This is the result when a quadcopter strikes the wing of an aircraft

While goose hunting last year, we were continuosly buzzed by a drone. We were on the perimeter fence to the local airport and the drone was definitley entering the airport airspace. When the opportunity presented itself, we blew it out of the air. Talked to the airport manager about this and he thanked us. Apparently some asshole kept flying it into the tarmac area and twice they had to call off approaching aircraft.

Wow, someone removed a bunch of posts and replies.

Was the test done in a wind tunnel, putting the wing under flight load stresses? It doesn't look like it, this doesn't give a really accurate result as we don't know if the wing could have catastrophically failed definitively.

I think this is a good topic to do just type of research into. I would think that most drone interaction zones are going to be in the 200 kias speed restricted ranges. (Beneath Class B, in Classes C,D,E,G etc) So, in this case, 238mph would be just over max speed one should 'reasonably' see.

In the case of the Mooney M20 test aircraft, this test was faster than vne. (A condition it is clearly not designed for: https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=36780 ) Likewise,from the video they were aiming mid-spar, thus an open cavity with thin protection. My point being, this text exceeded the design specification for the Mooney's wing, and the investigators should address that in their report. (The reason they chose that speed, that location on the wing, and what they determined. For example, it still looked flyable ---that Mooney that is.)

The common buzzard (a more probable hazard around here) can easily weigh twice the Phantom. I've come close to hitting a buzzard a few times (once glancing off the external wing spar), but never felt 'click-bait' unsafe. More testing is needed, but I wish the 'news' would stop it with these click-bait 'reports.' The researchers can be just a guilty by showing the glamour moments without making the reporter listen to all the science, rational, and limits behind the tests.

The public does need education on their role in the National Airspace System. Hopefully this can be done with just education and without much knew-jerk regulations. So, like everything, this is a mixed bag. Just the type of video that low information voters crave right now. It will be echoed when this video is picked up by the likes of other non-traditional media.

I get that this is an alarmist article and that the test parameters are highly unlikely, but I do find it surprising that there is very little info out there on the actual damage potential a drone strike could cause. As David McKie pointed out, there are plenty of idiots out there who are more than willing to fly a drone in restricted airspace - whether willfully or by ignorance. And as noted, with drones becoming less expensive and more popular, the likely hood of strikes becoming more frequent is rather high.

Pilots bear some responsibility too. See first page article from RI Pilots Association Newsletter this month.

http://ripilots.com/PDFsTemp/planepaper1018.pdf

I was thinking about waiting for the report to come out. I contacted UDRI to see if it would be published. This is the result:
From: UDRI

Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 2:12 PM
To: joel wiley
Subject: RE: Drone VS Mooney Wing Video

Hi Joel,
I’m sorry for the delay in responding; as you can imagine, we are getting numerous requests re this video.
Typically tests such as these are funded by an external sponsor, for whom we produce a report. In this case, the researchers did not have an external funder, and so did not produce a report. They are, however, working to find sponsors for additional tests on various aircraft structures, and will consider producing a paper that discusses multiple tests at that time.
Thank you for writing,



300 College Park, Dayton, OH 45469-7759
udri.udayton.edu



Subject: Drone VS Mooney Wing Video

Dear UDRI:
After watching the Internet video of University of Dayton Impact Physics group and seeing some of the reaction to it, I have a question.

Is the study form which this video was extracted going to be published in a peer-reviewed journal. I am sure I am not the only one interested in the study design and results.

Thank you in advance,
Joel Wiley


Anyone want to set up a GOFUNDME site to pay for a report?

I'd be interested to see a test that included the aerodynamics in play and what effect the wing's bow wave would have on the drone.

While the article is arguable one way or the other in a structural integrity discussion, there’s another topic that should be even more concerning.
Two months ago, just after rotation off the water, my brother realized he was being “chased” & overtaken by a large drone.
Before he could take evasive action, it flew IN FRONT OF THE AIRPLANE, evidently to capture a video of the takeoff.
Both left and right chairs agreed that it passed a mere 30 to 50 feet off the nose of the airplane.
IF THAT DRONE HAD STRUCK THE PROP, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NOWHERE TO GO BUT INTO THE TREES.
There IS a happy ending, however.
The last thing they saw as the LARGE drone swung under the plane & into the “dirty air” was the drone tumbling towards the lake.

wow! how to reconcile that with the outline of the wings on the WTC towers... hmm...

Too technical (the comments) for me !! Bottom line..The proliferation of drones and in the hands of amateurs who are experiencing the "Rush" of flying and the almost complete lack of FAA control and enforcement is extremely dangerous !

Just ban drone flying in the vicinity of all airfields. I can't see why the rights of drone flyers OVERRIDE the rights of aircraft pilots and passengers to have a safe flight.
As I have said before on this site. Would anyone who really believes that drones hitting an aircraft will not be catastrophic just because it has not happened,yet, be willing to fly a Real aircraft on short finals and be Deliberately hit by a drone? As an experiment. Of course the drone driver is free to hit whichever part of the aircraft he wishes. I think the cockpit windshield should be great.

There are a lot of unknown variables here.... For one, what a/c / Wing was that... The structure looked a lot thinner than anything that I have worked on... 2 the side of the Quad... 3 this is obviously a wind tunnel test, so basically they took the quad and blew into a wing controlling where it was going to hit choosing the worst place for damage. A/C are designed to deflect birds and to divert them away from engines (even though it is not always effective)... That was a worst case scenario!

Pretty impressive how the mooney wing basically swallowed it. Very unrealistic test, but if it did happen that way, there would be plenty of fuel air and ignition sorce to make quite a pyrotechnic display.

I'd love to see a Mooney go 200 knots

That is ridiculous, No blades, they just 'shot' the drone at the wing. Might as well have been a 5lb brick. "This is the result of a brick thrown at an aircraft" Please tell me this wasn't funded with public grant dollars

Mooney aircraft are not thin skinned airplanes and you virtually never read about them coming apart in flight due to the one piece spar and a beefy empennage. If that is the result of this trial, I would hate to see what it would do to an LSA. Granted, they are slower, but how fast is the Quad goin?