20240906012479I

Incident · Minor damage

FAA incident report · Hood Tech Corp Mechanical HTMC-40 · Pendleton, OR · September 6, 2024

Date
September 6, 2024 · 13:42 local
Place
Pendleton, OR
Phase of flight
Takeoff: Climb Out
Damage
Minor damage
Aircraft
N59MC
Reported as
Hood Tech Corp Mechanical HTMC-40
People aboard
0
Fatal injuries
0
Other injuries
0
Pilot’s flight hours
250 total20 in this make and model3 in the last 90 days

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.

FLARES2 privacy data omitted executed a normal preflight checks, which include checking the voltage of every battery cell and performing a spin check where the multicopter’s rotors are powered at low RPM to confirm that they are spinning and the esc's are reporting healthy. All preflight checks passed. When the scaneagle 3 PIC communicated that they were ready to liftoff, I commanded the liftoff of flares 2. Within a handful of seconds after liftoff I observed that flares 2 was failing to meet the 5 m/s climb rate that it should. I aborted the launch attempt by switching the flight mode from auto launch to loiter, with the intent of landing immediately. At that point flares 2 had sufficient control authority to maintain position control, but not altitude. Flares 2 descended back to the ground with the scaneagle 3 still attached. Immediately on ground impact I commanded flares 2 rotors to disarm. The scaneagle 3 became detached from flares 2 on ground impact, and the two aircraft came to rest a few feet apart.

Post incident review indicated that the bottom battery experienced a partical failure resulting in insificant power.

Minor damage to FLARES2 and SCANEAGLE3. No property damage and no injuries.

As the FAA filed it

FLARES2 ^PRIVACY DATA OMITTED^ EXECUTED A NORMAL PREFLIGHT CHECKS, WHICH INCLUDE CHECKING THE VOLTAGE OF EVERY BATTERY CELL AND PERFORMING A SPIN CHECK WHERE THE MULTICOPTER’S ROTORS ARE POWERED AT LOW RPM TO CONFIRM THAT THEY ARE SPINNING AND THE ESC'S ARE REPORTING HEALTHY. ALL PREFLIGHT CHECKS PASSED. WHEN THE SCANEAGLE 3 PIC COMMUNICATED THAT THEY WERE READY TO LIFTOFF, I COMMANDED THE LIFTOFF OF FLARES 2. WITHIN A HANDFUL OF SECONDS AFTER LIFTOFF I OBSERVED THAT FLARES 2 WAS FAILING TO MEET THE 5 M/S CLIMB RATE THAT IT SHOULD. I ABORTED THE LAUNCH ATTEMPT BY SWITCHING THE FLIGHT MODE FROM AUTO LAUNCH TO LOITER, WITH THE INTENT OF LANDING IMMEDIATELY. AT THAT POINT FLARES 2 HAD SUFFICIENT CONTROL AUTHORITY TO MAINTAIN POSITION CONTROL, BUT NOT ALTITUDE. FLARES 2 DESCENDED BACK TO THE GROUND WITH THE SCANEAGLE 3 STILL ATTACHED. IMMEDIATELY ON GROUND IMPACT I COMMANDED FLARES 2 ROTORS TO DISARM. THE SCANEAGLE 3 BECAME DETACHED FROM FLARES 2 ON GROUND IMPACT, AND THE TWO AIRCRAFT CAME TO REST A FEW FEET APART.

POST INCIDENT REVIEW INDICATED THAT THE BOTTOM BATTERY EXPERIENCED A PARTICAL FAILURE RESULTING IN INSIFICANT POWER.

MINOR DAMAGE TO FLARES2 AND SCANEAGLE3. NO PROPERTY DAMAGE AND NO INJURIES.