Drone hits BA Plane at Heathrow airport.

[Sauron]

1 hour ago, Prysin said:

If your hobby is to put hundreds of people at risk, then you fall in line with those other people we put in jail. Those with "killing people" as a hobby.

That's a load of bullshit. You just dropped all resemblance of sense from your argument.

 

First of all, the chances of that drone actually doing anything to the plane were incredibly low (doesn't mean it's justified to fly it in an airport, but it's certainly not the weapon of mass destruction you make it seem).

 

Second, the hobby is obviously NOT flying it INSIDE AN AIRPORT. "Let's ban baseball because bats can be used to hurt people in airports" - do you see the nonsense?

 

I could literally go to any diy shop right now and buy a hammer that could kill a person in one swing. Or an axe. Or a knife. All of which would be much, much more effective at killing any amount of people than a drone (unless it's a military drone).

 

I could manufacture a grenade from a lithium battery that can be found in any laptop or smartphone. I could take my car and kill 20+ people on the sidewalk before anyone knew what was happening and had time to get out of harm's way. And yet, according to you drones are evil made machine and must be banned, their owners put in jail and any drone shot down on sight. Right.

 

Whoever did this deserves all the jail he could get, that doesn't mean drones in general need to be banned when even firearms aren't.

[Centurius]

16 hours ago, Admiral Naismith said:

I really am wondering if anti-drone Laser[correction] systems will be developed for non-military use simply because of airports.

Lets get this straight, in most of the world, you will never have an effective ban on drones/rc anything. The stuff is too easy to find/make/already everywhere. It's not rocket science. Also the legal work would be an absolute bitch considering there is a very well established RC model-aircraft industry that would suffer needlessly. Plus a substantial amount of the aviation industry likes drones/rc. I haven't heard anyone who does anything to do with actually flying (pilots, aircraft maintenance, etc.) argue for anything of the sort.

 

The only thing I can think of that would work would be 'turrets' that can kill the electrical systems on these so noobs can't f*ck sh*t up. Small enough they don't pose a risk to the real aircraft, big enough that any typical rc/drone would get fried.

 

Then again since when are those in charge of legislature even remotely reasonable these days.

-reason for edit-

To fix my comment about EMPs in an airport when I should have said lasers. Can I blame finals on this?

 

Those drones have to come down after shooting them, possibly on someone's head. It's more likely they figure out a system to override the pilot and safely land it or force a backdoor to be installed.

[ivhyn]

Make it so that everyone who buys a drone must have a license which in turn can only be aquired through a short training program (similar to how guns are being handled in many countries), force online resellers to verrify if a customer is allowed to order one.  It certainly won't stop every accident from happening but it will greatly reduce the amount of idiots flying into things on purpose or simply because they lost control.

 

I don't care if your argument is "we're living in a free country therefore everyone should be allowed to buy one". You can't just buy a car and drive it around the streets without knowing how to control it. 

[Prysin]

3 hours ago, Sauron said:

That's a load of bullshit. You just dropped all resemblance of sense from your argument.

 

First of all, the chances of that drone actually doing anything to the plane were incredibly low (doesn't mean it's justified to fly it in an airport, but it's certainly not the weapon of mass destruction you make it seem).

 

Second, the hobby is obviously NOT flying it INSIDE AN AIRPORT. "Let's ban baseball because bats can be used to hurt people in airports" - do you see the nonsense?

 

I could literally go to any diy shop right now and buy a hammer that could kill a person in one swing. Or an axe. Or a knife. All of which would be much, much more effective at killing any amount of people than a drone (unless it's a military drone).

 

I could manufacture a grenade from a lithium battery that can be found in any laptop or smartphone. I could take my car and kill 20+ people on the sidewalk before anyone knew what was happening and had time to get out of harm's way. And yet, according to you drones are evil made machine and must be banned, their owners put in jail and any drone shot down on sight. Right.

 

Whoever did this deserves all the jail he could get, that doesn't mean drones in general need to be banned when even firearms aren't.

One drone hitting through the window of the cockpit, killing or maiming the pilot(s) can kill up to 500 people depending on the plane.

If you can kill 500 people on your own, with a hammer, knife or axe before being subdued by people or killed by the police, well, ill give you a fucking medal.

 

[Kierax]

Surely airports could be equipped with a jammer for drones, rendering them useless for being moved into the flight path of an aircraft? or even a law where GPS is equipped to all drones capable of such altitude, and when the GPS recognizes it's near a restricted airspace, it refuses to enter and bypasses?

 

Then those who want to enjoy their hobby can do so, and those who want to be dickheads are shit out of luck.

 

Oh and have the GPS report the operator when someone tries to fly it into a restricted airzone.

 

 

[GeekJump]

Remember that time a stupid geese (aka evil feathered dino-bitches) flew into that plane (in the engine/turbine thingy) in NY and the pilot safely crashed it into the hudson river? I feel like something similar will happen soon but with a drone instead....

 

People originally argued that governments were being too controlling and strict but then you keep having cases like these. I understand its bs but, like always, the few idiots ruin it for the many. 

 

I wonder what the solution will be in the end? You can ban it but people will still find a way to buy drones. You can require licenses to operate, but people could just ignore it. You can use those fancy lasers and jammers but that is expensive and will probably interfere with non-drone stuff. hmmmmm  

[Donut417]

49 minutes ago, Kierax said:

Surely airports could be equipped with a jammer for drones, rendering them useless for being moved into the flight path of an aircraft? or even a law where GPS is equipped to all drones capable of such altitude, and when the GPS recognizes it's near a restricted airspace, it refuses to enter and bypasses?

 

Then those who want to enjoy their hobby can do so, and those who want to be dickheads are shit out of luck.

 

Oh and have the GPS report the operator when someone tries to fly it into a restricted airzone.

 

 

Or we could just install flack cannons at the airport. Just blow them out of the air. 

[Kierax]

30 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Or we could just install flack cannons at the airport. Just blow them out of the air. 

I could be down for that, just don't let them be computer controlled.  Let's not give Skynet ideas.

[Sauron]

3 hours ago, Prysin said:

One drone hitting through the window of the cockpit, killing or maiming the pilot(s) can kill up to 500 people depending on the plane.

If you can kill 500 people on your own, with a hammer, knife or axe before being subdued by people or killed by the police, well, ill give you a fucking medal.

 

What? Are you seriously convinced a consumer drone can break through a plane's cockpit? Furthermore, have you seen how big those windows are? If you think you can hit those with ANY degree of reliability you have never flown a drone.

 

And the sheer IDEA that it couls smash through the window and still have enough force or mass to seriously hurt a pilot... your arguments are getting weaker by the hour.

 

-edit-

here, inform yourself

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-for-a-human-to-punch-through-an-airplane-window-with-their-bare-fist

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a228655.pdf

[NumLock21]

There are always two sides to this, pro-drone, those who will do anything to defend it and anti-drone, those who will do anything to ban it.

The problem is those who are pro-drone will do anything to defend their hobby by making up excuses like, maybe that drone was suppose to be at the airport or the it's so small, it won't bring down a plane, etc. When you have a bunch of these people that defends it like this, it only tells those idiots who actually do this, that it's okay and its not their fault their drone, has brought down a jet, killing all of its passengers and crew. Learn when to be on the other side, if you want to keep your precious flying hobby. When the ban does become a reality, don't blame it on those who hate drones. Blame it on those like yourself who likes it, but don't use common sense, fly by the rules, and have to ruin it for every one.

[Mihle]

drones getting banned for civilians is not going to happen, but requiring drones to be registered may happen. like with a black box for drones.

[Donut417]

Registration and black boxes are only half the battle. But are a good idea. How are they going to prevent these drones from getting in to the airport. Its not even the whole concern. My sister lives in the landing path of Detroit Metro Airport. No joke these planes are fucking low to the ground. Easily with in the range of a drone. Thats where the issues really lies. Im not real concerned about terrorism, even though its in the realm of possibilities. Im ore worried about the dumb ass with the drone, who has no respect for others or the law. Ive seen people state block wireless signals. I can sorta see that at the Airport, but near the airport? What about the people who use WiFI. Also you have the issues with blocking communication to 911 which is illegal. Thats part of the reason behind no being able to own wireless jammers in the US. 

 

The first step is getting a registration system in place. Something similar to how motor vehicles are done, this way it makes it easy for law enforcement to find people. Requiring a black box on all drones. Make flying in to restricted air space a federal crime punishable by time in the big house. Then to make it fair, make places that people can go to fly their drones. Place far away from airports. 

[LAwLz]

I vote for regulating them. The problem with laws are that they have to be designed to cater to the lowest common denominator. If you are arguing that you are a responsible drone owner and shouldn't have to get a license, then you are also arguing that the mentally challenged and unstable 16 year old living two blocks away from an airport should also be free to fly his drone completely unregulated. Idiots are dangerous because they don't realize they are idiots.

I don't have anything against taking a small test if I want a drone, and then have it registered. I really don't see why anyone would be against that. It's like a test to prove that you aren't a moron.

 

That being said, planes will survive getting hit by a drone. Even if the drone completely destroys one of the engines the plane can still operate just fine. The windshields are also very durable. They are made to withstand being smashed by a bird, and birds often weigh 2-3 times as much as drones.

It would be very bad if your toy ended up destroying something for 20 million dollars and cause mental distress for hundreds of people though so you still shouldn't do it.

[Metro]

Could these planes/airport use a certain noise frequency when they fly to stop this from happening, as the frequency can disable the drones. The motion of the plane produces a noise and once the plane stops, the frequency stops. Therefore it saves on power and any complaints based on no evidence like "the frequency leads damaged hearing" you could use lasers, however it could damage other aircraft (unless you use the correct strength) however that will be more expensive

[Metro]

15 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I vote for regulating them. The problem with laws are that they have to be designed to cater to the lowest common denominator. If you are arguing that you are a responsible drone owner and shouldn't have to get a license, then you are also arguing that the mentally challenged and unstable 16 year old living two blocks away from an airport should also be free to fly his drone completely unregulated. Idiots are dangerous because they don't realize they are idiots.

I don't have anything against taking a small test if I want a drone, and then have it registered. I really don't see why anyone would be against that. It's like a test to prove that you aren't a moron.

 

That being said, planes will survive getting hit by a drone. Even if the drone completely destroys one of the engines the plane can still operate just fine. The windshields are also very durable. They are made to withstand being smashed by a bird, and birds often weigh 2-3 times as much as drones.

It would be very bad if your toy ended up destroying something for 20 million dollars and cause mental distress for hundreds of people though so you still shouldn't do it.

 

That is not the point though, drones could carry explosives on them, which could potentially destroy an aircraft or make it crash

[pagani123]

just an update to the story it wasn't a drone. no debris no dent on the plane (and a drone would have caused a minor dent). most prevailing theory was that it was a plastic bag .

also @Prysin I wouldn't be worried about a drone crashing through a cockpit window. If a drone were to damage a large jet liner it would be getting sucked into the engine that is the only way it would do anything major to a large commercial jetliner.