The threat to trains from drones?

Howardh · 29 Jul 2015

Dave1987 said:
Firstly considering even the cheaper drones are at least £200+ and those can only fly within the wifi range of an iPad, I highly doubt you will have people flying them into anything deliberately. The ones that can carry heavy equipment are very very expensive, so a moron isn't going to buy one to deliberately attach a brick to it and crash it are they!

So why stop at Drones? What about remote control helicopters and planes? You can attach cameras to those as well. Ban them?

They are £200 now. In two years time those prices will tumble as cheap imports are brought in (just as the price of mobile phones, laptops tumble). Drones are more "fun" than simply flying a toy plane, as mentioned above they carry stuff, not just cameras, and will soon be used by idiots to bombard us with bricks, smash into windows/cars etc. The only way we'll get them banned is when pervs use them to spy on kids in playgrounds?

And, of course, if one is annoying you, over your property, over a road etc and you bring it down yourself, guess who'll be before the bench?

It needs really tight, waterproof legislation now (not just CAA rules that most don't know exist) before someone gets hurt or even killed.

RailUK Forums

Dave1987 · 29 Jul 2015

Howardh said:
*Like*
That's exactly the point I was trying to make. In the hands of the irresponsible kids and their parents, like you say for many no laws exist at all, and they'll be flying them around like nobody's business. Expect them to be big sellers at Xmas?
Will police REALLY be all that concerned if a kid is flying a drone, illegally, in a field next to a rail line with cables?

So punish the many because a few kids might disobey the rules? What makes you think the kids would obey a ban? The law already covers the use of drones any anyone caught will be prosecuted.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Howardh said:
They are £200 now. In two years time those prices will tumble as cheap imports are brought in (just as the price of mobile phones, laptops tumble). Drones are more "fun" than simply flying a toy plane, as mentioned above they carry stuff, not just cameras, and will soon be used by idiots to bombard us with bricks, smash into windows/cars etc. The only way we'll get them banned is when pervs use them to spy on kids in playgrounds?

And, of course, if one is annoying you, over your property, over a road etc and you bring it down yourself, guess who'll be before the bench?

It needs really tight, waterproof legislation now (not just CAA rules that most don't know exist) before someone gets hurt or even killed.

Sorry but that is pure paranoia the ones that can carry large amounts cost thousands. If it becomes an issue no doubt the CAA will tighten up the rules. An outright ban is totally draconian. Might as well ban anything that's remote control and flies.

Lockwood · 29 Jul 2015

455driver said:
But you will have permission to use it in your own home! :roll:
read all the legislation, not just the bit that suits!

Where's the fun in that?! :P

matacaster · 29 Jul 2015

By drones, are you referring to particular station announcers?

wheelnrail · 30 Jul 2015

To echo Dave1987 In the hands of the irresponsible, the law is clear on punishment for those people. But A total ban on drones? I can't remember seeing a comment so inane. Why punish everyone for a stupid few? Also, lets keep in mind, yes drones are getting cheaper, but they still cost a pretty penny. Who in their right mind will waste hundreds of pounds worth of flying kit and perhaps camera by deliberately smashing it into a train or buzzing it over catenary?

Drones as a whole provide us with a brand new perspective for photography that brings beauty an perspective that we never had access to. There will be law breakers but it's how in dealing with them we make drones safe for everyone, as well as enjoyable.

DaleCooper · 30 Jul 2015

Drones with built in camera £69.99 at Menkind, I suspect at that price they probably only last one flight but the skies could be full of them on Boxing Day. Obviously these aren't the kind enthusiasts like Dave1987 would use. I think (and hope) this will just be a short lived fad and then the field will be left to responsible people like those who fly RC planes which I imagine are too expensive and difficult to fly to be a plaything.

Dave1987 · 30 Jul 2015

DaleCooper said:
Drones with built in camera £69.99 at Menkind, I suspect at that price they probably only last one flight but the skies could be full of them on Boxing Day. Obviously these aren't the kind enthusiasts like Dave1987 would use. I think (and hope) this will just be a short lived fad and then the field will be left to responsible people like those who fly RC planes which I imagine are too expensive and difficult to fly to be a plaything.

I haven't got mine yet, the one I want will cost the best part of £1k! The cheap and cheerful ones that you can get for relatively low cost can only just support their own weight in the air, and they have a very limited range. The OP was alluding to yobs strapping bricks to drones and then flying them into stuff deliberately. The cheap and cheerful drones would never get off the ground with a brick strapped to them. IMO people are creating problems that just don't exist! People who have misused drones like the man who flew one over The Etihad Stadium have been prosecuted using the existing legislation. People who flout the current rules would flout an all out ban as well so it would only punish responsible owners.

broadgage · 30 Jul 2015

Agree that the cheaper and therefore smaller and lighter weight drones have virtually no payload capacity and a very limited range. They are battery powered and can take off vertically from any small flat surface such as a car roof.
Air guns and crossbows are arguably far more dangerous and can be purchased without any licence.

