
UK Airprox board says police drone and jet had 'near-miss' - jaytaylor
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-44286754
======
sgentle
Worth reading the report itself, linked from the article:
[https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/uploadedFiles/Content/Standa...](https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/uploadedFiles/Content/Standard_content/Airprox_report_files/2018/New_Assessed_Folder/Airprox%20Report%202018011.pdf)

It's only 4 pages, and explains the situation fairly clearly. Choice quotes:

    
    
        The Airprox occurred on the northern edge of Dartmoor
        some distance from any notable habitation and therefore
        in an area where military aircraft can operate to their 
        minimums. Both the drone operator and the F-15E pilot
        were operating within their regulations which, in the
        case of the F-15E, was not below 500ft agl.
        Nevertheless, it is of note that within the UKLFS RAF 
        fast-jets can use a minimum of 250ft MSD
    
        although the drone operator perceived that the F15s
        were extremely close to his drone, in actuality they 
        appeared to have had sufficient separation
    
        after discussion about the likely separation between
        the two air systems, it was agreed that the
        circumstances were probably best described as a
        sighting report, with the risk assessed as Category E, 
        normal safety standards and procedures had pertained. 
        Nevertheless, the Board agreed that the drone operator
        had been right to raise a report with his concerns and 
        thanked him for doing so because it had provided useful
        discussion points about the integration of drones and 
        military fast-jets.
    

To be clear, nowhere in the report does it say "near-miss", or that the risk
was "high" (these were the words of the drone operator, not the board). A high
risk would correspond to a Category A assessment, which is basically the
opposite of what happened.

Edit: Also, "no blame nor any lessons to be learned" is a curious
characterisation given that the military flight was booked through CADS, the
Centralised Aviation Data Service, which is mandatory for low altitude
military flights but not currently used by police drone units. There was
substantial discussion about the police checking CADS in future or booking
their operations through CADS. The military are also considering integrating
the existing Drone Assist location sharing system into a future unified CADS
replacement.

------
hexscrews
Literally 30 seconds of searching brought up a IFF transponder that would add
100 g (3.53 oz). Why isn't a state owned drone not equipped as such? (XPC-TR
Mode C Transponder)

~~~
PeterisP
100g is _a lot_ for the type of drones used there, it's comparable to their
whole battery pack weight. Also, the power draw of such a transponder is
likely to be significant.

~~~
jsjohnst
Sorry, but unless it’s a toy drone, the battery weighs a lot more than 100g. I
own almost 20 drones and I think only the Tello batteries clock in at that
range in weight and it’s useless imho to a police department. My Phantom
(nearly 500g battery) / Inspire (515g) / Mavic (~250g) batteries are all way
heavier than 100g and the batteries I use for my S1000 are over 2,000g. That
said, 100g additional payload is significant for everything but my S1000, but
I had to correct the statement re: batteries.

As to transponder power usage, it would be very negligible compared to the
power draw of the ESC/motors.

------
pjc50
This led me to an internet research rabbit hole, via
[http://www.ukserials.com/](http://www.ukserials.com/) to the crash report
(years ago) of
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/8587389...](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/8587389.stm)

It drove home that the aircraft doing low-level flights have very little
manuverability option when flying at 400kts (~200 meters per second). Dodging
a drone would be infeasible even if you could see where it was. Transponders
with LOS limitation might be of limited use given that the terrain is
extremely hilly and the aircraft could come round a corner in the valleys or
over a ridge.

It's also a major tourist area, just the sort of place that people might want
to send up a photography drone...

~~~
omegant
It's not only limited manuverability, is the time window to see something that
small and react at that speed. In an airliner at 180kts is like 5-7 seconds,
you see a bird, confirm that is in a collision path and you correct you
trajectory. At 400kts it's maybe 2-3 seconds to do all that.

You need to be looking forward to have time enough, but you need to look
elsewhere sometimes(instruments, to the sides, etc..). So it's possible to
crash with something you didn't see comming if it's small.

------
kiallmacinnes
No error, and no lessons to be learned?

If the drone pilot believed a crash was imminent, and the F15 pilot was
oblivious, I'd be concerned. It could have been a lot worse.

~~~
tempodox
That's what baffles me, too. “No lessons to be learned” sounds like they leave
it to chance when an actual crash will occur.

~~~
evgen
There is no error nor a lesson to be learned because in the estimation of the
board this was not a "near miss" and the drone operator was in error in making
this assessment.

~~~
peteretep
I don't think that's right -- they got lucky that it was a near miss. The
aircraft could well have been lower -- there's overlap in the operating ranges
of the aircraft in this area, and of drones.

------
chx
May I grab this no particular occasion and ask English speakers: is this
natural to you? A near miss? I mean, a near miss is something I would expect
from sports where a shooter nearly misses the target but manages to hit it but
barely. How is an avoided collision a near miss...? Close call, close to a
collision, but a near miss?

~~~
swampangel
I think this expression would be familiar to most native English speakers, but
it is idiomatic.

It's using "near" as a synonym to "close" \-- as in "a close shave" (actually
close) rather than as a synonym for "close to" as it is in the expression
"near death" (almost, but not quite dead).

The second sense is definitely more common.

This post suggests "near miss" became common as a military phrase to mean
"missed, but still damaged the target" but changed as it entered the
vernacular:

[http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-
nea1.htm](http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-nea1.htm)

------
cstross
Who was operating the F-15E? USAF?

(The RAF doesn't have any F-15s, but routinely hosts visiting aircraft from
other NATO air forces. One wonders if differing operational standards played a
role in this airprox -- or if politics played a role in the incident being
downplayed.)

~~~
mbrameld
Didn't the article address that?

~~~
cstross
Not the BBC report. Nor the quoted excerpt from the airprox board on HN.

------
tempay
Does anyone have any information on how bad it would have been if the crash
had actually happened?

~~~
ricardobeat
This drone is on the heavy side at 6kg, could be ugly if it’s sucked by the
engine intake or hits a wingtip (as happened recently to a commercial flight).

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
While I don't disagree an F-15 hitting a 6kg multirotor could be
catastrophic...

There's at least one incident of an F-15 and a Douglas A-4 colliding, A-4
fireballed on impact and the F-15 flew home and landed.

On one wing.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M359poNjvVA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M359poNjvVA)

------
jaytaylor
I didn't know jets were allowed to fly at less than 400 ft over populated
areas.

~~~
pjc50
It's Devon, it's not very dense. The UK has some areas used for low level fast
jet training where people get Tornadoes over their house every week. It's
practically a tourist attraction. E.g.
[https://machloop.co.uk/](https://machloop.co.uk/)

~~~
TrickyRick
Similar to the Jedi Transtion in the US I guess.
[https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-jedi-transition-a-
cany...](https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-jedi-transition-a-canyon-that-
fighter-pilots-love-1678453195)

------
ed_blackburn
I grew up near the area - well 50miles west of. North Dartmoor is used
extensively by the forces for training and low flying jets are not uncommon.
'Tis a beautiful place to visit too!

------
sjtgraham
Who was piloting the airplane, it's a US aircraft? AFAIK the RAF itself
doesn't operate F15 aircraft. Could it have been USAF 48th fighter wing out of
RAF Lakenheath?

------
tobyhinloopen
A near-miss? Shouldn’t it be a near-hit? Since it didn’t hit?

~~~
TrickyRick
It was a miss but it was nearly a hit I think is the rationale behind the
term.

------
vorticalbox
Article states the jets were flying at 500 ft and the drone at 300, I doubt
the jets lost 200 ft just by banking.

~~~
jsjohnst
You’d be surprised. Jets bleed a lot of altitude in a bank unless it’s
compensated for.

That said, I find it _highly_ suspect that a jet is banking at 500ft altitude
in the first place, unless it’s at an air show. It’s highly dangerous doing
maneuvers like that at that altitude.

------
jacquesm
Wow. An actual 'cops eye'. RAH predicted them decades ago.

------
retrac98
We have police drones now?

~~~
jstanley
Since July last year, it seems:

[http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-
devon-40595540](http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-40595540)

~~~
misnome
That’s a unit dedicated to Drones that’s new. Police using drones have been
around for almost a decade, at least (I first saw one being used to surveil
Stonehenge visitors around 2009)

~~~
isfield
Yup. A common sight at music festivals and the like now, too.

------
garyfirestorm
Putting lives at risk doesn't carry sentence anymore?

~~~
TheRealPomax
Not if there is a 200 foot distance, and the situation was deemed safe. If
actual lives _had_ been at risk, this report would read rather differently.
The drone operator had a little panic. That's not a lesson anyone can do
anything with.

