Not what we need in the news



SamaraMedia

SamaraMedia

Active Member
That sucker had to be really high up have crashed through tiled roof, lucky the batteries didn't catch on fire looking at their condition. Somebody was real stupid and reckless on that flight.
 

Noah410

Noah410

Member
This is exactly why emergency parachute recovery systems should be mandatory, or at least a strongly encouraged practice. I just wish that companies would make systems for multirotors other than dji s800, s900, and s1000s. That article is an example to how dangerous even the smaller multirotors can be when they're falling from 300 or so feet. I'm planning on making a system for the Sky Hero Spy, so I'll make a build log of that when I get around to it.
 

R

R_Lefebvre

Arducopter Developer
Saw this elsewhere. Does it seem a bit implausible to anybody else? Really, breaking through a roof? The terminal velocity on a hex is not that high, maybe 100mph. How is it even possible the batteries did not ignite? There doesn't appear to be even remotely enough damage to the frame to account for having smashed through a roof. There's no dust on it or anything.
 


R

Ronan

Member
Noah410 said:
This is exactly why emergency parachute recovery systems should be mandatory, or at least a strongly encouraged practice. I just wish that companies would make systems for multirotors other than dji s800, s900, and s1000s. That article is an example to how dangerous even the smaller multirotors can be when they're falling from 300 or so feet. I'm planning on making a system for the Sky Hero Spy, so I'll make a build log of that when I get around to it.
Click to expand...

I think you need to do more research before making a statement like that.
Most users do not use parachutes because they don't work that well for multirotors, also they are heavy and cumbersome, the amount of drag they introduce in their folded position on top of the multirotor is ridiculous and dangerous.
If you want to carry one, go for it. They are not and should not be mandatory, unless r/c helicopters will have to carry them too.

R_Lefebvre said:
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/25569788/drone-crashes-into-perth-house/

Look at the hole they are suggesting that drone fell through. Impossible. Something is not right about all this.
Click to expand...

If that is a real photo then it's amazing those people took the time to clean the multirotor, not a single trace of debris or drywall on it!
drone_1a6r04o-1a6r04s.jpg
 

Bartman

Bartman

Welcome to MultiRotorForums.com!!
R_Lefebvre said:
Saw this elsewhere. Does it seem a bit implausible to anybody else? Really, breaking through a roof? The terminal velocity on a hex is not that high, maybe 100mph. How is it even possible the batteries did not ignite? There doesn't appear to be even remotely enough damage to the frame to account for having smashed through a roof. There's no dust on it or anything.
Click to expand...


I agree with you 100%, doesn't seem plausible at all. I'd expect that thing to be a pile of dust and magnets if it had penetrated a tile roof and the interior drywall.

And it's perfectly clean, go figure.
 

kloner

kloner

Aerial DP
Wonder who's behind all these weird reports..... certainly feels like an attack and not very well played out
 

dazzab

dazzab

Member
Noah410 said:
This is exactly why emergency parachute recovery systems should be mandatory, or at least a strongly encouraged practice. I just wish that companies would make systems for multirotors other than dji s800, s900, and s1000s. That article is an example to how dangerous even the smaller multirotors can be when they're falling from 300 or so feet. I'm planning on making a system for the Sky Hero Spy, so I'll make a build log of that when I get around to it.
Click to expand...
I agree. I've been looking at placing two MARS 58 chutes on my SkyJib. But I really don't know how I would trigger them. It seems to me that the system to control the cutes in an emergency needs to be totally independent of all the normal flight systems. In that case you can't do it with the flight controller or through extra channels on your Tx. The missing ingredient is a separate control system and the ability to kill the power on the copter at the same time so the props aren't spinning.

A friend of mine told me that he has a kill switch on his DJI1000 that is separate and wired in to the power distribution board as a safety device. I'll have to catch up with him and see how he did that as wiring that up to the release for the MARS chute sounds like a great idea to me. BTW, I've been told that in France chutes are required and I have no doubt that other countries will follow.
 

dazzab

dazzab

Member
R_Lefebvre said:
Saw this elsewhere. Does it seem a bit implausible to anybody else? Really, breaking through a roof? The terminal velocity on a hex is not that high, maybe 100mph. How is it even possible the batteries did not ignite? There doesn't appear to be even remotely enough damage to the frame to account for having smashed through a roof. There's no dust on it or anything.
Click to expand...
+1. Something is certainly not right with this report. Very suspicious indeed.
 

