misinformation, conjecture, and bias in these comments is horrifying.
I fly airplanes and helicopters and have flown hobby-size aircraft my whole childhood. I spend most of my life below 1000ft for work. Keep it simple: if you fly a drone in a dangerous area, you're putting lives at risk. It's just that simple. Helicopters, airplanes, it doesn't matter. If one busts through a windshield, you can incapacitated or kill the pilot. If one hits a critical flight component, you kill everyone on board. What's there to defend so vigorously on this topic? Children and hobbyists have no stake in the matter.
Stay out of our airports; stay out of our airspace; stay out of popular routes. We don't want to break your toy, but we also want to live.
How do you tell the birds to get out of the way?
Rather. are you flying below 500ft AGL?
Class G airspace is for hobbyists. If you are flying in THEIR airspace, then you are the one "trespassing", as it were.
Your attitude is not helpful and pushes away any real support you might think you are going to gather.
If you see my drone in controlled airspace or above 400ft AGL please try to avoid it, it’s definitely a flyaway. Let’s all educate ourselves and fly responsibly. I wonder who the “experts” were making the much informed statements in the video.
Your right but if you fly to low over populated area (
@@TheNick70nick No idea what your background is, but I hope you have some full-scale experience. If not, I recommend it to you! A lot of fun and I think you can gain a lot of perspective from it (on life, the universe, everything; not just this topic)!
You're right. Part 135, it's actually illegal to go below 300ft AGL in a helicopter over a 'congested' area. (separate topic: define 'congested'). Drones are limited to 400ft AGL, but, I'm sorry, out of those who have an altimeter on their drone, who cares what it says? Again, though, MOST helicopter flying is done below 1000ft. EMS, utility, fire, and often corporate. That's what we do. That's our job and most often our livelihood. Crash into us, we die.
Personal experience suggests that most drone hobbyists think they are the ones with the rights to the sky, but they have a $1000 piece of replaceable equipment. There are no lives at risk. The numbers just don't add up, and I have no idea the basis on which people think they have a platform to stand on.
is it really that hard for people to not fly drones around airports?
Dragonfyre drone people are like gun people. They believe it’s their god given right to fly a drone even if they’re putting people at risk
@@TG-it8zt eh no most pilots don't fly their drones near airports way to risky
Zed's animations tell that to the hundreds of thousands affected at Gatwick this week
@@TG-it8zt link?
Zed's animations link? You’ve got google, it’s massive news
Gatwick recently anyone?
yes
Hai
@fenton bevan Yep
@fenton bevan How did it take a military to stop a drone
I wonder why they didn't use a bigger drone to destroy it?
Can't handle a drone but they slice through the WTC
Inside job.
@@ashleyjanit5052 I think it was sarcasm, but I could be wrong
@@ashleyjanit5052 th-cam.com/video/F4CX-9lkRMQ/w-d-xo.html
Exactly! Wake up folks!
Se você soube como pesquisar isso em inglês, você está aqui depois do inteligência Ltda com o lito.
De fato
It looks like a fairly biased test, as any engineer will know, looking at the static wing versus projectile has a massively different energy transfer to the wing moving into a static target. The wing moving will sustain far less damage in that situation as there is kinetic energy energy in all of the moving components. It is very evident in car crash damage, the moving car is always the one that fares best. Still, the prime objective is the same old story... drones will be killing millions by the end of the year... oh, sorry, that might be alcohol.. oh we can just blame drones for that too..
WE NEED MORE BANS AMD REGULATIONS. THINK OF THE MINORITIES AND CHILDRENS, FUCKING NAZI ALT RIGHT SHITHEAD
The result of the test would not be any different if the airplane were to be flown into the drone. The damage would be exactly the same, the only bias I notice here are from the people scraping at the bottom of the barrel for reasons as to why this test is flawed.
What if black people are the majority of drone owners? Would they continue to push drone ban amd regulations? Would they dare be called racist?
yes , it's like firing a gun to a bullet , no fair game put the wing in movement and then I will see how the coanda effect at the leading edge will cause a different effect, I just think...
The narrarator kept saying when the drone hits a plane and I think that's backwards
American metal motors And muscle well technically the plane has the right of way. It is so hard to see a drone from an airplane moving 120mph+
1:19 " So the drone we use for this type of testing is a dji? Phantom? 2?"
Although its good to see the "Potential " damage a drone could cause, the factor that was not represented here is the displacement and compression of the air about the leading edge of the wing. Its very possible the drone may actually surf the compressed air and elevate or be pushed down in the vortex and not do the damage shown. The test was good, but incomplete based on this variable.
Exactly!
Do they? I have never heard of a bird damaging a wing. They get sucked into jet engines, or hit propellers... but leading edge of a wing? Any examples from the real world?
Don't bring your science, logic, reason... into this video! How dare you!
@@IceTTom Are you a Trump advisor? Kidding, but not really.
Thanks for the propaganda; might just ruin a lot of amazing footage in the future :D ❤
Why? WHY? WHY DO PEOPLE INSIST ON CALLING *QUADCOPTERS* “DRONES”????
Too long of a word, I know that bothers me also
Eh, well those ones can pretty much fly themselves on a pre programmed mission so are more deserving.
Because with the term "drone" one envisions an MQ-9 Reaper loaded with 500lb LGBs and Hellfires or an RQ-4 Global Hawk. It places an undeserved aura of fear over RC aircraft, never mind the fact that if a terrorist was actually wanting to cause some damage, they would smuggle RPGs, MANPADs, and mortars over the Mexican border, all of which are far cheaper than even a mediocre quadrotor that couldnt carry enough explosive material to actually effect any damage or injuries anyway. Further, in no way, shape, or form should a quadrotor ever be able to intercept aircraft in flight, they simply can not go that fast. Mid air collisions are only a true risk around hospital helicopter landing pads, wildfires, and airport runways, and even at that, those collisions would be at a low velocity. Helicopters are perhaps the only thing that might be vulnerable, and I say MIGHT because one need only look at all of the battle damage sustained by helicopters over the years, including a case where two huey's landed in a thicket of bamboo to evacuate troops in Vietnam (cutting said bamboo down and damaging the blades far more than a simple bird/"drone" collision). To say that a quadrotor could fatally damage an aircraft in a collision is laughable never mind that the conditions of a collision are difficult to achieve, and that is also forgetting that there are only a few locations where a quadrotor could actually hit/intercept a large aircraft. It is simply politics, and it is completely biased.
In order to purposefully cause damage, you must know where an aircraft is beforehand, further, it must be low enough and slow enough in order to purposefully hit it... Again, this is only truly possible around landing strips/pads. It is far easier to sabotage aircraft on the ground, or to blast it on the runway with an RPG and lay mortars down on the terminals, or to blast it out of the air far away from the airport with a MANPAD. All of those options would effectively be a mass casualty event, unlike a "drone" strike which would, at best, damage the leading edge of an aircraft and cause some drag, and at worst, bend the spar of an old light weight aluminum aircraft.... if this were a composite wing, the results would have been vastly different and again, at worst, the quadrotor would only cause a hole and some drag in a wing....
I keep asking myself the same thing and can't find a valid answer for it.
The same reason they call any black rifle an "assault rifle". Too lazy for facts and it sounds scarier. But drone does have 3 less syllables so it is easier to say. Unless we start calling them quads, then the 4 wheeler guys won't know what you are talking about.....
But the wings on the planes on 9/11 somehow cut through the steel beams on the building🤔
Not Shaken they didnt cut through
Connor Clark they did... there look at the impact on the buildings, there is opening where the wings were