Drone pilot agrees to plead guilty in collision that grounded aircraft fighting Palisades fire

Los Angeles Times

31-01-2025

A man who was piloting a drone that collided with a firefighting aircraft on the Palisades fire has agreed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, pay a fine and complete community service, federal prosecutors said Friday.
Peter Tripp Akemann, 56, of Culver City was charged with a count of unsafe operation of an unmanned aircraft. He faces up to a year in federal prison, prosecutors said.
The drone, which authorities say was flying in restricted airspace on Jan. 9, put a fist-sized hole in the wing of a Super Scooper — a massive fixed-wing plane that can drop large amounts of water onto a fast-moving fire. The collision knocked the plane was out of commission for about five days and destroyed the drone.
As part of the plea agreement, Akemann agreed to pay full restitution to the Government of Quebec, which supplied the plane, and an aircraft repair company that repaired the plane. It cost at least $65,169 to repair the plane, prosecutors said.
Akemann also agreed to complete 150 hours of community service in support of the 2025 Southern California wildfire relief effort.
'This defendant recklessly flew an aircraft into airspace where first responders were risking their lives in an attempt to protect lives and property,' Acting United States Attorney Joseph T. McNally said in a press release.
The wind-driven Palisades fire raged for days in Pacific Palisades and surrounding communities, burning 23,400 acres, killing 12 people and destroying more than 6,800 properties, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.
Temporary flight restrictions were put in place across portions of Southern California as the firestorms tore through Los Angeles County. Those restrictions mean that all aircraft not involved in wildfire suppression operations have to get permission to enter the airspace. Officials said no permission had been given at the time the drone collided with the plane.
Drones flying in the fire zone were a persistent problem as firefighters battled the Palisades fire. Aerial footage of the devastation wrought by the blaze went viral on social media, but was frequently criticized by officials and others who said the drones were jeopardizing the fire fight.
'This is not just harmless fun. This is incredibly dangerous,' Chris Thomas, public information officer for the Palisades fire, told the Times this month after the Super Scooper was hit. 'Seriously, what if that plane had gone down? It could have taken out a row of homes. It could have taken out a school.'
The crash—and the flouting of the flight restriction by others—prompted the Federal Aviation Administration to issue a stern warning against flying drones near wildfires.
'It's a federal crime, punishable by up to 12 months in prison, to interfere with firefighting efforts on public lands,' the FAA said. 'Additionally, the FAA can impose a civil penalty of up to $75,000 against any drone pilot who interferes with wildfire suppression, law enforcement or emergency response operations' during a temporary flight restriction.
Drones flying in wildfire zones has been an issue for the FAA and fire officials for at least a decade.
In 2019, the U.S. Forest Service reported there were at least 20 unauthorized drone flights over or near wildfires in seven states, including California. Flights resulted in aerial firefighting operations being temporarily shut down nine times that year, according to the forest service.
'This damage caused to the Super Scooper is a stark reminder that flying drones during times of emergency poses an extreme threat to personnel trying to help people and compromises the overall ability of police and fire to conduct operations,' McNally said. 'As this case demonstrates, we will track down drone operators who violate the law and interfere with the critical work of our first responders.'
The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has spent weeks investigating the cause of the Palisades fire. From the beginning, there has been speculation an 8-acre blaze that fire officials thought they had put out on Jan. 1 in the same area reignited and spread because of intense winds, or a new fire was somehow sparked nearby that morning.
But sources said this week no conclusion had been made and it was still a possibility the fire was sparked on Jan. 7.
Times staff writers Terry Castleman and Grace Toohey contributed to this report