R

Ronan

Member
dazzab said:
I agree. I've been looking at placing two MARS 58 chutes on my SkyJib. But I really don't know how I would trigger them. It seems to me that the system to control the cutes in an emergency needs to be totally independent of all the normal flight systems. In that case you can't do it with the flight controller or through extra channels on your Tx. The missing ingredient is a separate control system and the ability to kill the power on the copter at the same time so the props aren't spinning.

A friend of mine told me that he has a kill switch on his DJI1000 that is separate and wired in to the power distribution board as a safety device. I'll have to catch up with him and see how he did that as wiring that up to the release for the MARS chute sounds like a great idea to me. BTW, I've been told that in France chutes are required and I have no doubt that other countries will follow.
Click to expand...

Yes, for 150kg multirotors... The sub 25kg do not need one.
 

Noah410

Noah410

Member
Ronan said:
I think you need to do more research before making a statement like that.
Most users do not use parachutes because they don't work that well for multirotors, also they are heavy and cumbersome, the amount of drag they introduce in their folded position on top of the multirotor is ridiculous and dangerous.
If you want to carry one, go for it. They are not and should not be mandatory, unless r/c helicopters will have to carry them too.
Click to expand...

I agree. Parachute systems are EXTREMELY heavy and create a ton of drag. I use them only because of insurance and liability purposes. The one I'm planning on making will solve the drag issue, and also the weight concern too. I also would like to agree that I was wrong for even considering making them mandatory. When I said that I was thinking about how it was mandatory for me with insurance, so I guess that if you want to get insured, then you should have one. Because mandatory parachutes are just one more law that us pilots don't particularly want to deal with.
 

D

deluge2

Member
Yes, neither news account is believable. Even *if* someone is intentionally misleading the media, one wishes these 'professional' journalists had more than two neurons to rub together when putting together their news accounts. Or should I say news stories. One account says the drone was above the ceiling, whatever that means. The other says it fell through onto the floor.

I wonder if we'll ever learn what, if anything, actually happened...

Steve


R_Lefebvre said:
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/25569788/drone-crashes-into-perth-house/

Look at the hole they are suggesting that drone fell through. Impossible. Something is not right about all this.
Click to expand...
 

R

Ronan

Member
If you are able to make a lightweight system that also takes care of the drag issue, I'll be one of your first customers in a heartbeat.

Noah410 said:
I agree. Parachute systems are EXTREMELY heavy and create a ton of drag. I use them only because of insurance and liability purposes. The one I'm planning on making will solve the drag issue, and also the weight concern too. I also would like to agree that I was wrong for even considering making them mandatory. When I said that I was thinking about how it was mandatory for me with insurance, so I guess that if you want to get insured, then you should have one. Because mandatory parachutes are just one more law that us pilots don't particularly want to deal with.
Click to expand...
 

Noah410

Noah410

Member
Ronan said:
If you are able to make a lightweight system that also takes care of the drag issue, I'll be one of your first customers in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

Okay, well I have a few projects that are in line before I get to making a system like that (like a triple screen mission planner based groundstation). I expect to get the ground station done and possibly brought to market by March, so I'l be working on the parachute system shortly after then.
 


S

sk8brd

Member
something seems off with all these reports lately tbh.. ..starting with that verge article about the phantom flyer and then the 2 reports i heard today on nbc then this...prolly heard of 3 reports since forever most were special reports like amazon, etc. then in past couple days several reports -all negative
 
Last edited by a moderator:

dazzab

dazzab

Member
Noah410 said:
I agree. Parachute systems are EXTREMELY heavy and create a ton of drag.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call 300gms heavy. Two Mars 54s would be around 600gm. Even the Mars 120 is less than a kilo. Drag? I laugh when I hear people talk about multirotors and aerodynamics. There is absolutely nothing aerodynamic about a multirotor.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.
Top