This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Dismiss
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss
Back to Squawk list
  • 17

FAA reports steady increase of near-miss incidents involving drones and aircraft across Las Vegas

Submitted
The reports cover a span of years between 2014 to 2018 and show 95 reported drone sightings in the Las Vegas area. Dr. Walach said the number of reported drone sightings to the authorities is on pace to double in 2018 compared to the previous year. (www.ktnv.com) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77 5
The number of sightings would go down if they drones were software limited to 200' AGL and inoperable within 5 miles of an airport, of any sort.
ADXbear
ADXbear 4
No surprise to me.. i lived 1/2 mile south of LAS runway 25L i called out and reported many drones over my house and even closer to sunset blvd which runs directly next to the runways.. cops were aware but didnt know what to do.. as people were gone before they could get caught.. this must be handeled electronically to force drone activity away for arpts..
tyketto
No surprise here, either. This was happening a lot with balloon activity over in Sunset Park off of Sunset and Eastern back in the early-mid 2000s when I was primarily living in Vegas. Same still happens now, and used to happen when that golf course and RV park was on the other side of Tropicana across from the approach end of the 19s.

The problem here is ignorance of the laws on the part of both the drone operators and the LEOs, and the police need to bone up on that and enforce it, otherwise more laws are going to pop up for it with harsher punishments.
AAaviator
AAaviator 5
Those aren't drones in Vegas. They're element-115 powered anti-gravity prototype vehicles which occasionally stray too far south from Area 51

atanudey
Atanu Dey 2
They actually mean "near-hit" when they write "near-miss."

"I nearly missed my flight" means I actually caught the flight. Would you rather be nearly-saved or nearly-drowned?

It's time that the "near miss" language was dropped and "near hit" used.
WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDKdvTecYAM
mduralia
Mike Duralia 1
Somebody is a fan of George Carlin...
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
Whatever happened to "close call"?
Dreamflight767
Dreamflight767 2
The ONLY reason there has been an increase is because:

-The FAA is requiring reporting of/for drone activity.

-The FAA is always changing the reporting requirements.

Chances are, everything has remained status-quo.
tongo
Dan Grelinger 1
Illogical and Bogus. 50 years ago there were likely few if any reports, and it had nothing to do with reporting requirements. The more drones in the hands of unlicensed pilots, the more incidents there will be. Every year results in more drones being operated by non-pilots. THIS is the MAIN reason there are more reports.
PDLanum
Philip Lanum 2
Dude, 50 years ago there were no drones.
Please check your facts before posting.
You are propagating your favorite term "Fake News".
tongo
Dan Grelinger 2
Wow, you totally missed my point.
8literbeater
8literbeater 1
What is that "status quo" in your estimation?
Dreamflight767
Dreamflight767 2
What I'm suggesting is that the number of drone encounters has actually, by large, remained the same. BUT, because of the change to reporting requirements, the numbers become inflated.

Eg, before it was only required to report drones if there was a near or actual collision. Now it's required to report anytime anyone SEES a drone regardless of its safety/risk to flight.
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
I am inclined to disagree with you that drone encounter instances have remained the same. Airspace has remained the same, but the population of drone owners has significantly increased recently. The trend continues. You can now buy them at Costco at prices ranging from $80 to $800, and they don't stay on the floor long. I surmise that the vast majority of owners are actually going to fly them.

You may believe that all the new owners are going to be conscientious, responsible operators flying within the law, but I don't.
8literbeater
8literbeater 2
I suppose you are correct. There's definitely a responsibility to read what is reported verbatim, not to assume. It's human nature to assume that there are more UAVs present because of the report, but the report only suggests that more are being reported, like you said.

However[!], hobby "drones" are selling at a rate of about three million per year. I think it's a given that there are more and more violations and risks, with that many unregulated aircraft being put into the hands of the unwitting public.


I would say that if I see one of these aircraft while I'm flying, it's a safety risk to me.
8literbeater
8literbeater 1
https://expandedramblings.com/index.php/drone-statistics/
ssobol
Stefan Sobol 1
How many of these reports are verified as actual "drones"? At least early on, there were lots of reports of "drones" that were actually something else. It seems that a UK airliner that collided with a drone a few years ago near LHR actually hit a plastic bag.
tongo
Dan Grelinger 1
Maybe that should be your job.
ssobol
Stefan Sobol 1
Gladly, if someone would actually be willing to pay me to do it.
tongo
Dan Grelinger 1
Easy to throw spears. Harder to actually add value.
8literbeater
8literbeater 1
Some interesting info: https://expandedramblings.com/index.php/drone-statistics/
paulgilpin1953
paul gilpin 0
that 13 action news female anchor has a great rack.
oh.
yeah.
this is vegas.
mgrimler2
Fake...like most racks in LV. ;-)
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 2
Seriously ??????
glenver
glenver 1
made me look too....
tongo
Dan Grelinger 1
You made me look....
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 0
I'd like to give what for to whomever came up for the expression "near miss" when something actually did miss. I'll never get it.
Forensics1
Forensics1 1
Simple - a 'near miss' means an object missed the aircraft be just a few feet or a fee meters.All other misses are more like what you think they are i.e a miss. The implication is that a near miss came very close to impacting the aircraft, or one could say, all the souls on board the aircraft barely missed being victims of an accident where they all could have died a most horrible death. Other misses, not in the same proximity, are not nearly so worrisome. Got it?
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 0
Actually, Forensics...it was a rhetorical comment. Got it?
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
I posed a similar question a few years ago on FA. The general response was near or far,a miss is as good as a miss. English is such a flexible language.
AWAAlum
AWAAlum 1
English is difficult enough without putting this kind of a twist on it. It's goofy.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
As goofy as the pronunciation of 'ough'?
redcataviation
Sidney Smith 0
It's like drinking and driving, (drones and airplanes( someday there will be a hell of a wreck.

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!