DRONE SHOT DOWN: Duck hunter shoots, hits #DJI Inspire 2 in Utah

[Derrick Threatt]

DRONE SHOT DOWN: Duck hunter shoots, hits #DJI Inspire 2 in Utah
DRONE SHOT DOWN: Duck hunter shoots, hits #DJI Inspire 2 in Utah - The Digital Circuit

 

[Maverik]

Sad situation, but great opportunity for drone pilots and the general public to have a better understanding of each other. A very kind and thoughtful way of handling it by the drone pilot when he could otherwise be taking other actions.

Thank you for posting.

 

[Phatzo]

nice story and positive but what is allred paying the hunter in exchange?
hunter should pay replacments for drone, i understand that but vice versa?
time, money, gas, the value of birds...
just asking.


Sent from my iPhone using InspirePilots

 

[lake_flyer]

nice story and positive but what is allred paying the hunter in exchange?
hunter should pay replacments for drone, i understand that but vice versa?
time, money, gas, the value of birds...
just asking.


Sent from my iPhone using InspirePilots

The birds have no $ value, they don't belong to anyone, including any hunter. Just because he payed gas money doesn't make him owner of whatever flies in the sky.
You could say that the drone just saved a good number of birds and that's also a good thing. Had there been an eagle overhead the birds would have been scared away as well.

I think it is just ridiculous that hunters are allowed to just shoot around with real lethal ammunition without warning anyone and with far less restrictions then a drone pilot. They should be aware that the lower skies are not just occupied by feathers anymore and they should issue a warning through a website/app or even a NOTAM that hunting is taking place in the area. Clearly, if you would fly somewhere where you expect hunting might be going on, it would be great to be able to check if it's safe.

 

[lake_flyer]

Ironically the drone pilot, unknowingly at that moment, saved his bird by flying at an illegal altitude. If he had flown at or below 400 feet the I2 would have been totally shattered in the sky.

 

[Phatzo]

The birds have no $ value, they don't belong to anyone, including any hunter. Just because he payed gas money doesn't make him owner of whatever flies in the sky.
You could say that the drone just saved a good number of birds and that's also a good thing. Had there been an eagle overhead the birds would have been scared away as well.

I think it is just ridiculous that hunters are allowed to just shoot around with real lethal ammunition without warning anyone and with far less restrictions then a drone pilot. They should be aware that the lower skies are not just occupied by feathers anymore and they should issue a warning through a website/app or even a NOTAM that hunting is taking place in the area. Clearly, if you would fly somewhere where you expect hunting might be going on, it would be great to be able to check if it's safe.

ok fair point of view, i was thinking of the hunter (in hungary at least) has to pay a fee for being able to hunt on grounds, normally there are signes (also again, in hungary that hunting is active in the area). i was not aware that the drone pilote had no knowing of the hunting area. the notam or infomationflow is a good idea though.


Sent from my iPhone using InspirePilots

 

[lake_flyer]

ok fair point of view, i was thinking of the hunter (in hungary at least) has to pay a fee for being able to hunt on grounds, normally there are signes (also again, in hungary that hunting is active in the area). i was not aware that the drone pilote had no knowing of the hunting area. the notam or infomationflow is a good idea though.


Sent from my iPhone using InspirePilots

The same here in the Netherlands. And things like duck hunting are very regulated. Many here say that by killing migrating birds, like ducks and geese, in one country, at the same you kill them in another part of the world, where they even might become extinct. Many of the nesting wild geese here have to overcome the hunting season on the other side of the planet first, before coming back to our wetlands to breed.
Not that I am against hunting, but only to help to keep or restore balance where nature can't (anymore).
Sorry for getting off topic.

 

[Moonster]

Ridiculous excuse to take a shot at a drone but also a pro pilot operating at 1000 feet and not LOS?

 

[licensed pilot]

Me thinks this is not the whole story, just saying.

 

[Casey53]

Ridiculous excuse to take a shot at a drone but also a pro pilot operating at 1000 feet and not LOS?

Article reads "So he decided to bring it back again. And while en route, something happened. “Coming back at about 1,000 feet, it lost connection and quit responding to my remote,”" which also could mean horizontal distance and not high altitude. He could have been legal and within FAA rules. I doubt if he would admit to FAA flying at 1,000 altitude given the circumstances. More likely he was 1,000 out and 200 feet high.

Far too much of this "See a drone. Shoot it down." going on lately along with shotgun shells marketed as anti-drone rounds. FAA needs some bite with these people shooting at aircraft, imho. Fine the hunter and make him replace the drone both, then publicize the heck out of it. I'd bet he doesn't pull the same stunt twice.

 

[Paul Jacques]

I agree with some previous comments that this doesn't add up, i.e.

"Aerial cinematographer James"

"I want my drone back. Too much waiting and too much money to not be booking gigs."

"As for Allred – he doesn’t have insurance"

Just my opinion

 

[Dejan Smaic]

This incident was obviously no accident and there was intent. The hunter is liable and should face criminal charges as well as financial responsibility. In addition, his hunting license should be revoked for an unspecified an=mount of time.

 

[Ryan Van Scotter]

Licensed pilot is right,

There is more to this story. The hunters action are a problem, however the drone pilot is going to get bit the hardest. Flying beyond visual line of sight, the data will show that pilots action in that flight and previous flights were reckless by nature. Flying over the hunters and being unaware is no excuse. This will come back to haunt him.

The FAA is unlikely to defend the drone operator, which will exonerate the hunter. Interfering with a hunters by flying several flights in the area can causes loses which open up a counter suit.

My prediction is Charges ultimately dropped against the hunter, the FAA will review the drone data and conclude that his contributory negligence resulted in the event.

 

[Pescatoral Pursuit]

28 hits and it still RTH! Talk about survivability!

The I2 is the A-10 Warthog of the drone world!

DJI could make a commercial out of this incident. On a more serious note, I'm not buying that this guy wasn't harassing the hunter, which still doesn't justify the shooting.

 

[Eyeup Aerial Solutions]

I agree with some previous comments that this doesn't add up, i.e.

"Aerial cinematographer James"

"I want my drone back. Too much waiting and too much money to not be booking gigs."

"As for Allred – he doesn’t have insurance"

Just my opinion

Yes, lack of insurance for a "commercial" operator doesn't sound right. It's compulsory in the UK for commercial flyers and I assume the same in the US? Anybody confirm?

 

[licensed pilot]

nope. The FAA could care less about insurance, definitely a bad business practice though.