The folks at Aviation International News TV recently posted a video that reveals what it looks like when a drone hits the wing of a general aviation airplane.
The video shows the drone hitting the wing and its resulting damage, courtesy of research done at the University of Dayton research institute. Check it out below:
Part of the point of this test was that the less ductile nature of a drone vs bird is worthy of consideration. That the DJI Phantom 2 damaged the wing spar while a bird simulation in the same test setup did not is noteworthy.
Steve … I guess you didn’t hear that a US Army Blackhawk rotor struck a drone last year. I’d bet you couldn’t hit a rotor if you tried … it’s all a matter of luck and timing.
If a drone gets into a large high bypass turbine engine … it’s not going to be good. With the potential near term proliferation of drones for all manner of purposes, those that poo-poo the problem are doing a disservice to us all. This was a valuable data point in addressing the problem … nothing more.
I notice defenders of drone strikes out in force. A drone is a flying mass object and it will cause MAJOR damage to any aircraft far worse than a fleshy bird. The mere fact the FAA is allowing drones to fly at all is a mistake and someone is going to pay with a plane and their lives in time.
Its a mistake that the are allowing actual planes with people in it up there.. Drones are far less dangerous.
This test is flawed. It states the problem too narrowly. The drone could have done much more damage if it struck the tail surfaces, which are critical parts that are much smaller and more fragile than the wing. The drone could have crashed through the windshield and killed the pilot. As a licensed pilot for over 50 years, these drones scare the dickens out of me. It is only a matter of time before somone in an airplane is killed by a drone.
As a corollary to this video, Image a similar video showing a bullet stiking a person in the arm. Very survivable indeed. But the video did not show what happens if the bullet stikes the person’s heart!
This test was bogus in so many ways! I agree it was pure fear mongering. Our news outlets are so naive to accept release as this should be much more critically analysed before being published.
NTSB report involving the collision of a small UAS with a manned aircraft.
https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?EventID=20170922X54600&AKey=1&RType=HTML&IType=IA
Oh, please! Don’t you also fall for the fear mongering that this “demonstration” fuels. All that this test demonstrates is that if you throw a 2-pound mass at a thin piece of aluminum at 200 MPH, you will get damage. But the conditions of the demonstration are completely unrealistic.
1) Few aircraft fly at 200 MPH at altitudes where most drones fly (below 500 ft AGL). And 200 MPH the Mooney would be at Vne.
2) The test is not done in a wind tunnel. If there were airflow over the Mooney wing at 200MPH, the laminar airflow would deflect a considerable amount of the impact energy.
This “study” started with a conclusion (drones are dangerous) then they set up an unrealistic demonstration to prove it. While in fact, there have been an estimated three to four million-hours of flight of these small aircraft, and there is not a single documented* collision of a drone with a manned aircraft.
[Right now, there are around 2.9 million drones that regularly fly over American skies (https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/media/FY2016-36_FAA_Aerospace_Forecast.pdf)]
This is what we in the rational world call “Fear Mongering”.
Today (if this is an average day in the U.S.):
1560 people will die from Cancer
268 people in hospitals will die because of medical mistakes.
162 people will be wounded by firearms.
117 Americans will die in an automobile accident.
98 people in will die from the flu.
53 people will kill themselves with a firearm.
46 children will suffer eye injuries.
37 will die from AIDS.
30 people will die in gun-related murders.
18 pilots will report a Laser Incident
3 General Aviation airplanes will crash.
0 people will be seriously injured or killed by a small drone accident.**
The panic, here, is completely out of any sort of proportion to reality.
Small UAVs do not pose any significant risk to anyone. “Dangerous” and “invasion of privacy” concerns are ridiculous, driven by paranoia borne of ignorance. Where’s the blood and mayhem to justify the perception that small personal drones are a threat to public safety?
* I am willing to change my statement if I can receive documentation of any drone – aircraft collision in the form of an accident report or an NTSB summary. But, to date I have not found any such documentation.
** A band-aid is not a serious injury. CFR 49 §830.2 contains the definition of “Serious Injury” that the FAA and NTSB use in their aircraft and vehicle accident statistics. It is important to hold small UAS accidents to the same metric, otherwise comparisons are meaningless.
Really? They were asked to test flying blenders against aircraft wings. That’s what they accomplished. Absence of strikes does not mean they are totally safe. Whover you are you seem to have a vested interest. Your “numbers” prove nothing except that you can use google to make banal statements about people dying
Maybe after someone dies you’ll see that your ranting was self serving. And i do hope that this never happens.
Bruce… you are aware that *nothing* is totally safe. Even getting out of bed in the morning exposes you to risk. You could trip on the carpet and smash your head against a coffee table, dying from the concussion (people have). Aviation itself is never going to be totally safe — all we can hope to do is to manage the risk to an acceptable level?
What is an acceptable level?
We the USA seems happy to suffer 30,000 deaths on the roads and 30,000 deaths by firearm without considering driving or gun ownership to be too “unsafe”.
As Steve says, recreational multirotor drones have proven themselves to be the safest form of aviation *ever*, with not a single death attributable to this activity during the decade or so that it’s been “a thing”. Can you name any other branch of aviation with such an impeccable safety record?
Nice reply
As someone who actually has had a mid-air with a “Drone”, I feel qualified to comment.
In June of this year I had a mid-air with a “Drone” in my C-170B at 120 mph at 1800 ft agl while transitioning Class D airspace while in contact with the tower. We had to replace the wingtip and the out-board 18” of the leading edge skin of the right wing. The spar was not damaged. The NTSB has the damaged parts and are trying to determine the make of the object, which was totally destroyed. To the best of my knowledge the operator of the “Drone” was not injured.
Fortunately the impact was on the wingtip, the windscreen or horizontal stabilizer most likely would have a different outcome.
The airplane was down for about two months for repairs and I got a nice surprise in the form of a “surcharge” on my insurance renewal.
The next one could be fatal, but I am sure the operator of the “Drone” will be not be injured.