Larger drones can carry many kilos, but these cost thousands of pounds and really need a qualified pilot to fly them. They are more akin to a small "proper aircraft" but with the pilot on the ground rather than in the machine.
They are driven by a petrol engine or even by a jet engine, both need care and skill in maintenance and safe fuel handling.
These machines though not carrying a pilot, really need the facilities of a small airport not just for landing and take off but also for fuelling and servicing.

They are mainly used by the military but do have civilian uses.
A large drone could certainly drop a brick or worse on a train and perhaps murder the driver, but it seems a most unlikely mode of attack for terrorists or criminals, and far beyond the reach of hooligans.

Tim R-T-C · 30 Jul 2015

I think the biggest risk is someone getting hit by a train while trying to recover a crashed drone.

A-driver · 30 Jul 2015

I personally can't see much of an issue here-I can't see anyone, no matter how cheap drones get, deliberately crashing into a train. Possibly there will be accidental collisions but the chances of an accidental direct hit on the front of a train striking the windscreen with enough force to damage it are very slim (wind screens can withstand being hit by high speed ballast - they generally only actually brake of hitting a solid object like a tree. A drone isn't grounded or as heavy as that.

Currently kids can get hold of bricks and rocks and stand on bridges throwing them at trains. From time to time kids do this and when they do the police try to find them. I would have thought most would stick to throwing stones than buying a drone to use instead! The chances of a drone damaging a train are very slim and the drone would definitely come off worse!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Tim R-T-C said:
I think the biggest risk is someone getting hit by a train while trying to recover a crashed drone.

Absolutely. People have been known to trespass on the line to retrieve their dog who is running round or who has (very sadly) been struck by a train. I'd guess if someone's drone which they had spent a lot of money on landed on the line a lot of people wouldn't think twice about attempting to recover it. People have done it with phones and wallets dropped on the line before to. Tragically a man was killed on my route about 18months ago fishing his wallet off the line as he appeared to believe his train wasn't due for 10mins. He didn't take into account the non stop train running in front of it.

Phil6219 · 30 Jul 2015

Hmm so my plan to acquire a drone and fly it right through the open shed doors at Fortress Toton has been foiled? Bugger...

In all fairness (part of) it was an idea that me and a mate had to buzz TO and get some good shots of the rust tugs, not that we would actually go and do it though...

There is the remnants of either a drone or a helicopter about 200 yards west of Daisy Hill, in the six foot. A bit further on there was a dog too, I called a mate at NR to go and retrieve it to bring closure to the owner (as it had a collar on) and also ensure that nobody went on their to get him themselves.

Phil 8-)

Jonny · 30 Jul 2015

PHP:

Haydn1971 said:
Fairly "standard" drones can take the weight of a large DSLR - I'd imagine 1.5kg of camera and lens slung below a £1000 drone hitting the window of a train traveling at 125mph would be pretty messy for a driver.

I was thinking of something more sinister than 1.5kg of dead weight (which is equivalent to a large bird (of the feathered variety) anyway).

Tim R-T-C · 3 Aug 2015

Phil6219 said:
In all fairness (part of) it was an idea that me and a mate had to buzz TO and get some good shots of the rust tugs, not that we would actually go and do it though...

Wouldn't be surprised if someone hasn't - Toton would be a very easy place to do it, given the spectator style banking. Biggest risk at somewhere like that is a drone hitting a member of the depot staff if it flies out of range or runs out of power.

There are drone 'zapping' techniques being developed which are likely to be available before they become too prolific. The law already says that you can't fly a drone ' within 50 metres of any vessel, vehicle or structure which is not under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft', so anyone trying to fly close enough to get photos at a depot is already breaking this rule.

Haydn1971 said:
Fairly "standard" drones can take the weight of a large DSLR - I'd imagine 1.5kg of camera and lens slung below a £1000 drone hitting the window of a train traveling at 125mph would be pretty messy for a driver.

Fortunately most trains should be fine with that. This is the damage caused by a fully grown person jumping off a bridge and hitting an HST cab window at 125mph.

43308 in tow by Timothy Young, on Flickr

So a drone even with the heaviest camera would likely not even crack the windshield.

Peter Mugridge · 3 Aug 2015

Tim R-T-C said:
So a drone even with the heaviest camera would likely not even crack the windshield.

