The Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has lifted controls on the use of drones. The new rules are designed to reduce costs and reduce red tape around Australia's operating drones, but many pilots and air traffic controllers worry that these loose regulations could lead to catastrophic air collisions.
These changes took effect in October, including the cancellation of the $1,400 fee charged to commercial drone operators and allowing landowners to operate unmanned vehicles weighing up to 25 kilograms on their property without a permit. aircraft. Joseph Wheeler, a special aviation consultant at Maurice Blackburn Lawyers, said deregulation would greatly increase the risk of drone crashes.
CASA admits that it does not “let people go there to find drones.” A spokesperson said that CASA had no resources at all to investigate unlawful pilots. But experts warn that the use of drones in Australia has become more dangerous, and amateur pilots do not know or ignore existing laws.
This is an intersection where the pilot of the aircraft is worried about the worst outcome.
There is no research on the impact of drones.
Proponents of drones believe that there is a lot of information and research on the impact of bird-to-aircraft collisions, and we should be able to reasonably assume that a drone of the same size as a bird does not pose a greater threat, but This reasoning is true. Do not consider mitigating factors or criminal intent.
Steven Landells, the flight safety expert at the British Airways Pilots Association, said: "There are many scenarios that are currently studying the severity of these effects. The extent of the damage depends on factors such as size, the direction of travel and drone speed and collision location." He said that despite a large amount of data on the impact of bird attacks, specific drone research is needed because "there is no large lithium battery in the birds."
Randalls did say that we have a little understanding of the drone strike. He said, "If one of the engines goes out, it will stop the engine. There is no doubt about this. As drones get bigger and bigger, they are more capable, and if there is an air collision, the potential is even greater."
David Booth, chairman of the Australian Aviation Pilots Federation, said that if the tail rotor of a helicopter hits the engine of an aircraft, the drone can cause a lot of damage. “Birds are very soft, they can damage the engine, but the use of drones can cause impact fires, and they will be reinforced by Kevlar composites. 250 km/h or 400 km/h – this effect is very Big energy," he said.
UAV attacks are no longer in the theoretical arena.
In April, it finally happened - a drone collided with a plane that landed at Heathrow Airport in London, England. The aircraft carried 132 passengers and five crew members when the pilot reported that the aircraft was hit by “no characters” shortly before landing on the apron.
Fortunately, the plane landed safely and was later ready for the next flight, but the impact with the drone could be as catastrophic as an engine failure or broken cockpit windshield.
This year, the Daily Telegraph reported that the number of close collisions between aircraft and drones quadrupled in just one year. The Federal Aviation Administration records more than 100 reports of drone errors every month. People saw a drone flying over Los Angeles airport at a distance of 8,000 feet, 7,000 feet above the current allowable drone and climbing the cruising altitude of commercial aircraft. At the Istanbul Airport, the fifth busiest airport in the world, there is a claim that drones are found to have a geofence area - which means that one should protect it from drone entry. Even the White House - another no-flyer no-fly zone - has let drones land on the lawn.
The drone incident at the airport is not limited to the United Kingdom and the United States. According to reports, a drone is within 50 meters of a rescue helicopter on the Australian Gold Coast. In France, while an Airbus landed at Charles de Gaulle Airport in the same month, when a drone landed at Heathrow Airport, it just barely avoided hitting a drone. The pilot was disengaged from the autopilot and evaded, allowing the drone to pass 5 m below the wing.
This is the first incident in its class, but it seems unlikely that it is the last. Only time will tell if the law can catch up with the reality of a world full of drones. When we see the real threat to the sky in the drone, we need to use Handhold UVA Control Equipment to correspond to the threat of drones.