Drones flying over forest fire divert planes and cost US Forest Service $10,000 - $15,000

[Bouzoo]

Even I know that California has some of the biggest fires in the US. Actually I read a while ago that it is one of the 3 major locations in the world concerning fires, while interestingly 1 of the remaining 2 is Dalmatia in my country. 

The Lake Fire in California's San Bernardino county is a really big thing now and it's still spreading. Three planes were supposed to drop the flame retardant on the forest but were prevented from doing so because people were flying 2 private drones. The drones wingspan may be up to 4ft. That's not small.

 

A DC-10 carrying 10,800 gallons of retardant, and two smaller planes also carrying retardant, were diverted from a drop site south of Big Bear Lake, where scattered homes were being threatened by the encroaching fire, the Los Angeles Times wrote. An incident commander spotted the drone, a fixed-wing craft about four feet wide, flying about 800 or 900 feet off the ground, at an elevation of 11,000 feet above sea-level.

Hobby drones are forbidden to fly above 400 feet off the ground in most situations, and the US Forest Service had issued a temporary flight restriction over the fire-fighting area.

“The DC-10 had to divert and drop its retardant on a fire along the Nevada border, while the two smaller planes had to jettison theirs because they couldn't land with that much weight,” the Los Angeles Times reported. “Officials said the failed mission cost between $10,000 and $15,000.”

A second drone was spotted later that day by a pilot returning from fire-fighting duty. That drone was flying at 1,200 feet. The San Bernardino Forest Service emphasized in a press conference on Thursday that flying drones in restricted areas is forbidden. On its Twitter feed, the service posted an image saying, "If you fly, we can't," adding that it's "critically important that recreational UAS drone users not operate near wildfires."

 

Firstly, it was flying on a much higher level than allowed and secondly it was in a restricted area. Since the mission failed it costed them $10,000 - $15,000, so they say. Now I have to ask, who does that? Some say it was a hobbyist, others say it was military or law enforcement while others think it was a news reporter drone. Either way, you should let them do their job and not making it harder with a drone, the people are trying to put out a fire.

 

The San Bernardino Forest Service published a picture on their Twitter, and I agree with it. 

 

They did find 1 pilot but they aren't charging him, even though the video says they might face criminal charges.

“We did find one of the pilots, and the Sheriff's Department talked to them, but they weren't interfering with operations so they weren't charged,” Alcordo added. “We were just trying to educate them.”

 

What do you think? Do you think is this okay or should the person get fined? I personally can't see how people though it was a good idea to fly a drone above the fire.

 

The video has been provided by the courtesy of @ionbasa:

 

 

Source

Edited June 28, 2015 by Bouzoo

[arnavvr]

Yes. It isn't legal do this. Drones must be flown on your own property.

[ZetZet]

Well, I think doing anything to interfere with services like police or firefighters is not acceptable.

[Tedster]

They should just deal with the problem and if the drones are damaged sobeit?

[Tedster]

Yes. It isn't legal do this. Drones must be flown on your own property.

What if the drone owners owned the land of the forest?

[Oshino Shinobu]

It's the irresponsible ones like this that are going to ruin it for everyone else. The laws regarding drones in the UK are much loser than the ones in the US by the looks of things (basically, don't fly in residential;/built up areas, and obviously restricted areas). 

[Oshino Shinobu]

They should just deal with the problem and if the drones are damaged sobeit?

I don't think that's the issue. It's more that the drones may damage the planes. If a drone goes into an engine or propeller, it can potentially crash the plane. 

[Tedster]

I don't think that's the issue. It's more that the drones may damage the planes. If a drone goes into an engine or propeller, it can potentially crash the plane. 

Okay, then have some sort of EMP pulser thing they can hit the drones with?

[Bouzoo]

What if the drone owners owned the land of the forest?

What if the drone gets into the propeller? Huge problem, if the plane crashes the pilot may die. 

 

EDIT: ninja'd

Edited June 28, 2015 by Bouzoo

[Bouzoo]

Okay, then have some sort of EMP thing they can hit the drones with?

Wouldn't EMP also disable the plane electronics?

[Tedster]

Wouldn't EMP also disable the plane electronics?

They should be able to focus it well enough to make it safe.

[Oshino Shinobu]

Okay, then have some sort of EMP thing they can hit the drones with?

I guess EMPs are pretty damn expensive. There's also the issue of disabling other electricals in the area.

 

The problem would be solved if the drone pilots had some common sense

[Tedster]

I guess EMPs are pretty damn expensive. There's also the issue of disabling other electricals in the area.

 

The problem would be solved if the drone pilots had some common sense

Or if they had some way of taking over the drones, some sort of emergency feature that might end up becoming a regulation and then generally abused by members of the public.

[Speedyv]

Saw this on the news...

It's more of a curious mistake than malicious obstruction.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

They should probably start issuing fines before casualties happen. Worst case scenario is that you may need a licence to fly advanced drones   

[Bouzoo]

The problem would be solved if people had some common sense

And most of the world problems would've been fixed. 

[Bouzoo]

They should probably start issuing fines before casualties happen. Worst case scenario is that you may need a licence to fly advanced drones   

I personally would charge them the extra damage that occurred due to them flying there. Or at least a portion of it.

[Speedyv]

Or if they had some way of taking over the drones, some sort of emergency feature that might end up becoming a regulation and then generally abused by members of the public.

 

Why are you making it so complicated. Just stay out of the way....

They are trying to stop a rapidly spreading fire that might encroach houses and damage large portions of a forest....

[SIGSEGV]

They should be equipped with something to shoot them down next time this happens

[ZetZet]

They should just deal with the problem and if the drones are damaged sobeit?

launch some of these babies.  :lol:  :lol:

 

[Trik'Stari]

1 tiny ass drone vs a Dc-10? Just hit the damn thing, not like it can do that much damage to a prop aircraft...can it? I know a jet might be threatened by it because of speed, but still. It's not like we're talking about a fragile ass aircraft here. Consider that the DC-10 is the commercial version of a plane that carries side firing artillery cannons and gattling guns.

 

Or why not just, fly above or below the damned thing? Shit, drop the foam on it, and knock it down into the fire, maybe the operator will learn their lesson lol

 

Seriously, a close pass at high speed could probably knock that drone out of the air (just from the turbulence surrounding the much large and faster moving aircraft), or at least make the operator decide to bring it back.

[Lethal Seraph]

One person to spoil it all. Goddamn terrorist!

[KirbyTech]

Yes. It isn't legal do this. Drones must be flown on your own property.

It is legal to fly anywhere that meets the guide lines as long as you don't break other laws. So public land is okay to fly on.

[Trik'Stari]

It is legal to fly anywhere that meets the guide lines as long as you don't break other laws. So public land is okay to fly on.

Civillian drones are limited in altitude to about 400 feet above ground. These ones were well above that. Not to mention that during a forest fire, the airspace can be declared restricted, as was the case here. So they were breaking the law.

[KirbyTech]

Civillian drones are limited in altitude to about 400 feet above ground. These ones were well above that. Not to mention that during a forest fire, the airspace can be declared restricted, as was the case here. So they were breaking the law.

I said where it meets the requirements so if it was above 400 ft it does not also if it is in restricted air space it does not meet the requirements.