An Aerolineas Argentinas Boeing 737-800, flying from Trelew, northeastern Patagonia, was struck by a drone during the final landing approach to Buenos Aires Jorge Newbery Airport, La Capital reports. At the time of the accident, the plane was flying over the Tierra Santa religious theme park.
While the Boeing landed safely, the captain of the aircraft notified the tower that a major incident was averted, after the drone struck below the window on the commander’s side of the aircraft. “Had it [drone] hit the engine it would have failed the engine,” the pilot is quoted as saying by La Capital. He also noted that “three weeks ago, in the same place, we crossed a drone within five meters,” Newsinflight.com reports.
There were no injuries, but the aircraft did sustain minor damage, the company announced, confirming the incident. “Although the aircraft, a Boeing 737-800, suffered minor damage, it was out of service for inspections,” the company said in a statement by Infobae. The incident is now being investigated by the National Civil Aviation Administration (ANAC) and the Civil Aviation Accident Investigation Board (JIAAC).
Article 6 of the ANAC’s Provisional Regulation of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles prohibits”the operation of remotely piloted air vehicles or remotely controlled aerial vehicle systems in controlled airspace, visual corridors, and helicopters” unless special authorization is obtained from the authorities by the operator. (RT)
Source: Mirage News
Wouldn’t it probably be more accurate to say that the 737 hit the drone, not the other way around?
Guy: They ran into each other. Since the mUA did not belong where it was it is appropriate to make it the hitter and the plane the hittie (my word).
Niel
I notice you automatically assume the claim of a drone is correct. Since almost every single claim has no basis in fact or proof of any Kind, including the one in England that ended up being suspected as a paper bag, and the fact that in the us alone there are THOUSANDS of bird strikes…. unless they find pieces of the drone, I would hold judgment.
But to put my two cents worth in. the previous poster is correct, and it is like the aero Mexico mid air over Cerritos CA. It is always the little guys fault even when proven otherwise. In that incident The DC 9 was at the bottom edge of the TCA the Piper Pilot probably confused because a major visual landmark (a giant 12 story natural gas storage tank) that defined the corner of the TCA had been torn down but was STILL on the chart he bought days earlier. The DC-9 ran over from behind the Piper, but the papers could not get it in their head the difference. In the end we are splitting hairs.
Thankfully this time there were no fatalities
For the time, the only evidence we have is a pilot report over the radio. No evidence of collision and no evidence of drone.