back to article Drone smacks commercial passenger plane in Canada

Canada's transport minster has told drone operators to stay away from airports after a remotely piloted craft bonked a passenger plane during its final approach to Jean Lesage International Airport in Québec City. Minister Marc Garneau hasn't revealed the model of the drone, but we do know that it hit a plane operated by …

Page:

  1. ben kendim

    Why does your desk assume it didn't hit a prop?

    (The drone, I mean, not the desk.)

    So, which craft landed without incident, the drone, the King Air, or both?

    "There's also no news of where the drone struck. As the craft landed without incident, The Register's aviation desk will assume it wasn't chopped up by the plane's propellors with attendant spray of plastic and metal."

    A King Air prop, with a PT6A driving it, could probably shred a DJI and never know it.

    1. Stoneshop

      Re: Why does your desk assume it didn't hit a prop?

      A King Air prop, with a PT6A driving it, could probably shred a DJI and never know it.

      There would definitely be traces. And an aircraft propeller runs at higher RPMs than helicopter rotor blades, so the impact involves a lot more energy.

  2. NXM Silver badge

    Don't mess with the drone

    This guy found out how dangerous drones (or in this case remote controlled helichoppers) are:

    http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/queens/teen-killed-remote-controlled-helicopter-slices-throat-article-1.1447068

    "Freak accident" my bottom. That "elaborate daredevil stunt" was just waiting to go wrong - as many others have pointed out, why raise the risk until its guaranteed to fail? Why not put your hand in the blender to see what'll happen?

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Proof : no harm = no problem

    So after all the paranoia in the headlines, now we know that quadcopters present no danger to aircraft. So evidence and rational argument says we should relax the regulations.

    ... No, we must do the opposite: impose more regulations and crack down harder on otherwise lawful drone users! After all our overlords can't allow the proles technology that might threaten their superiority. It's a good thing most proles don't think laterally and can be easily manipulated into giving up their freedom. Why else would anyone be "stupid" enough to pilot a drone into the flight-path of an aeroplane?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Proof : no harm = no problem

      Proof : no harm = no problem

      So, you are saying that because it thankfully didn't down the plane, it's OK to keep doing it. Now walk outside and cross the street without looking. If you make it to the other end, will you then advocate that everyone should do it because you were lucky enough to survive?

      (if you don't, consider that another important lesson learned).

  4. JaredReabow

    anyone here cares to link me to the evidence that proves this was a drone?

    because right not I see BUPKISS!

    1. werdsmith Silver badge

      3KM from the main runways at Jean-Lesage in any direction are populated areas so all it would take is an appeal for the public in the area to report any likely drone fragments on the ground.

  5. Aitor 1

    No drone

    So there is no proof it was a drone except what the pilot said and we know they have been wrong before.

    I would say "probable drone", but taking action on this seems ridiculous unless proven to be a drone.

  6. Bob Dole (tm)
    Mushroom

    There's an opportunity here

    Anyone that could invent a drone killing gun that fires some type of radio or electrical wave to fry a drones circuitry would make meellions.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: There's an opportunity here

      "

      Anyone that could invent a drone killing gun that fires some type of radio or electrical wave to fry a drones circuitry would make meellions."

      I like it!

      You could fry all the smartphones in the hands of those distracted drivers and pedestrians, and the people who talk loudly on the bus, and who use them to cheat in exams, and students who don't pay attention in class, or shirk their chores, and people who talk in cinemas, or block sidewalks taking 'selfies', and all those noisy bluetooth speakers, and obnoxiously loud car stereos, and connected cars and all those nosey CCTV cameras, and overly flashy advertising screens, and creepy 'smart' speakers, and the neighbour's wifi that cuts your network speed... the applications are endless!

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like