Low?
Did he conclude whether or not the Challenger turned out to be a turkey?
I love the cautious optimism and “national inferiority” in the documentary, especially knowing how successful the program turned out to be. No one in that movie (except maybe the men from TAG aviation!) would believe this plane would still be flying and even still in production in 2024 (with updates, of course!).
I’ve never seen that film, unfortunately. I know most of this IMAX films, but not this (conventional) one.
Another one from the scanner - airplane accident in Campbell County, WY - “no need for medical”
Possible causes? High winds, turbulence, lack of visibility, toxic smoke or what?
Was it a SEAT?
Two unrelated questions for our aviation experts.
I was in a rooftop hot tub at a hotel immediately adjacent to the Calgary Airport two days ago, and to my surprise, there was a drone hovering near us, perhaps 50 feet up. I looked around and spotted the pilot on another part of the rooftop, about 100 feet away from where we were.
I don’t know what he was doing, but there was (IMHO) no one particularly interesting in the hot tub area to spy on. And at one point he sent the drone up to maybe 200-300 feet up. (I could be off on these numbers.) After maybe 20 minutes in the air, he brought it down.
It’s hard for me to estimate it’s size, but it was a gray quad copter, maybe 18-24 inch arm-span, with green lights on the ends of two of the arms.
Here’s the exact location, you can see the two white hot tubs on the roof:
It looks to me like the hotel is about two miles from the airport’s main runway.
Q. 1: Was he breaking the law by flying so close to the airport? (Don’t forget this was Canada, not the US.)
As you know, Alberta has been experiencing some serious wildfires. Two days after we left Jasper, half the town was burnt down. There was heavy smoke haze for all of week we spent in the province, and in Calgary, we could actual smell the odor of burning wood.
I know that flying through volcanic ash can actually shut down and damage jet engines.
Q. 2: Does flying through wildfire smoke pose any risks, or require any special operational measures or maintenance activities?
(Needless to say, our flight, and AFAICT all other flights leaving Calgary that day, had no problems that I was aware of.)
Per Transport Canada, unless this person had a special authorization, he very likely was breaking the law based on your description.
Unless you are following an established Transport Canada procedure, you cannot fly closer than:
- 5.6 kilometres (3 nautical miles) from any airport listed as Certified (“Cert”) in the Canada Flight Supplement
As for smoke, any particulates can theoretically cause problems for equipment, just in terms of gunking things up. It’s possible it could affect the drone, but may also be light enough to not cause issues. The operator is responsible for maintaining their drone in an airworthy state, so should probably clean it after. The other concern with smoke/haze is visibly; drones are expected to be operated in line of sight, so losing sight of it can be a problem.
Thanks for the reply. I thought the drone was too close.
But I should have been clearer that I wasn’t concerned about the smoke affecting the drone. I was wondering about its effect on passenger planes.
The guy was looking for nudes (all or partial). You would have been completely within your rights to blaze away at the drone with your sidearm, rifle, or shotgun.
“Hold on a second, Steve. This is in Canada, not Florida/Texas/Alabama/etc…”
I see! I think the resident pilots could best answer that, but my understanding is that they generally would be routed away from areas where it might be a problem. The thermal effects/air temperature changes probably are a bigger actual concern to the aircraft.
Incoming air for the cabin is filtered, so it would have to be pretty bad for it to be noticeable at all to passengers, I think.
I assume the risk increases with smoke particle sizes, as they become more abrasive and can accumulate in the engine or pitot tubes, but again, airspace where the risk is present is probably avoided to begin with. When you can’t design a problem out of the aircraft, you define operating limitations for it.
I have an FAA Remote Pilot License, but I don’t know what the rules are in Canada. In the U.S. you need a waiver to fly a drone in controlled airspace, which (mostly) includes the Class E that is above most airports whether they are tower controlled or not. Irrespective of that, you’re supposed to avoid manned aircraft, which means you probably shouldn’t fly near any airport.
Irrespective of THAT, using a drone to spy on people is potentially actionable under criminal law. I’m no expert on privacy laws, but I was told by a police officer that if I hover a drone over somebody’s property they probably have a right to disable it. Outside of private property there’s public space rules, and on top of THAT there is whether the drone operation is commercial in nature or recreational.
Sounds like the guy over the hotel roof was at least a jerk, and very possibly in violation of Canada’s drone flying rules.
The National Transportation Safety Board spokesperson Keith Holloway said Saturday that preliminary information indicated the plane crashed following an “auto pilot issue during flight” and a team of investigators was headed to the site.“The aircraft is in a remote location and once they gain access, they will begin documenting the scene, examining the aircraft,” Holloway said. “The aircraft will then be recovered and taken to a secure facility for further evaluation.”
“autopilot issue”?
Can’t the autopilot easily be disconnected?
There’s probably some very interesting case law yet to be settled, but as things stand right now that police officer was wrong.
In the US…
The act of shooting down a drone can indeed be considered a crime. Under federal law, a drone is classified as an aircraft. Therefore, damaging, destroying, disabling, or wrecking a drone could result in federal criminal charges under 18 U.S.C. § 32, which deals with the destruction of aircraft or aircraft facilities. Penalties can include fines, imprisonment, or both, depending on the severity of the offense and the damage caused.
In Canada…
While shooting at trespassing drones might seem like a good short-term security solution, Dionne says doing so is “definitely not” permissible.
Both Dionne and Transport Canada stress that UAVs are considered aircraft. As with planes, helicopters, hot air balloons, and so on, shooting at a drone endangers the safety of the aircraft, and violates federal legislation on the safe use of firearms.
More information about the Wyoming crash:
No doubt there is a lot to be settled.
I’d have to go through the regs carefully to give a better analysis, but… Off the top of my head I can’t think of anything preventing me from hovering a drone over my neighbor’s lawn to peer into their window and take video.
Assuming it’s airspace not requiring a waiver and there’s nobody underneath or nearby that could be endangered, and I have the drone in visual sight and under my control I believe it would be OK under the regs. The only thing I can imagine preventing it is the ever-present “careless and reckless operations” clause, which can often cover what isn’t explicitly spelled out.
But I sure as hell would understand if said neighbor threw a blanket over my drone, or even destroyed it by some other means. And the ensuing litigation would certainly be amusing and possibly precedent-setting. But again, outside of FAA regs this sounds like a breach of privacy law.
Just cultivate a hawk or two…
One of the local TV news stations had a commercial talking about & showing how their helicopter could read a license plate from 2000’ up, much higher & way more powerful zoom than any drone out there
Yes it can. Unless there’s an issue. If there’s an issue then maybe it can’t. The issue could just have been a distraction that took their mind off job number one, flying the plane. Like the Ansett Dash 8 in New Zealand that had a landing gear issue that resulted in the pilots failing to monitor their height and caused them to come to rest at the top of a hill. Very lucky that only three died (though it wouldn’t seem lucky to the three).
Boeing’s incoming CEO is, thankfully, not yet another McDonnell-Douglas drone.
Rockwell-Collins was a pretty good name in the biz (AFAIK, Collins still is, as part of RTX).
Mr. Ortberg, 64, brings decades of industry experience and an outsider’s perspective to the role. He is a former chief executive of Rockwell Collins, which made electronic systems and other technology for aircraft, including those made by Boeing…He retained a senior role at the new company until it merged with Raytheon in early 2020 and became RTX. Mr. Ortberg retired from RTX in 2021
From paywalled:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/31/business/boeing-kelly-ortberg-ceo.html
So they picked a retired 64 year-old. Frankly it’s doubtful he will be CEO for more than a very short time.
In other news: