Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

Polish Air Force F-16 jet collided with drone

Discussion in 'News' started by wali, Oct 7, 2015.

  1. wali

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2015
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    5
  2. bbfpv

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2015
    Messages:
    3,751
    Likes Received:
    1,093
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    and the jet didn't fall out of the sky. shocker.
     
    Evel_Knievel likes this.
  3. Meta4

    Meta4 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2014
    Messages:
    7,771
    Likes Received:
    3,479
    Next to no details given.
    The official version of the incident, given by major Dariusz Rojewski of the Krzesiny AB, is that the jet collided with an unknown aerial vehicle; damage assessment highlighted that the overlay of the Viper‘s fuselage and fuel tank (probably the CFT) were damaged. The Air Force refused to provide any further information.
    So they've got some damaged paintwork but nothing in the story to say what they hit or where it was when hit.
    I'd like to have a lot more to go on than that.
     
  4. nickyb

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2015
    Messages:
    391
    Likes Received:
    97
    Location:
    Northern Hemisphere
    If it had been the DJI Matrice it would have avoided the F16 with collision detection :D
     
  5. B- Scene Films

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2015
    Messages:
    305
    Likes Received:
    112
    They offer no evidence that it was even a drone...
     
  6. nickyb

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2015
    Messages:
    391
    Likes Received:
    97
    Location:
    Northern Hemisphere
    ..thinking about it, the same thing happens' with bird strikes. But, no, not a sensational as a 'drone'!
     
  7. Jeff48920

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2014
    Messages:
    1,017
    Likes Received:
    502
    Location:
    Pomona, IL
    It had to be a drone. How else could they justify the bans?
     
  8. N017RW

    Joined:
    May 2, 2014
    Messages:
    6,257
    Likes Received:
    1,619
    Location:
    Palm Beach Co.- FL
    It's kind of disaapointing that so many [here] have lost their objectivity.

    It's easy to determine if it was tissue or other material that collided with the a/c.
    Aviation mechanics have the experience to determine, or at least rule-out, what the type of material it was that came into contact with the a/c.

    Because you're drone enthusiasts you ridicule reports and dismiss the possibility and the dangers???

    As the number of UAS in the hands of [ignorant] people and in the sky increase, so do the chances of collisions.

    Bird strikes MAY be unavoidable, civilian UAS (drone) strikes definately are.
     
    #8 N017RW, Oct 7, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2015
    WeeMrP, dirkclod, GoodnNuff and 2 others like this.
  9. BigAl07

    BigAl07 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2015
    Messages:
    2,362
    Likes Received:
    1,268
    Location:
    Western North Carolina
    I have to totally agree with N017RW It could've been a multirotor, goose, or even an alien. Right now anything is completely possible and with the mind boggling # of UAV going up in the air every day by mindless "operators" it is only a matter of time.
     
    GoodnNuff likes this.
  10. B- Scene Films

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2015
    Messages:
    305
    Likes Received:
    112
    You're right. We should accept any and all media reporting about drone operator misbehavior as fact and never question anything.
     
  11. shipdriver

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2015
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    50
    Location:
    Bothell, Washington, USA
    This is the third case this year that I've seen of a suspected UAV collision with an airplane and about the same level of (sarcasm here) "catastrophic" damage, despite the fact that a jet fighter is always flying quite fast. It lands faster than most GA aircraft cruise. I have to say that this report is a little odd in that it was discovered by ground crews inspecting the aircraft: "The mid-air impact, whose evidence was discovered by ground crews during the post-flight checks..." The pilot didn't report anything?

    In most risk assessment methods, probability and severity are factored in along with mitigating measures. The actual severity of drone collisions seems to be getting less and less with each report/data point (if they are indeed UAV collisions).
     
  12. N017RW

    Joined:
    May 2, 2014
    Messages:
    6,257
    Likes Received:
    1,619
    Location:
    Palm Beach Co.- FL

    You telling me I'm right is worrisome.

    I said the loss of objectivity is disappointing.

    To avoid the risk of misinterpretation again, here's what I was referring to:
    Objective: existing independent of mind; belonging to the sensible world and being observable or verifiable especially by scientific methods; expressing or involving the use of facts; derived from sense perception.

    You previously said: "They offer no evidence that it was even a drone..."

