Slashdot Mirror
Civilian Drone Crashes Into a US Army Helicopter (nypost.com)
An anonymous reader quotes the New York Post:
It was nearly Black Hawk down over Staten Island -- when an Army chopper was struck by an illegally flying drone over a residential neighborhood, authorities said Friday. The UA60 helicopter was flying 500 feet over Midland Beach alongside another Black Hawk, when the drone struck the chopper at around 8:15 p.m. Thursday, causing damage to its rotor blades. The uninjured pilot was able to land safely at nearby Linden Airport in New Jersey... "Our aircraft was not targeted, this was a civilian drone," said Army Lieutenant Colonel Joe Buccino, the spokesman for the 82nd Airborne... "One blade was damaged [and] dented in two spots and requires replacement and there is a dented window"... The NYPD and the military are investigating -- but no arrests have been made.
The same day a federal judge struck down an ordinance banning drone flights over private property that had been passed by the city of Newton, Massachusetts. But local law enforcement warned that "an out of control helicopter could have crashed into residential homes causing numerous injuries and even fatalities," while the Post reports that drones have also crashed into a power plant and into the 40th floor of the Empire State Building.
"In February, a GoPro drone crashed through a Manhattan woman's 27th floor window and landed just feet away from her as she sat in her living room."
The same day a federal judge struck down an ordinance banning drone flights over private property that had been passed by the city of Newton, Massachusetts. But local law enforcement warned that "an out of control helicopter could have crashed into residential homes causing numerous injuries and even fatalities," while the Post reports that drones have also crashed into a power plant and into the 40th floor of the Empire State Building.
"In February, a GoPro drone crashed through a Manhattan woman's 27th floor window and landed just feet away from her as she sat in her living room."
Legal considerations aside: When I read "... over a residential neighborhood...", I would certainly not expect army choppers to fly there (at low altitude) - especially since they are probably producing much more noise than civilian drones.
Maybe don't fly multiple helicopters 500 feet over a residential neighborhood after dark?
Excuse me, but what is the Army doing flying over residential neighborhoods? That's what should be illegal.
The droning community needs to do a much better job of policing itself or we are going to lose our nice things.
Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
My understanding is that the helicopters were patrolling for the safety of the United Nations general assembly. The neighborhood is along the shore of Staten Island and the helicopters were following the shoreline. It's reasonable for helicopters to patrol the waterways around New York City for suspicious activity. I suspect there are plenty of other helicopters flown in the area by the Coast Guard and the Port Authority. I suspect they were flying low to get a better view of anyone out on the water. I don't view this as unreasonable behavior at all. They were flying at 500 feet, which is above where recreational drones are allowed to operate. The ceiling for those is 400 feet, so there should never have been a recreational drone at that height.
The chopper was low but seemed to be at at its legal flight altitude. Honestly, I'm don't see a need for your average consumer to fly more than 400 feet above the ground. Anything that flies higher should be required to be licensed and carry tracking transponders like any other aircraft.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
The original article states the chopper was "struck by an illegally flying drone over a residential neighborhood". That would be a "congested area, in FAA speak.
91.119 - Minimum safe altitudes: General
(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.
The chopper should have been at least 1,000 feet above the highest structure, so probably at least 1,100 feet. Had it been at a proper altitude, it would have experienced no danger from the drone.
Chopper pilots, particularly military ones violate this rule all the time. Go to a beach near a base and they will be flying up and down practicing, I mean sight seeing very low causing a huge racket and generally annoying folks. There's really no punishment unless enough people complain, which they rarely do. Now that drones are on the rise, they have a real, dangerous obstacle. But rather than follow the rules and be safe, they want to blame the drones.
Fine the chopper pilot and revoke his license for a while.
More like quit flying military helicopters over our neighborhoods.
Who are you defending us against? Quit crashing into our stuff while claiming to be protecting us when you can't even win a war anymore.
Yes there are. There are plenty of reasons. Was there a airport near? Police helicopters providing support or on the ground operations. Military, Police, and Civilian helicopters involved in search and rescue operations. There are plenty of reasons for this.
Where there is no reason for a civilian drone to operate above more than 400 ft above the ground. There is plenty of reasons for commercial drones to operate above that limit but they should require licenses and transponders. There could even be a special license to allow civilian drones to operate above that limit if they wanted too.
Aircraft carry people, drones do not. Some of these drones weight 40 pounds. That is enough to bring down many aircraft in a strike. If a few 10 pound ducks can bring down a 737, what can a couple of 40 pound drones to do to one?
Time to stop treating these like toys and start treating for what they are, aircraft.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
It could be both, you know. Midland Beach (the area this happened according to TFS) apparently *is* a residential area in NYC that has a beach; it also has some parkland immediately to either side of it - all perfectly valid places for someone to be flying a drone in a safe and legal manner. It's also pretty close to an area of the US that's a high-profile target for any wannabe terrorist, so quite reasonable to assume that law enforcement and the military will be keeping a close eye on things, and that might potentially entail the use of Blackhawks flying at low altitude. Combine a drone pilot pushing the limits of where they were supposed to be with a pair of Blackhawks pushing the limits of where they were supposed to be *at the same time*, and accidents (which is what this almost certainly was) are just going to happen.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Why not send the military a bill for the drone?
You should see the military CARGO PLANE that flies over my house every couple of weeks at approximately that altitude.
Military cargo planes don't fly below 500ft for fun. Also, you mentioning that you live in Germany, tells me that you most likely moved near an existing airport because no new military airports have been built in a while.
So one of two things is true: either you willingly moved close to a military airport, or you are 95 and are the victim of a military airfield being built next to your house.
I think the chances that you knowingly moved next to an existing military airport are higher than you being 95 and on Slashdot. So, by the power of deduction, I conclude that you moved next to an airport and now complain about those pesky aircraft flying over your home.
You, good sir, are a hypocrite.
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
The only reasons an army helicopter should be ~500ft in a residential neighborhood is:
* it's engaged in combat in said neighborhood (during war)
* it's engaged in recon-Ops in said neighborhood (during war)
* it's landing in said neighborhood (emergency landing)
just another Whiskey Tango Foxtrot OP AFAICT.
In all likelihood, the near-near-miss probably actually happened > 500ft, but the pilot had to cover his/her ass. Someone should do a FOIA request for the flight plan to get the cruising altitude and flight path.
The UN general assembly probably has some black people in it and they were worried the cops might kill some of them. Might create a bit of an incident, that.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
You mean the assembly located twenty miles to the northeast needed two black hawks to be in that area at 500 feet? Yes, how dare they.
It's reasonable for helicopters to patrol the waterways around New York City for suspicious activity.
Not military craft on US soil during peace time. And not at low altitude.
How does moving into a home near a military airport require you to enjoy noisy airplanes flying low over your new home?
I wouldn't say you are required to enjoy them but you are required to acknowledge that as a condition of buying the home. The prices of homes reflect things like their proximity to airports, train tracks, schools, churches, highways, hospitals, and so much more. If you want a house that doesn't have cargo planes flying low overhead then you'd have to choose a different house, and likely pay more for it.
I'm reminded of a bunch of people that complained of a navy base near them that would shoot off a ceremonial canon everyday. They've been doing this for something like 150 years. So, some people buy a retirement home near this base and complain about the noise. Well maybe they should have considered that before buying the property.
You say it happens every couple weeks? It's probably pilots getting their training. How bad can this be? Seems like a pretty minor thing to complain about.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.