The threat to trains from drones?

[Howardh]

These blighters are getting cheaper and cheaper, although I've only ever seen one in action (at the right place and time) the worry is they will just become toys and out of control.

Three worries, they crash accidentally or deliberately into the front of trains, land on the line or end up in the power cables.

Are there any "no fly" laws around railways, and if there aren't already could there be specific laws attached to the use where misuse around railways results in severe penalties?

Any experience/thoughts?

 

[misterredmist]

Good Morning , this link may be of help

https://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=1995&pageid=16006

basically, the regaulations and guidelines have been around for a while because "model aircraft and helicopters" can pose similar threats to drones........

in short, yes, there are some regs, there's a common sense touch too , but action will be taken against people who misuse drones.

 

[SPADTrap]

Interesting point to raise, a problem that I see getting worse as time goes on! There used to be someones drone sitting in the cess along my route (unless pway have moved it then its still there) and that particular location means it was either flown off a bridge or from a foot crossing half a mile away from where it now lays, either way someone had been flying it on the railway. I've reported it a few times as it looks expensive and likely to attract its owner to recover it but as far as I know it has been left there.

 

[TDK]

These blighters are getting cheaper and cheaper, although I've only ever seen one in action (at the right place and time) the worry is they will just become toys and out of control.

Three worries, they crash accidentally or deliberately into the front of trains, land on the line or end up in the power cables.

Are there any "no fly" laws around railways, and if there aren't already could there be specific laws attached to the use where misuse around railways results in severe penalties?

Any experience/thoughts?

To be fair a train would make mince meat out of a drone if one was hit however I haven't see any being used over the routes I take but it is only a matter of time when the prices come down where you will get people using them to follow trains for that elusive shot.

 

[SPADTrap]

To be fair a train would make mince meat out of a drone if one was hit however I haven't see any being used over the routes I take but it is only a matter of time when the prices come down where you will get people using them to follow trains for that elusive shot.

I've also seen this but the drones were kept a great distance from the railway. Until they 'lock' onto one of the GSM-R masts and start to circle it, as I've heard from someone who operates one!

 

[headshot119]

Interesting point to raise, a problem that I see getting worse as time goes on! There used to be someones drone sitting in the cess along my route (unless pway have moved it then its still there) and that particular location means it was either flown off a bridge or from a foot crossing half a mile away from where it now lays, either way someone had been flying it on the railway. I've reported it a few times as it looks expensive and likely to attract its owner to recover it but as far as I know it has been left there.

Having had a demonstration from a "drone club" at uni a lot of them are apparently fitted with a camera which is transmitted back the the controller, so it could literally have been flown from anywhere is so equipped (within radio range).

 

[broadgage]

Civilian drones are very light weight and most unlikely to pose a significant danger to trains.
Trains fairly regularly strike Canada geese and other large birds without serious consequences. I have been on a train that struck several geese, this gave the driver a fright, but no actual injury was caused and only slight delay whilst the driver examined the train.

I believe that a goose weighs more than most drones.

A drone deliberately or accidently flown into overhead power lines is unlikely to cause much damage but could result in a flashover and tripping of the power. Toy balloons, kites, wind blown debris and theft or vandalism would seem to be a greater risk.

A drone flown very close to a train could distract the driver, but probably no more so than a bird. The driver can of course slow or stop if he feels it unsafe to proceed.

 

[Howardh]

Interesting replies, thanks!
As alluded to, I can see them being a problem in the future as I'm sure they will get bigger/cheaper and be able to travel further. Glad to know a train would smash one to pieces just now though!

 

[185]

I would gladly test the major risks drones make to rail vehicles at 50mph. I've a feeling the train may just win. Previously, I have witnessed all sorts of kamikaze attacks including pheasants, pigeon, ducks, ford mondeos, and each time the Dellner coupler wins.

Laser pens are still a number one menace.

 

[Howardh]

I would gladly test the major risks drones make to rail vehicles at 50mph. I've a feeling the train may just win. Previously, I have witnessed all sorts of kamikaze attacks including pheasants, pigeon, ducks, ford mondeos, and each time the Dellner coupler wins.

Laser pens are still a number one menace.

Seagulls are having a war cabinet meeting as I write this!

 

[tsr]

It's worth noting that NR absolutely prohibit aircraft landing on rail lines, even up to and including such things as emergency air ambulance manoeuvres (seems common sense but, well, it seems to certainly warrant being written down), so I have no doubt they also have procedures in place to formally deal with drone / radio-controlled vehicle pilots whose vehicles pose a danger by landing on the track.

 

[Dave1987]

These blighters are getting cheaper and cheaper, although I've only ever seen one in action (at the right place and time) the worry is they will just become toys and out of control.

Three worries, they crash accidentally or deliberately into the front of trains, land on the line or end up in the power cables.

