View Full Version : FAA ASIAS/NMACS (Near Mid Air Collision) Summary and Analysis
With all the discussion recently over the incident near ORD, it seemed appropriate to take a look at the official FAA reports of Near Mid Air incidents. The most recent incident is not listed since the most recent freeze date is 31 Aug 2017.
7957 incidents between 1 Jan 1987 to 31 Aug 2017
2988 reported by GA (Part 91)
2106 reported by US air Carriers
1445 reported by US Military
765 reported by Air Taxi or Commuter aircraft (Part 135)
207 reported by Foreign air carriers (Part 129)
7 reports by gliders (6 in CA and 1 in HI)
439 by other various aircraft types
Interesting that almost half of those reporting a near miss were NOT on an instrument flight plan but were flying VFR.
4754 of those reporting a near miss were on an instrument flight plan.
10 others were under SFR or Defense VR and likely talking to ATC.
Other (second) aircraft analysis
More than half (4000+) were GA aircraft
25 were gliders (23 glider reports and 2 sailplane reports)
20 of the 23 glider incidents were considered no hazard or potential only
3 were considered Critical
May 1993 in Boulder, CO (14,000 ft) (reported by Part 135 Commuter)
May 1994 Wilmington, OH (5,900 ft) (reported by Part 91)
August 1997 Lancaster, TX (5,000 ft) (reported by Part 135 Commuter)
2 listed under Sailplane were both considered Critical
August 1995, Elmira NY (6,000 ft) (reported by GA Part 91)
June 2004, Saratoga Spring, UT (11,000 ft) (reported by Part 125)
Average Altitude for all incidents was 4985 feet
132 incidents at FL18 and above
599 incidents between 10,000 and FL18
5076 incidents below 10,000 ft
396 incidents occurred within 500 ft of the ground
Perhaps most scary is that 105 Drones encounters were reported since May 2014 with more than half of those (67) in the last 12 months
Average Drone altitude was 4138 ft with one reported as high as FL250
Gliders account for <0.1% of those reporting and 0.3% of those reported
Most dangerous place to fly --- CA with 1651 incidents (20.7% of the total)
On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 11:05:58 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> Perhaps most scary is that 105 Drones encounters were reported since May 2014 with more than half of those (67) in the last 12 months
> Average Drone altitude was 4138 ft with one reported as high as FL250
How did a drone get to FL250? I thought they'd run out of battery much lower than that. The hobby type drones, anyway. Do military drones fly that high? Do they use transponders, ADS-B, whatever?
The non-sailplane "gliders" were presumably hang-gliders or para-gliders? Us who fly sailplanes need of course to watch out for those in some of the same areas were we fly, as they seek the same thermals. They are slower moving and easier to see than sailplanes.
On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 1:59:46 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 11:05:58 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> > Perhaps most scary is that 105 Drones encounters were reported since May 2014 with more than half of those (67) in the last 12 months
> > Average Drone altitude was 4138 ft with one reported as high as FL250
>
> How did a drone get to FL250? I thought they'd run out of battery much lower than that. The hobby type drones, anyway. Do military drones fly that high? Do they use transponders, ADS-B, whatever?
>
> The non-sailplane "gliders" were presumably hang-gliders or para-gliders? Us who fly sailplanes need of course to watch out for those in some of the same areas were we fly, as they seek the same thermals. They are slower moving and easier to see than sailplanes.
Other than taking the UAS part 107 course, I do not know much about drones.
The commercially available DJI Phantom Drone reportedly has a ceiling of approximately 19,000 ft.
The drone at FL250 was spotted over Eustis, ME, by a Part 135 operator on 27 February of this year.
Eustis is within the Condor 1 MOA.
However, the MOA is 7,000 to 17,999 so even the military should not have been operating above FL180.
Details on the drone were never discovered.
I do not know of any drones that have transponders or ADSB, but who knows what the future holds.
There was one hang-glider specifically reported.
No para-gliders listed, but there were about a half-dozen parachutist.
Good point on those labeled just as "glider", they could have been hang-gliders.
The seven that made reports were sailplanes as their N-number and type were specified.
No way to know whether the 23 reported simply as "gliders" were sailplanes are not.
Although one was noted as a "glider under tow" and the N-number of the tow plane was reported by the Falcon Jet departing Hyannis, MA.
I just noticed that there were several other drones that I missed in the original count because they were listed as UAS rather than drones.
Many of the reports also have blank fields, which is why the altitude break down does not total up to 7597.
On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 4:14:11 PM UTC-4, wrote:
>
> The commercially available DJI Phantom Drone reportedly has a ceiling of approximately 19,000 ft.
Electric motors work well even at high altitudes. So you can launch that drone at 18,000 and it will climb to 19,000. But launched from sea level? There's a difference between "ceiling" and climb possible on the stored energy. That model has a claimed flight time of up to 30 minutes. Can it climb continuously at about 20 knots vertical speed? That's what it would take to climb to FL250 and then come back down at a similar rate, all within 30 minutes.
Dan Marotta
October 4th 17, 10:40 PM
Just want to point out that, while the military likes to operate in MOAs
where they must constantly be on the lookout for GA aircraft, they are
not limited to flying in MOAs.Â* Just because the ceiling of an MOA is
reported as 17,999' MSL does not mean that there will be no military
aircraft above that.