The drone may have sharp pointy corners to it though; would that increase the risk in an impact?

Old Yard Dog · 3 Aug 2015

An interloper with a drone upset videophotographers on a recent RTC visit to the Banovici coalmine line in Bosnia. It made more noise than the steam engines. Eventuallyhe was persuaded to take his toy home.

jon0844 · 4 Aug 2015

I think we may see laws tightened or restrictions on sale when ordinary people, not trains or vehicles, are hurt or killed from being hit by a drone being operated by an idiot. I think that's inevitable, and possibly not a bad thing (restrictions, not people being hurt!).

The proper drones mentioned above wouldn't be affected by this, as they're operated by qualified personnel anyway.

Sooner or later, there are going to be kids flying these around housing estates just as we've had the kids on their mini motos and the like before. People won't be intending to crash them, but it will happen.

crispy1978 · 4 Aug 2015

I'm not particularly up on the technical aspects of drones and what damage they might do.

But, used responsibly and correctly in the right hands, they can produce some fantastic shots. I saw a wonderful video from a heritage railway (Tanfield) with a drone recently, and it gave a fantastic insight for bits you don't/can't see from angles you'd never see either. Unfortunately I can't locate the video at the moment to post it.

Dave1987 · 4 Aug 2015

jonmorris0844 said:
I think we may see laws tightened or restrictions on sale when ordinary people, not trains or vehicles, are hurt or killed from being hit by a drone being operated by an idiot. I think that's inevitable, and possibly not a bad thing (restrictions, not people being hurt!).

The proper drones mentioned above wouldn't be affected by this, as they're operated by qualified personnel anyway.

Sooner or later, there are going to be kids flying these around housing estates just as we've had the kids on their mini motos and the like before. People won't be intending to crash them, but it will happen.

Again current laws cover the use of drones. An outright ban would not stop the idiots, it would only punish the responsible owners as per usual.

jon0844 · 4 Aug 2015

I said there will likely be a restriction on sales, or perhaps far tougher sentences, as there may well be current laws but so what?

People ignore laws and we've already had our increase in problems since the school holidays started. Up until now it's usually kids on the mini motos or just sharing a moped/motorbike in a park, but why imagine they won't buy a drone one year to have fun? I'd be surprised if some people will do anything but break the existing laws.

Fact is, we will have some bad things happen sooner or later. And the combination of an overworked police force and pretty pathetic legal system means I lack the faith that we're covered and shouldn't need to worry.

However, I think the railway needn't worry besides the suggestion of a drone falling onto railway property.

Rail-net · 15 Aug 2015

Any form of UAV should not present a problem for railways if they are operated properly. The problems will come as they become more popular and more than one starts to appear in the same airspace at the same time. I have been flying UAVs now for over two years around a variety of subjects including railways. Having spent a small fortune on building, maintaining and qualifying to fly these craft I can say the biggest threat to a railway would be a crash on the overheads, this could then snag a pantograph and bring "down the knitting".

As has been mentioned a locomotive/unit hitting an aircraft will undoubtedly write off the aircraft and cause a little damage to the locomotive. Probably at worst smashing a windscreen or light cluster which would stop the working. It would not be a pleasant experience for the driver.. But then neither is a bird strike.

As with all things it is unlikely to be someone who takes the situation seriously who will cause the problems and more likely someone who is 'king about with their new toy.

The training I've undergone provides guidelines as to where and where you can not fly. It is permissible to fly almost anywhere, but the trick is in communication. If I wanted to fly my craft across the main runway at Heathrow I can apply for permission to do this, I'm unlikley to get it without a very good reason but the possibility exists. The same applies to railway and their surroundings.

But if you do see someone flying one and you want to ask them.. Wait till they are not flying, to do it properly takes a bit of concentration

I joined the forum just to answer this

Howardh · 15 Aug 2015

I think if it's a fight between a pacer and a drone, think my money would be on the pacer being smashed to smithereens and the drone emerging unharmed

Howardh · 22 Nov 2015

Brought this thread back as there was a piece on Watchdog last week. One quite large dropped out of the air onto a lady's washing! But they pointed out it was close to the Eurostar line. Not sure what speeds Eurostar trains can achieve in Britain, but if it's 150mph+ and it meets a crashed lump of metal bigger than a football on the line, it's a worry.

Interesting that there are a set of guidelines (laws?) but there is no compulsory registration or licencing. If flyers break the rules/laws/guidelines I wonder what the punishment is...and is it s severe enough detterant? If a drone killed someone, is it manslaughter (if the flyer can be traced)??

headshot119 · 22 Nov 2015

Howardh said:
Brought this thread back as there was a piece on Watchdog last week. One quite large dropped out of the air onto a lady's washing! But they pointed out it was close to the Eurostar line. Not sure what speeds Eurostar trains can achieve in Britain, but if it's 150mph+ and it meets a crashed lump of metal bigger than a football on the line, it's a worry.

