FAA: Operator of Wayward Drone Unknown

QF-4 Drone

The Federal Aviation Administration investigated an incident last month involving a drone that nearly collided with a commercial airliner in U.S. airspace, but wasn’t able to identify who was flying the unmanned aircraft or what type of plane it was.

The near-miss took place on March 22 outside Tallahassee, Florida. A U.S. Airways commuter flight operated by PSA Airlines traveling from Charlotte, North Carolina, was on an approach about five miles northwest of a runway at Tallahassee airport 2,300 feet above ground when it “passed an unreported and apparently remotely controlled aircraft,” according to a statement from an FAA spokesman.

The commercial pilot reported the “near mid-air collision” to air traffic control and the agency investigated the incident, but “neither the UAS nor the pilot could be identified,” it stated, referring to the acronym for unmanned aerial system.

Indeed, the commercial pilot — whose identity hasn’t been disclosed — initially thought the two aircraft had collided, but an inspection of the airliner afterward found no damage, according to an article by Jack Nicas of The Wall Street Journal.

Jim Williams, who manages the unmanned-aircraft office at the FAA, disclosed the incident on May 8 during a drone conference in San Francisco and it’s believed to be the first case of a large commercial passenger jet almost striking a drone, according to the article.

The news report said the pilot described the craft as “as a camouflaged F-4 fixed-wing aircraft that was quite small.” The FAA spokesman said some media reports have speculated whether the aircraft was actually a QF-4 unmanned aerial target flown by the Air Force from Tyndall Air Force Base outside Panama City.

But a Defense Department spokesman told the Journal that “most military drones aren’t painted with camouflage” and the FAA spokesman said it would be highly unlikely for a military aircraft from Tyndall to find itself in the landing approach of a passenger jet at Tallahassee.

Manned aircraft are required to fly at least 1,000 feet apart vertically and several miles apart laterally; and remote-controlled aircraft are supposed to be operated below 400 feet, according to the article.

The incident comes as the FAA is crafting guidelines for integrating unmanned systems into the national airspace by 2015. The spokesman said he wasn’t aware of any impacts the incident may have caused to the agency’s rule-writing efforts.

About the Author

Brendan McGarry
Brendan McGarry is the managing editor of Military.com. He can be reached at brendan.mcgarry@military.com. Follow him on Twitter at @Brendan_McGarry.

20 Comments on "FAA: Operator of Wayward Drone Unknown"

  1. This is sort of joke, but will be whipped up over and over again as the reason the FAA MUST restrict all drone traffic.

    I say it's a joke because the 'drone" that is being described here is a radio controlled model plane of a type that RC hobbyists have been flying around for decades. There is no way that the fool operating it should have had it anywhere near the approach lanes of the airport – He should definitely get the chop for that – but there is also no way that the FAA is going to get model aircraft this small fitted automatic avoidance gear either.

  2. The USAF has a secret F-4E squadron no one knows about till now !!!!! LOL

  3. Little drones will soon be flying around delivering everything you can imagine. Unless the feds get involved. Then China will make it happen. But it will happen.

  4. sounds like a toy model plane…

  5. It was from Cuba. It was armed with 2 cigars. It was released from high altitude in international airspace. It cost them a bunch for the mission but most was sponsored by the drug market. So it was their way of washing away the dirty money :D

  6. Citizen of the World | May 13, 2014 at 3:27 am | Reply

    It raises another problem: Radar didn’t detect it. I read elsewhere that our current air defense systems for the United States currently doesn’t work well against drones and missiles.

    Air traffic control doesn’t use military radars, but they need to track all air traffic too.

  7. Again a incident with a drone., And it allmast collides with our own US Airplane and passes radar.Or it was flying drugs into our country? The Minstry of Defense has to give a Answer.
    Or do we wait until a real accident happens.? I mean a apoligie on its place is the least that can be done,That drone was not in war country,or was the flight operater sleeping?

  8. When we solve the duck problem let me know. The very next thing on my worry list is toy airplanes.

  9. Drug cartels

  10. …..no description of the 'drone', eh?

    it certainly wasn't an ole phantom ……

  11. It wouldn't surprise me if it was a QF-4 from Tyndall. I've seen them with the camo paint job flying from that very base. It was probably one that had been "shot down" but had recovered before hitting the water and flew off in whatever direction it recovered to. There may not have been a single system working on that airplane except the engines (maybe just 1) and fuel pumps. I wonder if they disable the on-board fire suppression systems when they create these QF airplanes? If they don't, perhaps they should.

  12. Can we just call this thing an rc airplane already?

    You probably won’t find the operator anyways unless one of his rc buddies sees this story on the news and rats him out.

    Probably won’t happen though, they won’t want to bring faa attention to themselves and their hobby.

  13. Maybe that it is one of those drones that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un keeps talking about. (LOL)

  14. An F-4 is not "small" so I seriously doubt this was a QF-4. Most likely a hobbyist flying his radio controlled airplane where it shouldn't have been. But hey, any excuse to prove the FAA needs to have more control I guess.

  15. James Watson | May 14, 2014 at 8:26 pm | Reply

    Nowdays , if you have the funds, you can build a fairly large scale radio controlled jet. Almost every jet imagined can be had along with an actual miniature jet turbine engine, which runs off of actual jet aviation fuel. With todays radio systems and onboard telemetry systems a person could.fly beyond visual range. Ofter further than one mile. I imagine this rogue drone encounter was actually the above mentioned scenario.

  16. this is great!

  17. RCs are not Drones | May 18, 2014 at 10:43 am | Reply

    This is the Drive-by media creating a story from nothing. "RC plane? Let's call it a Drone and then we'll have a story!. Yep! Print it! We'll also force the FAA to address a non-issue."

  18. It’s awesome to pay a visit this website and reading thee views of all
    colleagues on the topic off this piece of writing, while I am also keen of getting know-how.

  19. It’s awesome for me to have a web page, which is helpful in support of my know-how.
    thanks admin

  20. thanks admin for such a great posting.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.