    You're right.

    Being objective one would surmise they (maintenance personnel) are very familiar with damage created by organic materials such as birds since we know they collide with aircraft quite regularly (Mr. Steve Mann can provide you the historical statistics about that) and that what they discovered was inconsistent with damage caused by tissue or organic materials.

    This does not determine it was a drone per se but what else would be in the air of a non-organic nature?
    Meteor, falling space junk, kite, balloon, model aircraft, etc..... again, be Objective.
     
    #12 N017RW, Oct 8, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2015
    spaceharrier and GoodnNuff like this.
  13. B- Scene Films

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2015
    Messages:
    305
    Likes Received:
    112
    Thank you for your edict.

    So, based on what you are saying, we should just accept vague statements such as these:

    "According to the reports published by several Polish media outlets, on Sept. 15 a Polish Air Force F-16 fighter stationed at Krzesiny Airbase, near Poznan, collided with a small drone."

    as fact...

    Please note that no sources are cited other than "According to the reports published by several Polish media outlets". For all I know, a Polish media outlet is a guy living in his mother's basement blogging about the evils of drones.

    There is nothing in that article that inspires confidence in the reporting. The story could be spot on. It could be a pack of lies. I have no way of knowing and these journalists do not even cite a credible source.

    So, you have my perspective. I will be interested to understand what part of my posting is subjective in your opinion.
     
    #13 B- Scene Films, Oct 8, 2015
    Last edited: Oct 8, 2015
  14. N017RW

    Joined:
    May 2, 2014
    Messages:
    6,257
    Likes Received:
    1,619
    Location:
    Palm Beach Co.- FL


    "For all I know, a Polish media outlet is a guy living in his mother's basement blogging about the evils of drones."

    How does thus exemplify objectivity?

    Your position would seem to be there a bias on this 'guy's' part.
    To use your words in-part: "There is nothing in that article that" suggests this.

    But hey I'm more of a skeptical and tech-y kind a guy so this is no fun for me and I'm not good at it.

    It was a fun exchange.

    Please don't interpret this as 'taking my ball and going home', it's just run it's course for me.

    Cheers!
     
    GoodnNuff and BigAl07 like this.
  15. B- Scene Films

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2015
    Messages:
    305
    Likes Received:
    112
    It's a supposition. Kind of like what you are doing with the ground crew's abilities.

    I enjoy a good debate. I enjoy have my perspective altered. Sorry you are going :(
     
  16. davis

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    28
    Location:
    SoCal
    debating aside, we should take the opportunity to read and get as much information about these collisions and educate non-drone owners (and owners) about responsibility and state that many of these stories have important information missing.
     
    GoodnNuff, N017RW and B- Scene Films like this.
  17. vgt

    vgt

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    72
    Bird strikes have taken down aircraft. They usually don't, because most aircraft have multiple engines. See Captain Sully for what happens when both engines ingest a bird. A single bird into a single jet engine aircraft could take it down. Smashing into the wing, windshield, etc? Not so much.

    Insert drone into that sentence, and you can expect similar results.
     
    BigAl07 and N017RW like this.
  18. JKDSensei

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,511
    Likes Received:
    658
    Location:
    USA
    I do too. But some can't handle when others have opposing valid points of their own.
    Don't be sorry. If he doesn't agree with you or you disagree with his perspectives, he tends to put you on his ignore list. We all can be wrong....which is why my ignore list is and will remain empty. Keeping an open mind is important to the learning process.

    Thanks for your opposing viewpoints B. Scene Films.
     
  19. GoodnNuff

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2013
    Messages:
    1,909
    Likes Received:
    831
    Location:
    Washington State
    If YOU see that as your only option, please follow it.

    For the rest of us, I say keep an open mind. As has been said above, with the increase in drones and a huge expected in increase this holiday season, logic tells us it is only a matter of time.

    Regardless of what was hit, none of us should be flying stupid, nor should we immediately dismiss every report making the news, anymore than we should take each report as fact.
     
    dirkclod and B- Scene Films like this.
  20. B- Scene Films

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2015
    Messages:
    305
    Likes Received:
    112
    I am guessing my tone did not convey my intent for you. This should do it tho:

    sar·casm
    ˈsärˌkazəm/
    noun
    1. the use of irony to mock or convey contempt.