Are there any "no fly" laws around railways, and if there aren't already could there be specific laws attached to the use where misuse around railways results in severe penalties?

Any experience/thoughts?

Sorry but drones used properly are no risk to anyone. I've seen some of the shots you can get from them and it's very impressive, landmarks and landscapes can be amazing shots with them. The CAA see the biggest risk as the threat to people's privacy. There have been few incidents of people being irresponsible but compared to the amount of people that own them that's a tiny fraction. If people obey the rules set out by the CAA the pose no risk to anyone.

 

[Howardh]

Sorry but drones used properly are no risk to anyone. I've seen some of the shots you can get from them and it's very impressive, landmarks and landscapes can be amazing shots with them. The CAA see the biggest risk as the threat to people's privacy. There have been few incidents of people being irresponsible but compared to the amount of people that own them that's a tiny fraction. If people obey the rules set out by the CAA the pose no risk to anyone.

BIB yes, I agree with that, but that's why only "professionals" should be using them. I worry that as they become cheaper and much more common as "toys" they will be "flying" down our streets at regular intervals, onto railway areas, motorways etc. What isn't (much of) a problem now could be a massive problem in a few years, and suggest the authorites look carefully at licencing, and particular punishments for flying them around said infrastructure.

 

[Dave1987]

BIB yes, I agree with that, but that's why only "professionals" should be using them. I worry that as they become cheaper and much more common as "toys" they will be "flying" down our streets at regular intervals, onto railway areas, motorways etc. What isn't (much of) a problem now could be a massive problem in a few years, and suggest the authorites look carefully at licencing, and particular punishments for flying them around said infrastructure.

It's a criminal offence to fly one within 50m of any permanent structures (or something along those lines) without prior consent. IE if you flew one close to the railway or any housing or anything like that without consent you are liable for arrest and prosecution. Have you actually looked at the rules regarding Drones? You will find they already cover what you desire. Where do you stop though? Require anyone with a model plane to have a license? Why not apply that to remote control cars as they pose a risk to road traffic?

 

[reb0118]

licencing

license?

If we merely swap the "c" & "s" from the above words I'm sure that there will be no safety infractions involving drones & trains. Sorted.

I've heard in the States that someone has managed to fix a pistol onto a drone (and it wasn't the CIA)!

 

[island]

I think there's a bigger threat to drones from OHLE

 

[PermitToTravel]

I'd think that's about negligible - there can't be that many large enough to bridge a contact wire with something earthed.

 

[cuccir]

There has been a successful prosecution for "the dangerous and illegal flying of an unmanned aircraft", as reported by the Civil Aviation Authority

A man from Cumbria has become the first person in the UK to be successfully prosecuted for the dangerous and illegal flying of an unmanned aircraft. Robert Knowles was found to have flown the device in restricted airspace over a nuclear submarine facility, as well as allowing the device to fly too close to a vehicle bridge. Both offences breached the UK’s Air Navigation Order. Mr Knowles, of Barrow-in-Furness, was found guilty on Tuesday 1 April 2014 and fined £800 at Furness and District Magistrate Court following the prosecution by the UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), who said the case raised important safety issues concerning recreational flying of unmanned aircraft. The CAA was also awarded costs of £3,500.

On 25 August 2013, the Court heard, an unmanned aircraft (UAV) was recovered from water near to a submarine testing facility in Barrow-in-Furness, operated by the defence company, BAE Systems. Analysis by the police of video footage taken from a camera fitted to the device subsequently revealed that during its flight it had skimmed over the busy Jubilee Bridge over Walney Chanel, well within the legally permitted 50 metres separation distance required. The UAV had also flown through restricted airspace around the nuclear submarine facility before it inadvertently landed in the water.

The UAV was traced to Mr Knowles who admitted to building the device himself and operating it on the day in question. He was charged with:

• Flying a small unmanned surveillance aircraft within 50 metres of a structure (Article 167 of the Air Navigation Order 2009).

• Flying over a nuclear installation (Regulation 3(2) of the Air Navigation (Restriction of Flying)(Nuclear Installations) Regulations 2007).

The CAA said the conviction sent a message to recreational users of UAVs that the devices are subject to aviation safety rules.

Note the first of these two charges relates to the low flight over the Jubliee Bridge between Walney Island and Barrow-in-Furness, rather than the BAE facility (though we guess that this low flight would not have been prosecuted without the latter also occuring). Presumably the same legislation could be applied to railway infrastructure, if necessary.

 

[duffield]

Drones are probably much more dangerous to aircraft (sucked into air intake) than trains (smashed into little pieces or most of it just bouncing off).

 

[Lockwood]

I got a drone a while back that had a camera mounting, and in the instruction manual it said it was for indoor use only.
So, as a surveillance UAV it cannot be within 50m of a property, and it can only be used within a property? *headache*

 

[Jonny]

Drones are probably much more dangerous to aircraft (sucked into air intake) than trains (smashed into little pieces or most of it just bouncing off).

Indeed, from a standard drone the risk is minimal. Unless they have various bits and bobs attached.

 

[Haydn1971]

Indeed, from a standard drone the risk is minimal. Unless they have various bits and bobs attached.

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.

 

[DarloRich]

The threat to trains from drones is surely minor unless they are armed with Hellfire missiles!

 

[Dave1987]

I have a great interest in aviation and it is my hobby/passion. I have looked into and intend to purchase a Parrot Drone in the future. Because of this I've looked into the CAA rules regarding flying drones. I feel the OP's worries are not really justified at all. As I and others have said you are not allowed to operate a drone within 50m of any building without permission. There is no way you will get loads of kids flying drones up and down the streets in the UK as the law forbids it and anyone caught doing so would be prosecuted. People who own drones are perfectly entitled to takes their drone out into the country or the seaside and fly them. Some of the bigger drones maybe a hazard towards OHLE but a train would make mincemeat of them. But this is all superficial as it is against the law to fly a drone near the railway without permission.

 

[LexyBoy]

I used to fly model gliders, and the community is well aware of the rules - if they didn't then you can be sure the CAA would crack down on it.

Don't recall any major incidents - and some of them are faster and heavier than amateur drones (i.e. 3-4 kg and >100 mph).

 

[DaleCooper]

I have a great interest in aviation and it is my hobby/passion. I have looked into and intend to purchase a Parrot Drone in the future. Because of this I've looked into the CAA rules regarding flying drones. I feel the OP's worries are not really justified at all. As I and others have said you are not allowed to operate a drone within 50m of any building without permission. There is no way you will get loads of kids flying drones up and down the streets in the UK as the law forbids it and anyone caught doing so would be prosecuted. People who own drones are perfectly entitled to takes their drone out into the country or the seaside and fly them. Some of the bigger drones maybe a hazard towards OHLE but a train would make mincemeat of them. But this is all superficial as it is against the law to fly a drone near the railway without permission.

Thank goodness nobody ever breaks the law.

 

[455driver]

​

I got a drone a while back that had a camera mounting, and in the instruction manual it said it was for indoor use only.
So, as a surveillance UAV it cannot be within 50m of a property, and it can only be used within a property? *headache*

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

 

[ian959]

There is no way you will get loads of kids flying drones up and down the streets in the UK as the law forbids it and anyone caught doing so would be prosecuted. People who own drones are perfectly entitled to takes their drone out into the country or the seaside and fly them. Some of the bigger drones maybe a hazard towards OHLE but a train would make mincemeat of them. But this is all superficial as it is against the law to fly a drone near the railway without permission.

Are you serious Dave? The law forbids a lot of things yet they still happen. The whole question of drones is already a problem in some places and it WILL get worse as kids WILL start using them more and they WILL NOT be conscientious about checking CAA regulations or whatever. Frankly the things should be banned as soon as possible before the problem gets out of hand.

There are already anecdotal evidence at least of issues in Australia with people using them to spy on other people and the regulations in Australia are to my knowledge similar to the UK regulations.

Drones will only get quicker and heavier and be able to carry more payload so it is no great leap to foresee morons using them for "amusement" like carrying the ilk of bricks and dropping them on cars or even trains, or deliberately flying them into things...

 

[Howardh]

Are you serious Dave? The law forbids a lot of things yet they still happen. The whole question of drones is already a problem in some places and it WILL get worse as kids WILL start using them more and they WILL NOT be conscientious about checking CAA regulations or whatever. Frankly the things should be banned as soon as possible before the problem gets out of hand.

There are already anecdotal evidence at least of issues in Australia with people using them to spy on other people and the regulations in Australia are to my knowledge similar to the UK regulations.

Drones will only get quicker and heavier and be able to carry more payload so it is no great leap to foresee morons using them for "amusement" like carrying the ilk of bricks and dropping them on cars or even trains, or deliberately flying them into things...

*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?

 

[Dave1987]

Are you serious Dave? The law forbids a lot of things yet they still happen. The whole question of drones is already a problem in some places and it WILL get worse as kids WILL start using them more and they WILL NOT be conscientious about checking CAA regulations or whatever. Frankly the things should be banned as soon as possible before the problem gets out of hand.

There are already anecdotal evidence at least of issues in Australia with people using them to spy on other people and the regulations in Australia are to my knowledge similar to the UK regulations.

Drones will only get quicker and heavier and be able to carry more payload so it is no great leap to foresee morons using them for "amusement" like carrying the ilk of bricks and dropping them on cars or even trains, or deliberately flying them into things...

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?

Don't see any call for mini motorbikes to be banned yet they are a bigger menace than drones.