OpenAirDocs.org

20200612021069I

Incident · Substantial damage
Open the Markdown

FAA incident report · Aircraft · Indianapolis, IN · June 12, 2020

FAA Aviation Safety Information Portal

© OpenStreetMap
Date
June 12, 2020 · 12:15 local
Place
Indianapolis, IN
Phase of flight
Cruise/Level Flight
Damage
Substantial damage
Aircraft
NONE
People aboard
1
Fatal injuries
0
Other injuries
0
Pilot’s flight hours
20 total10 in this make and model

From the FAA’s Accident/Incident Data System (AIDS), through its Aviation Safety Information Portal, as reported. The NTSB investigates accidents separately, and its record of an accident is the fuller one. The aircraft is matched to the registry by N-number and event date, checked against the reported make and model; the registry’s history has gaps, so older matches can be wrong. Compare the reported make and model.

What happened

The FAA’s narrative, in sentence case. The FAA writes it in capitals and removes private details.

Make: innoflight technology

Model: galaxy 950 helicopter

Registration number: FA3WMEC4MX

Gross take off weight: 46.3 lbs

Incident location: privacy data omitted.

Remote pilot certificate #: privacy data omitted

Approximately 10 minutes into a planned commercial flight the small unmanned aircraft system (suas) impacted a communication tower guy wire resulting in a complete loss of control of the suas and the deployment of the onboard emergency recovery chute. Upon examination by the rpic (remote pilot in command) the suas suffered delamination of the main rotor blades, loss of all main rotor swash plate links, bent landing skids, loss of the GPS antennas, and damage to the lidar optics and parachute deployment mechanism. The tower antenna guy wire could not be visually inspected for damage and will be replaced by the tower owner as a precaution at a cost of approximately $5,000. The crash site was an open grassy area adjacent to the tower with no trees or bushes. No other damage to property or persons on the ground was reported. The entity with operational control for the suas is privacy data omitted which provides commercial three-dimensional positioning technologies. At the time of the incident the suas was performing a demo privacy data omittedpipeline survey for a company named privacy data omitted. The suas was only equipped with the privacy data omitted sensor payload and no in-flight video of the incident was taken. The original flight plan for the suas was established via preset way-points in an open area just east of the communication tower. On the day of the flight the customer expanded the flight plan profile to include the area adjacent to the communications tower. The tower was noted by the rpic and the visual observer (vo), but due to limited access to the site, and heavy traffic, an in-person preflight scouting of that area was not performed. As the tower could not be located in the rpic flight planner software used, or otherwise e-scouted from the field, the rpic and vo visually estimated the distance to the tower and the towers approximate height of 300 ft. the amended flight plan was approved by privacy data omitted and the rpic received verbal confirmation to proceed with the flight.

As the FAA filed it

MAKE: INNOFLIGHT TECHNOLOGY

MODEL: GALAXY 950 HELICOPTER

REGISTRATION NUMBER: FA3WMEC4MX

GROSS TAKE OFF WEIGHT: 46.3 LBS

INCIDENT LOCATION: ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^.

REMOTE PILOT CERTIFICATE #: ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^

APPROXIMATELY 10 MINUTES INTO A PLANNED COMMERCIAL FLIGHT THE SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM (SUAS) IMPACTED A COMMUNICATION TOWER GUY WIRE RESULTING IN A COMPLETE LOSS OF CONTROL OF THE SUAS AND THE DEPLOYMENT OF THE ONBOARD EMERGENCY RECOVERY CHUTE. UPON EXAMINATION BY THE RPIC (REMOTE PILOT IN COMMAND) THE SUAS SUFFERED DELAMINATION OF THE MAIN ROTOR BLADES, LOSS OF ALL MAIN ROTOR SWASH PLATE LINKS, BENT LANDING SKIDS, LOSS OF THE GPS ANTENNAS, AND DAMAGE TO THE LIDAR OPTICS AND PARACHUTE DEPLOYMENT MECHANISM. THE TOWER ANTENNA GUY WIRE COULD NOT BE VISUALLY INSPECTED FOR DAMAGE AND WILL BE REPLACED BY THE TOWER OWNER AS A PRECAUTION AT A COST OF APPROXIMATELY $5,000. THE CRASH SITE WAS AN OPEN GRASSY AREA ADJACENT TO THE TOWER WITH NO TREES OR BUSHES. NO OTHER DAMAGE TO PROPERTY OR PERSONS ON THE GROUND WAS REPORTED. THE ENTITY WITH OPERATIONAL CONTROL FOR THE SUAS IS ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^ WHICH PROVIDES COMMERCIAL THREE-DIMENSIONAL POSITIONING TECHNOLOGIES. AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT THE SUAS WAS PERFORMING A DEMO ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^PIPELINE SURVEY FOR A COMPANY NAMED ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^. THE SUAS WAS ONLY EQUIPPED WITH THE ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^ SENSOR PAYLOAD AND NO IN-FLIGHT VIDEO OF THE INCIDENT WAS TAKEN. THE ORIGINAL FLIGHT PLAN FOR THE SUAS WAS ESTABLISHED VIA PRESET WAY-POINTS IN AN OPEN AREA JUST EAST OF THE COMMUNICATION TOWER. ON THE DAY OF THE FLIGHT THE CUSTOMER EXPANDED THE FLIGHT PLAN PROFILE TO INCLUDE THE AREA ADJACENT TO THE COMMUNICATIONS TOWER. THE TOWER WAS NOTED BY THE RPIC AND THE VISUAL OBSERVER (VO), BUT DUE TO LIMITED ACCESS TO THE SITE, AND HEAVY TRAFFIC, AN IN-PERSON PREFLIGHT SCOUTING OF THAT AREA WAS NOT PERFORMED. AS THE TOWER COULD NOT BE LOCATED IN THE RPIC FLIGHT PLANNER SOFTWARE USED, OR OTHERWISE E-SCOUTED FROM THE FIELD, THE RPIC AND VO VISUALLY ESTIMATED THE DISTANCE TO THE TOWER AND THE TOWERS APPROXIMATE HEIGHT OF 300 FT. THE AMENDED FLIGHT PLAN WAS APPROVED BY ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^ AND THE RPIC RECEIVED VERBAL CONFIRMATION TO PROCEED WITH THE FLIGHT.