Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,481 posts)
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 03:38 PM Mar 2016

A near miss; what can be done?

New technology, legislation to help unmanned aircraft and commercial jets safely share the sky

LOS ANGELES, 23 March 2016. A Lufthansa Airbus A380 experienced a near miss with an unmanned aerial system (UAS or drone) while approaching LAX, 14 miles east of the airport at an elevation of 5,000 feet. The drone flew 200 feet over the airliner, according to the Federal Aviation Authority.
Intelligent Aerospace's take:
The aviation community and the larger public cannot stand idly by any longer, while some operators of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) show utter disregard for rules and regulations -- and thereby threaten the lives of innocent people and the traveling public. We cannot afford even one accident as a result of a drone interrupting the safe operation of commercial jets. Law enforcement agencies and airports asking the public to comply with keeping airports and flight paths "no fly zones" isn't enough, clearly. Are stiffer penalties needed?

http://www.intelligent-aerospace.com/articles/pt/2016/03/new-technology-legislation-to-help-unmanned-aircraft-and-commercial-jets-safely-share-the-sky.html%20?cmpid=enl_IAS_IntelligentAerospace_2016-03-22&eid=302669424&bid=1352903

Takeoff and landing are the most critical phases of operation for aircraft.

Should airport law enforcement monitor UAV/UAS operation around the airport via RADAR and other systems to catch and punish those endangering the aircraft, the passengers and others?

What penalties should be involved?
5 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
Yes, this is a serious issue for public safety
5 (100%)
No, a federal agency should be responsible
0 (0%)
Other opinion in a reply
0 (0%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll
8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A near miss; what can be done? (Original Post) discntnt_irny_srcsm Mar 2016 OP
There need to be stiff 2naSalit Mar 2016 #1
As far as I'm concerned... discntnt_irny_srcsm Mar 2016 #3
As George Carlin said, that's not a "Near Miss" A HERETIC I AM Mar 2016 #2
Runway incursions discntnt_irny_srcsm Mar 2016 #4
A neighbor told me last week IDemo Mar 2016 #5
Not only hackers but under informed hobbyists discntnt_irny_srcsm Mar 2016 #6
Fun side note: ScreamingMeemie Mar 2016 #7
Ideally... discntnt_irny_srcsm Mar 2016 #8

2naSalit

(86,742 posts)
1. There need to be stiff
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:02 PM
Mar 2016

penalties for not abiding by the laws AND jurisdiction as to whom will be the enforcement agency... should be headed at the federal level and enforcement responsibilities should be universal across all agencies. anything less is inadequate at best and a sham at any level.

A law can't be uniformly in force unless it's federally administered... just look at the recent split decisions made by the SCOTUS which casts the decisions back to lower court districts which means those laws/decisions are not in force universally throughout the nation, only in the circuit court district where the last decision (which was appealed) ends up standing as the law in that district only. The input of the SCOTUS is required to make the ruling universally in force.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,481 posts)
3. As far as I'm concerned...
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 05:00 PM
Mar 2016

...the FAA has guidelines for UAV/UAS operation and the FBI should be pursuing criminals that violate those.

I'm okay with congress passing additional criminal laws and penalties.

A HERETIC I AM

(24,373 posts)
2. As George Carlin said, that's not a "Near Miss"
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 04:09 PM
Mar 2016

It's a "Near Hit"

A crash is a Near Miss!

Should airport law enforcement monitor UAV/UAS operation around the airport via RADAR and other systems to catch and punish those endangering the aircraft, the passengers and others?

Yes, or demand from the manufacturers the frequencies used to control these devices so they can be overridden and forced down, safely, of course

What penalties should be involved?

The same sort of penalties imposed if you drive a car or ride a bicycle onto an active runway.

Even at a small, municipal airport, the FAA doesn't fuck around if you unlawfully and arbitrarily get in the way of aircraft movements.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,481 posts)
4. Runway incursions
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:26 PM
Mar 2016

Most guidance and rules for those problems have the airport police in charge of enforcement.

Because of the hazard to commercial passenger flights and the inherently larger sized aircraft involved, I don't think the airport operators nor the local or county law enforcement can handle the effort. The LAX incident occurred at almost a mile up in the air and 14 miles East. This would be somewhere around the South Gate/Downey area.

The only workable answer I see is a roving federal patrol in line with approach and departure routes. Penalties are fine but new detection and enforcement methods are needed.

The most effective safety system would likely be improvements to TCAS for UAV detection.

IDemo

(16,926 posts)
5. A neighbor told me last week
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:44 PM
Mar 2016

that his drone was equipped with a 'geo-fence' which prevented it from flying in such areas. Maybe they all need to be so equipped if the technology works, not that tireless hackers wouldn't be all over it.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,481 posts)
6. Not only hackers but under informed hobbyists
Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:55 PM
Mar 2016

This was always a potential problem but with drone popularity the hazards are multiplying.

ScreamingMeemie

(68,918 posts)
7. Fun side note:
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 12:01 AM
Mar 2016

For the almost-5 years you have been here, I have read your user name as discount_irony_sarcasm.

discntnt_irny_srcsm

(18,481 posts)
8. Ideally...
Wed Mar 30, 2016, 12:57 AM
Mar 2016

...had the DU2 software accepted that many characters, that would be my user name.

That just goes to prove many letters in English are superfluous.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A near miss; what can be ...