Interesting that there are a set of guidelines (laws?) but there is no compulsory registration or licencing. If flyers break the rules/laws/guidelines I wonder what the punishment is...and is it s severe enough detterant? If a drone killed someone, is it manslaughter (if the flyer can be traced)??

I hate to paint a graphic picture....

A human body which is a lot bigger than a football causes very little damage to the front of a train even travelling at 125mph.

We don't really need to worry about a drone being hit.

cjmillsnun · 22 Nov 2015

headshot119 said:
I hate to paint a graphic picture....

A human body which is a lot bigger than a football causes very little damage to the front of a train even travelling at 125mph.

We don't really need to worry about a drone being hit.

and yet a medium sized stone dropped from a bridge hitting a train going at any speed could smash the screen and injure the driver.

I do agree though that the most likely impact of a drone being struck by a train is some damaged GRP/scratched paint on the train and a crumpled mess of drone.

Domh245 · 23 Nov 2015

Now, I am not an expert on drones, but I suspect that this medium sized stone is significantly more dense than your average drone. Effectively, this means that even if the drone weighs the same as your stone, the stone's mass is impacting the glass over a smaller surface area, which gives a higher stress, and thus more likely to break the glass. The drone will bounce off because the mass is spread out over a larger area, with smaller stresses and less chance of breaking the glass

A-driver · 23 Nov 2015

cjmillsnun said:
and yet a medium sized stone dropped from a bridge hitting a train going at any speed could smash the screen and injure the driver.

I do agree though that the most likely impact of a drone being struck by a train is some damaged GRP/scratched paint on the train and a crumpled mess of drone.

That's simply because a stone has a smaller surface area which can strike the glass like an emergancy hammer would and cause it to break. A body is generally bigger so more surface area distributing the weight more equally. However it isn't unheard of for the body to enter the cab through the windscreen. Sorry to be graphic but it happens. It all depends on where abouts and with how much force an object strikes. A drone would, like a stone, brick or anything else penetrate the windscreen if hit in the right way and speed. But it's no more a threat than a stone or brick.

PaxVobiscum · 23 Nov 2015

There was another item on BBC News a few weeks back.

I liked the part that mentioned:

Merseyside Police was itself warned by the CAA that it was using a drone for police work without an appropriate licence.

Howardh · 23 Nov 2015

Domh245 said:
Now, I am not an expert on drones, but I suspect that this medium sized stone is significantly more dense than your average drone.

It's the density of those flying them that worries me

PaxVobiscum said:
There was another item on BBC News a few weeks back.

I liked the part that mentioned:
Merseyside Police was itself warned by the CAA that it was using a drone for police work without an appropriate licence.

Attaboy CAA!!!

DaleCooper · 23 Nov 2015

Domh245 said:
Now, I am not an expert on drones, but I suspect that this medium sized stone is significantly more dense than your average drone. Effectively, this means that even if the drone weighs the same as your stone, the stone's mass is impacting the glass over a smaller surface area, which gives a higher stress, and thus more likely to break the glass. The drone will bounce off because the mass is spread out over a larger area, with smaller stresses and less chance of breaking the glass

A-driver said:
That's simply because a stone has a smaller surface area which can strike the glass like an emergancy hammer would and cause it to break. A body is generally bigger so more surface area distributing the weight more equally. However it isn't unheard of for the body to enter the cab through the windscreen. Sorry to be graphic but it happens. It all depends on where abouts and with how much force an object strikes. A drone would, like a stone, brick or anything else penetrate the windscreen if hit in the right way and speed. But it's no more a threat than a stone or brick.

A drone isn't a homogeneous object, most of the mass will be concentrated in smaller components such as motors and batteries which could act as projectiles.

Howardh · 23 Nov 2015

DaleCooper said:
A drone isn't a homogeneous object, most of the mass will be concentrated in smaller components such as motors and batteries which could act as projectiles.

..and cameras. It's not so much smashing a cab window as lying on a rail. 1 because of the possible chance of derailment (I've never seen a piece anywhere encouraging people to leave stuff on rails) and secondly there will be muppets climbing fences and over rails (live ones too) to fetch their toys. If crashed onto a line or a motorway they would probably try to retrieve them otherwise the evidence would give them away.

The threat to trains from drones?

Established Member

RailUK Forums

On Moderation

Member

On Moderation

Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

On Moderation

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member