UK Airprox board says police drone and jet had 'near-miss'
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
It's only 4 pages, and explains the situation fairly clearly. Choice quotes:
The Airprox occurred on the northern edge of Dartmoor
some distance from any notable habitation and therefore
in an area where military aircraft can operate to their
minimums. Both the drone operator and the F-15E pilot
were operating within their regulations which, in the
case of the F-15E, was not below 500ft agl.
Nevertheless, it is of note that within the UKLFS RAF
fast-jets can use a minimum of 250ft MSD
although the drone operator perceived that the F15s
were extremely close to his drone, in actuality they
appeared to have had sufficient separation
after discussion about the likely separation between
the two air systems, it was agreed that the
circumstances were probably best described as a
sighting report, with the risk assessed as Category E,
normal safety standards and procedures had pertained.
Nevertheless, the Board agreed that the drone operator
had been right to raise a report with his concerns and
thanked him for doing so because it had provided useful
discussion points about the integration of drones and
military fast-jets.
Edit: Also, "no blame nor any lessons to be learned" is a curious characterisation given that the military flight was booked through CADS, the Centralised Aviation Data Service, which is mandatory for low altitude military flights but not currently used by police drone units. There was substantial discussion about the police checking CADS in future or booking their operations through CADS. The military are also considering integrating the existing Drone Assist location sharing system into a future unified CADS replacement.
As to transponder power usage, it would be very negligible compared to the power draw of the ESC/motors.
Even if it were equipped with the transponder it is not a given that F-15, as flown, would be (A) interrogating it, (B) show the pilots the replies, (C) show the pilot the replies early enough to make the difference. Pilot flying F-15 at 500AGL is likely training for other things than avoiding small drones. I think at those altitudes and speeds he is given the clearance to exercise (500+kts; not the regular restriction of under 250kts below 10000ft) in a well defined region and assumes that it is clear.
It drove home that the aircraft doing low-level flights have very little manuverability option when flying at 400kts (~200 meters per second). Dodging a drone would be infeasible even if you could see where it was. Transponders with LOS limitation might be of limited use given that the terrain is extremely hilly and the aircraft could come round a corner in the valleys or over a ridge.
It's also a major tourist area, just the sort of place that people might want to send up a photography drone...
You need to be looking forward to have time enough, but you need to look elsewhere sometimes(instruments, to the sides, etc..). So it's possible to crash with something you didn't see comming if it's small.
If the drone pilot believed a crash was imminent, and the F15 pilot was oblivious, I'd be concerned. It could have been a lot worse.
It's using "near" as a synonym to "close" -- as in "a close shave" (actually close) rather than as a synonym for "close to" as it is in the expression "near death" (almost, but not quite dead).
The second sense is definitely more common.
This post suggests "near miss" became common as a military phrase to mean "missed, but still damaged the target" but changed as it entered the vernacular:
(The RAF doesn't have any F-15s, but routinely hosts visiting aircraft from other NATO air forces. One wonders if differing operational standards played a role in this airprox -- or if politics played a role in the incident being downplayed.)
There's at least one incident of an F-15 and a Douglas A-4 colliding, A-4 fireballed on impact and the F-15 flew home and landed.
On one wing.
https://www.gov.uk/low-flying-in-your-area
”Low flying isn’t usually allowed in areas around airports, or towns and cities with populations of more than 10,000.”
That said, I find it highly suspect that a jet is banking at 500ft altitude in the first place, unless it’s at an air show. It’s highly dangerous doing maneuvers like that at that altitude.