OpenAirDocs.org

20260828011329I

Incident · Destroyed
Open the Markdown

FAA incident report · Aircraft · Frisco, TX · August 28, 2026

FAA Aviation Safety Information Portal

© OpenStreetMap
Date
August 28, 2026 · 20:11 local
Place
Frisco, TX
Phase of flight
Cruise/Level Flight
Operating rules
Air taxi and commuter (Part 135)
Operator
6OOA
Damage
Destroyed
Aircraft
NONE
People aboard
0
Fatal injuries
0
Other injuries
0

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.

UAS hit a crane. Prior observations indicated the crane was not at the construction site until 2 days before. Ch did not see any NOTAMS for the crane being on site. The tower of the crane reached above 200' AGL. The regulation for cranes to file NOTAMS is not enforceable according to the FAA airports division. Gsc did not see the crane before the incident due to (1) distance from the nest and (2) crane was obsured by other buildings. Actions taken by the company to prevent a reoccurrence: (1) the immediate action the company took was made no fly zones around large commercial areas/ high rise buildings. (2) wing is working on improving their camera and acoustic software to be better at identifying cranes and construction sites.

A. it is still in work and roll out will be in the next 2-3 weeks. (3) they moved their mapping and data review from Monday to wednesdays, since it seemed more logical for cranes to be positioned into place during the normal work week. (4) they will have people reviewing the UAS camera footage data daily to see if they can identify new construction sites and then put in a no-fly zone for the construction site. (5) ch searches local data bases for construction permits however there is a severe lag time between filing for a permit to when the crane is actually on site.

As the FAA filed it

UAS HIT A CRANE. PRIOR OBSERVATIONS INDICATED THE CRANE WAS NOT AT THE CONSTRUCTION SITE UNTIL 2 DAYS BEFORE. CH DID NOT SEE ANY NOTAMS FOR THE CRANE BEING ON SITE. THE TOWER OF THE CRANE REACHED ABOVE 200' AGL. THE REGULATION FOR CRANES TO FILE NOTAMS IS NOT ENFORCEABLE ACCORDING TO THE FAA AIRPORTS DIVISION. GSC DID NOT SEE THE CRANE BEFORE THE INCIDENT DUE TO (1) DISTANCE FROM THE NEST AND (2) CRANE WAS OBSURED BY OTHER BUILDINGS. ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE COMPANY TO PREVENT A REOCCURRENCE: (1) THE IMMEDIATE ACTION THE COMPANY TOOK WAS MADE NO FLY ZONES AROUND LARGE COMMERCIAL AREAS/ HIGH RISE BUILDINGS. (2) WING IS WORKING ON IMPROVING THEIR CAMERA AND ACOUSTIC SOFTWARE TO BE BETTER AT IDENTIFYING CRANES AND CONSTRUCTION SITES.

A. IT IS STILL IN WORK AND ROLL OUT WILL BE IN THE NEXT 2-3 WEEKS. (3) THEY MOVED THEIR MAPPING AND DATA REVIEW FROM MONDAY TO WEDNESDAYS, SINCE IT SEEMED MORE LOGICAL FOR CRANES TO BE POSITIONED INTO PLACE DURING THE NORMAL WORK WEEK. (4) THEY WILL HAVE PEOPLE REVIEWING THE UAS CAMERA FOOTAGE DATA DAILY TO SEE IF THEY CAN IDENTIFY NEW CONSTRUCTION SITES AND THEN PUT IN A NO-FLY ZONE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. (5) CH SEARCHES LOCAL DATA BASES FOR CONSTRUCTION PERMITS HOWEVER THERE IS A SEVERE LAG TIME BETWEEN FILING FOR A PERMIT TO WHEN THE CRANE IS ACTUALLY ON SITE.