On 10/4/2017 2:14 PM, wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 1:59:46 PM UTC-5, wrote:
>> On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 11:05:58 AM UTC-4, wrote:
>>> Perhaps most scary is that 105 Drones encounters were reported since May 2014 with more than half of those (67) in the last 12 months
>>> Average Drone altitude was 4138 ft with one reported as high as FL250
>> How did a drone get to FL250? I thought they'd run out of battery much lower than that. The hobby type drones, anyway. Do military drones fly that high? Do they use transponders, ADS-B, whatever?
>>
>> The non-sailplane "gliders" were presumably hang-gliders or para-gliders? Us who fly sailplanes need of course to watch out for those in some of the same areas were we fly, as they seek the same thermals. They are slower moving and easier to see than sailplanes.
> Other than taking the UAS part 107 course, I do not know much about drones.
> The commercially available DJI Phantom Drone reportedly has a ceiling of approximately 19,000 ft.
> The drone at FL250 was spotted over Eustis, ME, by a Part 135 operator on 27 February of this year.
> Eustis is within the Condor 1 MOA.
> However, the MOA is 7,000 to 17,999 so even the military should not have been operating above FL180.
> Details on the drone were never discovered.
> I do not know of any drones that have transponders or ADSB, but who knows what the future holds.
>
> There was one hang-glider specifically reported.
> No para-gliders listed, but there were about a half-dozen parachutist.
> Good point on those labeled just as "glider", they could have been hang-gliders.
> The seven that made reports were sailplanes as their N-number and type were specified.
> No way to know whether the 23 reported simply as "gliders" were sailplanes are not.
> Although one was noted as a "glider under tow" and the N-number of the tow plane was reported by the Falcon Jet departing Hyannis, MA.
>
> I just noticed that there were several other drones that I missed in the original count because they were listed as UAS rather than drones.
>
> Many of the reports also have blank fields, which is why the altitude break down does not total up to 7597.
--
Dan, 5J
>>>> Electric motors work well even at high altitudes. So you can launch that drone at 18,000 and it will climb to 19,000. But launched from sea level? There's a difference between "ceiling" and climb possible on the stored energy. That model has a claimed flight time of up to 30 minutes. Can it climb continuously at about 20 knots vertical speed? That's what it would take to climb to FL250 and then come back down at a similar rate, all within 30 minutes.
Good point. As mentioned, I am not an expert on drones. Perhaps it was a run-way and it climbed until the batteries were dead with no plan to fly back down? The DJI apparently has a climb rate of 4 m/s x 60s/min x 30 min is 7,200 meters (23,600 ft)? Elevation in that area is ~2000 ft, so if it could climb for 30 min at the advertised climb rate, that would be 25,600 ft? There is apparently more powerful drones, one of which claims a climb rate of 40 m/s or (140 km/hr). The website doesn't say how long they can climb at that rate.
On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 4:40:32 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Just want to point out that, while the military likes to operate in MOAs
> where they must constantly be on the lookout for GA aircraft, they are
> not limited to flying in MOAs.Â* Just because the ceiling of an MOA is
> reported as 17,999' MSL does not mean that there will be no military
> aircraft above that.
>
Dan, you are correct of course. I was thinking around here where I live that the military controls the airspace from surface to infinity and they can do whatever they want. It is restricted airspace here rather than a MOA. The military probably would not be operating a UAS in a MOA like Condor 1, above or below FL180. I really should have said they should not be operating a military drone in Class A Civilian airspace without coordination with the FAA and ATC. If there was an IFR flight in that area, then there must not have been any coordination. Since the military has places they can do drone test, then no need to do it in ME. Thus, highly unlikely it was a military drone. Of course, I haven't worked with the military in more than 20 years, so things may have changed.
> Can it climb continuously at about 20 knots vertical speed? That's what it would take to climb to FL250 and then come back down at a similar rate, all within 30 minutes.
Another crazy possibilities is that someone was playing in wave. The report was in the same general area as the Mt. Washington Wave camp next week. The historical weather for February 27, shows winds WNW at 10 G20 so conditions may have been right for wave. That makes the webinar tonight even more interesting.
On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 5:14:53 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> >>>> Electric motors work well even at high altitudes. So you can launch that drone at 18,000 and it will climb to 19,000. But launched from sea level? There's a difference between "ceiling" and climb possible on the stored energy. That model has a claimed flight time of up to 30 minutes. Can it climb continuously at about 20 knots vertical speed? That's what it would take to climb to FL250 and then come back down at a similar rate, all within 30 minutes.
>
> Good point. As mentioned, I am not an expert on drones. Perhaps it was a run-away and it climbed until the batteries were dead with no plan to fly back down? The DJI apparently has a climb rate of 4 m/s x 60s/min x 30 min is 7,200 meters (23,600 ft)? Elevation in that area is ~2000 ft, so if it could climb for 30 min at the advertised climb rate, that would be 25,600 ft? There is apparently more powerful drones, one of which claims a climb rate of 40 m/s or (140 km/hr). The website doesn't say how long they can climb at that rate.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.