Oregon small aircraft drone strike
- Thread starter Drone_Video
- Start date
well we can rule out that nylon bag that was a drone back a few years ago making huge news...
i am not a proffessional nore a person to judge what was really going on, but the strike on the wing is strange looking to me. if it it would have been a quad there would be only one dent but thatone seemed to have hit the outer wing tip and the rolled in to hit it again so i would say it had to be bigger than a quad. i am not saying it was not a drone or UAV but would also really stress that there should be dashcams on the manned aircrafts.
i am not a proffessional nore a person to judge what was really going on, but the strike on the wing is strange looking to me. if it it would have been a quad there would be only one dent but thatone seemed to have hit the outer wing tip and the rolled in to hit it again so i would say it had to be bigger than a quad. i am not saying it was not a drone or UAV but would also really stress that there should be dashcams on the manned aircrafts.
Last edited:
Proof required, never seen footage or broken drone yet despite all these claims world wide.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2013
- Messages
- 10,825
- Reaction score
- 5,701
Agreed.
Exactly the same as the Gatwick fiasco.
Thousands of people at the airport with cameras on their phones.
Journalists and paparazzi resident at airport with very fast cameras and excellent lenses and used to shooting high speed events such as sports.
Sky, BBC and ITV News OB trucks with ENG cameras and lenses trained to the sky.
Military and police in attendance with their fancy pants overpriced drone detection kits.
Allegedly, DJI's over marketed Aeroscope was operating (as per Gatwicks CEO statement) and yet picked up and recorded/logged nothing.
Disruption over days, not hours
And yet.......
Not one single photograph of the alleged UAV/drone!
Looking at the damage to his plane, that would have to be a very large drone with a 5-6 foot wing span, the tip of the wing had Hit right on the center of the wing caving a round dent, that doesn’t explain the larger vertical dent to the right of the wing...how he said he saw a quadcopter? Pilots are looking forward, not looking at their wing tips, and the normal reaction would be to move, especially if he saw it...he hit something, that’s clear, but for him to know it was a quadcopter? Ok....
Drones are a thing to blame for insurance claims....no proof needed.
Drones are a thing to blame for insurance claims....no proof needed.
The drone this Cessna 170 struck could have been a P4. The distance between the two dents is about 10 inches. The landing gear or the motors could have made contact. It was not a very large drone. A bird strike usually makes one dent and leaves blood and feathers.
I have had two bird strikes in my flying career. The first was a goose vs. Cherokee 140 wing (just below the leading edge) at about 80 knots. Big dent, no blood or feathers. The second was a red shoulder hawk vs. F-35 Bonanza (struck landing gear door) at about 70 knots climbing out on take off. I knew it was a red shoulder hawk because the carcass (blood, guts feathers etc) were all over the gear door and the head, neck and shoulder ended up in the gear compartment.
I believe like others here that this guy's damage was not drone related.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2015
- Messages
- 1,903
- Reaction score
- 799
- Location
- CASA GRANDE, AZ
- Website
- www.martinezaerial.com
Location? Altitude? I call BS on you Mr. Weir. How high were you? Doing a little hedge hopping perhaps?
It could have been a bird or a drone strike. Based on the dents, I am guessing small drone. More info about the altitude and location would be helpful, but then the news story may not spin as desired. The pilot alluded to a quadcopter, but he did not say whether he saw it, or just made the assumption. If it were a drone, it is possible neither pilot was violating rules. Attached photos show the dent from my strike of a very large seagull at about 120 mph. The feathers are the gull's wingtip.
Attachments
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2015
- Messages
- 1,903
- Reaction score
- 799
- Location
- CASA GRANDE, AZ
- Website
- www.martinezaerial.com
Nothing but lies. They would have found the drone so it's just another bunch of bull .they are trying to stop us and try to have drones band. He was flying a piece of paper and if it was a drone it would have probably caused a lot of damage. I feel like I'm watching CNN.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2015
- Messages
- 1,903
- Reaction score
- 799
- Location
- CASA GRANDE, AZ
- Website
- www.martinezaerial.com
I have thought about this a bit and have a hard time reconciling the Dayton research video damage video with this one. I understand the speed differences and wing design etc.
But if this was a drone strike there should be more damage based on what we seen in the research video. Or way less damage should have been shown in the research video.
I feel this disconnect is too large to over come and one one of these two videos feels overstated.
Anyone else feel this way, or what am I missing between these two videos ?
But if this was a drone strike there should be more damage based on what we seen in the research video. Or way less damage should have been shown in the research video.
I feel this disconnect is too large to over come and one one of these two videos feels overstated.
Anyone else feel this way, or what am I missing between these two videos ?
I agree with you 1 hundred percent. It doesn't look like a drone strike it looks like what ever he hit had to have been a bird the material was still on the plane and it looks like some kind of white liquid form a drone would not have any liquid so it's just a lies.
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2015
- Messages
- 1,903
- Reaction score
- 799
- Location
- CASA GRANDE, AZ
- Website
- www.martinezaerial.com
Carl Sagan said it best- Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Me thinks this character is trying a bit to hard to be the "first pilot with a confirmed drone strike ."
After the Reporter says “FAA Regulations prohibit drones from flying within 5miles of airports” I couldn’t watch anymore ?
... start getting the basic facts correct! Another media circus act
... start getting the basic facts correct! Another media circus actThis guy is a Compulsive liar and if it was a drone witch we know it's a lies the air craft landed with no problems at all. He should be worried about a bird strikes. Their has not been a drone in the 10 years that has taken down an air craft but their's a lot of bird strikes that have. This guy just wants to be famous And that's all that's to it.
AGL please? Seeing a drone is not a violation. Send a reporter that knows something about aviation to ask the questions.
I think drones have hurt his photo business. Follow the money.
Similar threads
