Diese Website verwendet Cookies. Mit der Weiternutzung der Website drücken Sie Ihr Einverständnis mit dem Einsatz von Cookies aus.
Schließen
Wussten Sie schon, dass die Flugverfolgung auf FlightAware durch Werbung finanziert wird?
Sie können uns dabei helfen, FlightAware weiterhin kostenlos anzubieten, indem Sie Werbung auf FlightAware.com zulassen. Wir engagieren uns dafür, dass unsere Werbung auch in Zukunft zweckmäßig und unaufdringlich ist und Sie beim Surfen nicht stört. Das Erstellen einer Positivliste für Anzeigen auf FlightAware geht schnell und unkompliziert. Alternativ können Sie sich auch für eines unserer Premium-Benutzerkonten entscheiden..
Schließen
Back to Squawk list
  • 39

Embry-Riddle Study Confirms Small Unmanned “Drones” Pose Increasing Risks to Aircraft

Übermittelt
 
During the 13-day sampling period, researchers detected 73 individual DJI-manufactured drones that made 192 separate flights in the Class C airspace around the airport. (www.suasnews.com) Mehr...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


kdhurne
Ken Hurne 2
Maybe mandating geofencing on the drone app will become FAA mandated. Seems the only reasonable answer to minimize risk without banning or requiring special licensing to fly drones in the future.

I could see insurance companies taking note of this because while a drone strike may not always be fatal, damage is still likely and thus causing an increase in claims. I could see premiums shooting up because of findings like this one.
jimquinndallas
Jim Quinn 1
Question: Do these drones indicate actual AGL or MSL altitudes? GPS altitudes are inaccurate much of the time. Just curious.
crchall
Chuck Chall 2
Most of them don't have telemetry. The larger, more expensive ones do but the pilots I know seldom look at that number since the resolution on their cameras determine the altitude they need to be at to get a clear image. You don't see much detail from them at altitude. Our flying field is 3.5 miles from the local airport, we have a MOU with them, and we always use spotters when a pilot is flying FPV. Unfortunately, ANYBODY can buy one of these things, with no training or understanding of safety or regulation and that is where the problems come in.
GaryOglesby
GaryOglesby 1
Too bad they didn't report the number of UAS that may have been authorized by LAANC for commercial operations.
carlsonj
James Carlson 2
10th paragraph.

"The researchers compared detected sUAS activity with locations and altitudes prescribed by the FAA’s UAS Facility Maps. According to the FAA, “UAS Facility Maps show the maximum altitudes around airports where the FAA may authorize Part 107 operations without additional safety analysis.” More than 20 percent of the 177 flights were flying higher than the safe altitude prescribed for their operating area. Moreover, researchers compared detected UAS operations to historical manned aircraft flight data, revealing several near encounters."
yr2012
matt jensen -8
Had to go to school to figure that one out?
ToddBaldwin3
ToddBaldwin3 11
Yes, it does take "going to school" to figure that one out. Most of the evidence regarding drone issues are anecdotal, which is unreliable. The Embry-Riddle study appears to be based on more reliable, objective evidence.
joelwiley
joel wiley 3
No you didn't. It's just that nobody seems to have been willing to fund a study until now.
E-R did so as academic research.
linbb
linbb -3
Its more than some news stories like most are or knee jerk reactions that take place. This is a flight school and they can be a danger to there operations. That's why they did the study, OK?

Anmelden

Haben Sie kein Konto? Jetzt (kostenlos) registrieren für kundenspezifische Funktionen, Flugbenachrichtigungen und vieles mehr!