Sigh. Anyone else see this headline? Why oh why does the clueless media keep referring to RC vehicles as drones??
http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/...-And-Helicopter-Rattles-Pilots-267400371.html
And this follow up article.
Alleged 'Near-Collision' Between Drone And Helicopter Caught On Video, But Questions Linger
NBC news in South Florida is
reporting what they are describing as a “near-collision” between a drone and a helicopter. The report features an interview with both the pilot of the helicopter and the drone pilot (who also has a commercial pilot’s license). While they refer to the event as a near-collision, the facts end up being far more ambiguous, and the characterization of this as a near-collision takes this story out of the category of straight journalism as the reporters (or editors who chose the headline) are choosing to credit one pilot’s account (the helicopter pilot’s) while disregarding the equally plausible claim of another pilot (the drone operator).
In the story there are very few facts to indicate that the drone and the helicopter nearly collided. In fact, it appears equally likely that the drone pilot upon seeing the helicopter, immediately descended and flew away from the helicopter, and the helicopter pursued the drone. If true that suggests it was the helicopter’s pursuit of the drone that created the hazard. The problem with that narrative of course, is that it doesn’t drive eyeballs — the sizzle sells, and the sizzle news rooms are looking for is “bad drone operator nearly causes deaths.” Forget the fact that by framing the story as they have, NBC portrays the pilot as reckless, he’s just collateral damage in a sensationalist narrative that sells ads.
A drone and a helicopter allegedly came close to colliding in Southern Florida. This photo depicts a common drone known as a DJI Phantom, it weighs approximately 2.2 pounds and is approximately 16 inches in diameter.
The report describes the helicopter pilot’s concerns that the drone and helicopter “were on a collision course.” The pilot states that the drone “went right underneath us” but he does not describe the distance or altitude of either the drone or the helicopter. The drone operator claims to have done his best to “keep his unmanned aircraft out of the helicopter’s flight path” but the helicopter “followed his drone.” The drone pilot said “My objective was to yield the right of way to him as a full sized aircraft and to get back on the ground as quickly and safely as possible. He made that difficult I would say.”
Notably, what the NBC report left out of the story is the fact that the helicopter pilot runs a company that does aerial photography and video from helicopters — the exact type of company that is threatened by the emergent use of drones for the same task!
The story as summarized above (minus the ominous narration and video editing) doesn’t sound like a near-collision, it sounds like aircraft making efforts to avoid one another, and pilot’s telling different plausible versions of the same experience.
Beware Sensationalized Stories Of Near-Misses And Other Alleged Drone Harms
As this story develops — and likely becomes more sensationalized as cable and national news outlets pick it up — journalists and commentators should heed my caution about
first reports and the perils of drone related journalism. Especially because, as the FAA struggles to regulate these new devices, they will look for reasons to justify one-size fits all regulations. Such regulations are easy to implement, yet do little to address the diversity of drone aircraft (ranging from 1 pound up to 55 pounds) and variety of uses (such as:
precision agriculture, journalism,
utility inspections,
real estate,
oil field inspections, and prevention of
animal abuse at factory farms just to name a few).
Regulators like the FAA want a simple solution, and reports of “near-misses” by
irresponsible users will allow them to cite safety as their reason for grounding most users. But all users are not the same, a realtor’s drone or an agricultural drone or a journalist’s drone (or
Amazon’s drone for that matter) all have incentives to behave responsibly. When journalists chase the click-worthy “near-collision” stories we run the risk of prompting laws and regulations that respond to the sensational stories without giving due regard to responsible and beneficial uses of this new technology.
It is highly likely that these types of reports are only going to increase in the next few months. That’s because the FAA recently
directed Air Traffic Controllers to report any situation including “
any reported or observed unauthorized unmanned aircraft activity or reported or observed unauthorized unmanned aircraft activity or remote controlled model aircraft that deviate from normal practice areas...” A directive like that essentialy asks Air Traffic Controllers to report nearly all reported and observed drone activity.
What that means is that this Miami report (along with others like
this NYPD story from last week) will likely be the first of many reports that variously describe “near-collision” and “reported near collisions.”
This Cleveland report is emblematic of the type of stories that will become increasingly common:
The Federal Aviation Administration is investigating an incident in which a drone aircraft flew within a short distance of a helicopter in the skies near Cleveland. An FAA spokesman says the pilot of a small Schweizer helicopter reported on July 11 that a red quadricopter got within about 50 yards of his craft while flying at 1,700 feet. The FAA only allows Unmanned Aerial Systems to fly to 400 feet. A quadricopter is a drone with four propellers. The incident occurred about 5 miles northeast of Cleveland.
The FAA recently opened for comment
new regulations that seek to place new limits on the use of drones and other model aircraft for recreational purposes. The agency has also been
cracking down on the use of drones for commercial purposes. The information gathering directive issued to Air Traffic Controllers is likely intended to allow the FAA to cite to multiple reports of near misses which will allow them to have a factual basis for implementing regulations that restrict the use of drones.
There’s more to most of these stories than allegations of near-misses. Different players with different agendas are shaping these stories. Journalists want sensationalism, the FAA wants a path to simple regulations, anti-drone activists are looking for any angle they can grasp onto to stifle the use of this technology, and drone users want the freedom to build businesses around these aerial robots. The U.S. is already behind other countries in integrating drones into the national airspace, sensational stories increase the risk that we fall further behind.
