..freaking brilliant.. This will bring consequences here in Blighty.. wait and see.. ..as if flight restrictions weren't enough already.. I'm afraid that regulations are going to kill the beast before it's even born..
According to this it's not extreme facilities.. http://www.suasnews.com/2013/04/222...factor-after-airborne-camera-falls-in-thames/
hmm on a second read, you are probably right Brad..misread? i interpreted that they offered the cable in principle but did it anyway.. Will wait for the MOR.. cheers!
Yes Andy, Mandatory Occurrence Report. Must do here in the U.K. after an incident (..it doesn't have to be necessarily a crash, could be a close call, control loss etc..) Reports and statistics are made public yearly. dan.
So Dan is there a way to get MOR reports on a monthly basis? I looked at the AAIB site and they don't list UAV as a searchable type of aircraft. Sent them an email this morning. Would be sad that you can't see them monthly. in the US the NTSB posts the start of all reports usually within days after the occurrence.
Gary, According to the ANO, regarding occurrences, the guide lines are pretty simillar to General Aviation so there should be a listing somewhere on-line, but you are right, looking at the AAIB Website i can not see any clear classification for UAVs. I guess they will include it on the GA report. In my experience as a glider pilot, there is an annual safety report listing all the MORs and recommendations, but i believe it's published by the BGA. Dan.
Yep I remember reading the BGA reports. Would expect to see something similar. Will post if I get a reply from the AAIB folks. If you see anything further on the London incident let us know. Certainly doesn't look like they were 150m away from the crowds. But there is always a slim chance that they received a waiver.
I have just done my BNUC-s Course and we looked at this as a case study how what TO DO! The CAA had granted him permissioni to fly as close as 5m from the crowd. Both him and the CAA have obviously learned that this is too close and the standard 50m is likely to apply from now on. There was a full investigation into this and the pilot came out of it with his hands clean because he had all the relevant permissions, had submitted a comprehensive risk assessment and had stated that in the event of an emergency, he would ditch it in the Thames which is exactly what he did. The CAA and the UAS cleared him of any pilot error. He recovered his octocopter, replaced the relevant components, re-took the flight test with the updated machine and was flying again for the same contractor within a couple of weeks! It turned out that the GPS had come loose and the copter started 'toilet bowling'. Accidents happen, you just have to make sure your arse is covered if it does. Alot was lurned but there is a no-blame culture here in the UK.
I don’t know...looks a lot like pilot error (loss of orientation) and/or poor preparation of the UAV on the part of the operator. These systems are in no way “plug and play”, and anybody who represents them as such, or assumes they can operate them with little preparation, training or experience, is making a huge mistake. I’d be very careful making this kind of accusation, especially in a public forum. Your attempt to hide behind a pseudonym is no protection, and paints you in a negative light, too.
Steve, I could not have said it better! Moderators should delete SDF's comment. Sounds like a competitor finding an opportunity to bash.
To "Service Drone Fail": I'm sorry, but you seem to be working on the basis that this forum is an anvil upon which you can beat out your complaints against a particular vendor and/or pilot. It is not. There are multiple possible causes for such a mishap and you cannot simply make the inferential leap that because the aircraft crashed that all such aircraft are therefore "deadly dangerous." Your arguments, while seeming to be valid, are based on a premise that is not proven. Sure, all aircraft have the potential to be dangerous, but if a Boeing 747 crashes, would you argue all Boeing 747 are "deadly dangerous." I think you will see my point if you imagine that it turned out to be that it was indeed pilot error? Would your assertion then be: "All Service Drone pilots are deadly dangerous?" Furthermore, you might wish to report the issues with a little more balance. For example: according to this report, the pilot, on seeing the aircraft was in trouble, flew it out over the River Thames. This happened in April 2013, was discussed on this forum. You are now suing them according to your posting on YouTube. Making postings like yours on a globally accessible forum may well be the basis of a counterclaim from Service Drone. You have 24 hours to amend this posting to one that expresses a more professional view point rather than merely venting your spleen at a vendor. This is a professional forum. Your posting is unprofessional. Please consider amending your posting or I will delete it. Furthermore, if you wish to continue to use this forum, please use your real first and last name. This is no place for anonymity. The reasons for using your real first and last name (and how to change your user name) are explained here: http://forum.freeflysystems.com/index.php?threads/real-names.497/ Andy.
For the time being, I will leave it as a monument to what is inappropriate for this forum, Howard, even though I do agree with you. Personally I don't like to censor valid discourse as my position has always been one of "reasonable people can disagree." However there is a line between "disagree" and "disagreeable." In this case, what would be more valid and useful, would be postings that give us all a deeper understanding of what the mishap causes were rather that universal and unsupported statements. Why did the copter crash? What evidence do we have that supports it? We all know the risks associated with copters and crowds. The poster asserts that the pilots were professional. But as we also know, some more than others, professional pilots still have accidents -- so may we please have light shed on the mishap rather than just blowing smoke? Andy.