Drone Diverts Firefighting Planes, Incurring $10,000 Cost

An anonymous reader writes: Fire is raging through thousands of acres of forest in California. A few days ago we discussed how a man's personal drone was shooed away from a fire site. Now, the drone situation has gotten worse. The U.S. Forest Service is helping to fight the fire by sending planes full of fire retardant to drop on the surrounding area. Unfortunately, one of the missions had to be diverted because a private drone had encroached upon the planes's airspace. The mission involved three planes, all loaded with retardant. One was large enough to find another target on which to drop its payload, but the other two simply had to jettison and return to base. Officials say the failed mission wasted at least $10,000. They're now having to spend extra time keeping an eye out for these drones and trying to educate operators on the temporary restrictions in place around forest fires.

Comments

This problem needs a technical solution

[drinkypoo]

As much as I'd like to see drone operators exercise some responsibility, the system is completely broken if you can turn a state into a firestorm with a minor act of arson and some auto-loitering drones.

Step 1. Start fire
Step 2. Set drone to loiter over areas with the most fire, at about 1500 feet
Step 3. The world ends in fire.

If we cannot create firefighting craft which can tolerate drone strikes, then we're completely fucked, because any enemy can utterly destroy our country with nothing but a few container-loads of drones.

Re:This problem needs a technical solution

[Capt.Albatross]

Putting aside any other consideration, you don't want that DC10 taken out of service during the fire season.

Re:This problem needs a technical solution

[Richard_at_work]

If you know anything about jet engines, then you would know that a simple set of ear protection earmuffs can kill a multi million dollar engine if ingested.

Re:This problem needs a technical solution

[geoskd]

That DC10 was designed to hit geese without sustaining damage. You think a 1 kg drone is going to do anything?

No, the DC10 is designed to not crash after hitting a goose. They make no claims about damage. After a typical bird strike, the plane will still fly, but after it lands they're going to need to spend a few weeks rebuilding the engine that got hit.

Drones are a bit more harsh on the engine, because geese are made of relatively soft stuff. Even the bones are remarkably flexible. The metal or plastic chassis of a drone on the other hand is actually designed to be very rigid. I would not be surprised in an engine, that survives a goose strike relatively intact, is completely destroyed by a medium sized drone.

They don't just need fire retardant

[cyber-vandal]

They need retard retardant.

Can we go back to R/C Planes?

[Overzeetop]

Can we stop calling them drones. They're remote controlled (hobby) airplanes. Drones makes it sound like it's a weaponized, autonomous craft weighing hundreds of pounds.

What we need is disclosure

[russotto]

How much is Diane Feinstein's office paying Slashdot to publish stories like this? I fly R/C helicopters and I sure as fuck don't want them banned or restricted to the point where they have to be equipped with the sort of expensive equipment it would take for them to respect NOTAMs.

Not to mention that it won't work. There's already open-source versions of the control systems. What component are you going to restrict?

Re:Post a reward for finding this guy

[Fnord666]

I guess it's time to post a significant reward for information leading to the arrest of the person who did this. Apparently just the news stories about how stupid this is isn't enough to dissuade these idiots. So a good stiff fine is needed, and his drone seized. Hopefully that would finally send a message. Time for someone to 'fess up and spread the word to others.

Don't worry. The individual in question will self report via a youtube post within the next day or so. Problem solved.