All
← Back to Squawk list
Emirates Airline Airbus A380 hit by drone during approach Nice Airport, France
On 18 August, an Emirates Airlines Airbus A380-800 (registered A6-EOM) that operated flight EK77 between Dubai, United Arab Emirates and Nice, France got hit by a drone. (www-aviation24-be.cdn.ampproject.org) More...
Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Those responsible should be drawn and quartered.
If it was a bird, your wish has already been granted.
As with motor vehicles, aircraft, pedestrians, cyclists etc. Wherever you travel, comply with the rules and regulations and everyone will be safe and happy. Drones are expensive so only a criminal will fly where their drone can collide with an aircraft and be destroyed. They should be hunted down and prosecuted. Drones are regularly attacked and destroyed by birds, what rules do they follow? Perhaps time for the drone manufacturers to build in realistic altitude and location limits of operation for drones. Right now, it's virtually impossible for a drone owner to fly anywhere legally. Nobody banned kids from flying kites in urban areas and required them to undertake expensive courses prior to flying their kite. If the laws are too onerous to comply with, human nature is to just ignore all rules.
"The French investigation board BEA confirmed they were looking into this occurrence, but could not yet confirm if a drone was indeed involved"
If we have to lie in order to keep the all drones are evil narrative going, then so be it.
If we have to lie in order to keep the all drones are evil narrative going, then so be it.
Well the drone pilots have caused problems many times around fires and such. Now we have the FAA regulating the RC Airplane pilots requiring us to get transponders in out airplanes. So get over the fact that drones are evil as they are in stupid peoples hands. I am not saying they were right on this one or not but due to problems with drones, quad copters or ever what those things are called they cause problems people using them at view points along the coast is another problem.
I was being sarcastic.
In fact I agree with you completely and would just add the only thing the FAA is going to accomplish is to drive non-idiots away from a hobby they should be embracing.
In fact I agree with you completely and would just add the only thing the FAA is going to accomplish is to drive non-idiots away from a hobby they should be embracing.
Flying in general is a hobby for most of us, but we have to put up with all sorts of regulations that have evolved from none, when airplanes were in their infancy, to what we have now, and it's not unnecessarily driven people away from becoming pilots. I'm not arguing for or against regulation, but just highlighting that we shouldn't have 'some pilots' regulated and some not.
Well if the cheapest airworthy drone you could buy cost several hundred thousand up front plus 20k per year (or whatever it is) to keep it flying, then you might be right.
I guess that brings the old cost vs safety argument into play which is a really difficult subject.I'm just anticipating 5 years from now when there's hundreds of them all over the place, which I really don't want to be up in the air with.
Actually I was referring to the idea that says the evolution of aviation regulations over the past 100+ years have not discouraged many from becoming pilots, therefore the new remote id rule will not discourage people from flying rc models. I'm pretty sure the main thing preventing people from flying around in their own airplanes is the enormous cost of flying around in their own airplane.
I don't want you to be up in the air with them either... the problem is this rule isn't going to help that.
I don't want you to be up in the air with them either... the problem is this rule isn't going to help that.
