Tweet
CAA Safety Advisory issued - SUA -
I have to say, I don't believe that aircraft was 'ditched'. It looks like it went in where it went in and as we all know, multi rotors just drop out of the sky! A matter of opinion of course. But surely this should lead to the requirement of the 'little black box'?? Then there's no doubt. My aircraft has full logging and has the ability to show exactly what happened and when. This should be implemented on all commercial aircraft as a standard requirement along side the fail safe IMO.
There is suggestion that the FC used was a WKM - and that it cannot be flown manually if the GPS is out of action. This is not the case. In the early days of WKM when some pilots experienced the 'toilet bowl of death' effect. You could switch to manual and gain control of the aircraft again.
Providing of course that you can actually fly an aircraft and not just operate it in GPS mode all the time like soooo many other pilots. (What is the pilot in this cases flying background? Can they actually fly? - or is it another GPS hero?)
A prime example is photographers deciding they want to take some aerial snaps etc with no previous flying experience. I'd say about 50% of the attendees on my BNUC-S course were that way, and others I have spoken to had similar experience.
Frankly, I find the BNUC-S substantially lacking. How exactly can the CAA not see that pilot competence needs to go deeper than 'flying a simple flight plan' etc etc. The flight test for the BNUC-S is the weak link. It needs to be more in depth, actually proving a pilots competence to operate the aircraft in every single way. Not once was I asked to do anything particularly challenging. Just perform the task. I actually 'flew' my test, because I can. But many other would have just flicked that switch and away they went. Many having never flown manually before!
I want to see ALL commercial pilots tested extensively in a range of flying scenarios in all orientations and actually PROVE that they can fly in anything apart from GPS mode! It needs to be a full and proper licence and needs implementing sooner rather than later. Sure, that might push out some who might not be able to afford it, but the quality of flying will vastly improve, and ultimately, the safety of our industry.
A chimp can fly in GPS mode, I let my payload operator, who had never flown a damn thing in his life have a go of my little quad, he could move it around, happy as anything because he was 'flying'. But when it all goes wrong and you haven't got the skills to actually pilot the thing, you're gunna end up with a pile of bits and some explaining to do.
There is too much of the attitude that anyone can have a crack at this. That should not be the case. If you want to get involved, actually learn to fly properly first would be my advice.
But until the CAA actually step in and do something about it (which by looking at the RPAS integration plan, might be some time!), then we will definitely see a rise in incidents.
Pilot competence and safety should be the number one priority. At the moment there isn't enough in place within any national CAA to do it properly. (The UK CAA is actually leading the way on this front). Sure, it will come, but it might not be soon enough.
I have to say, I don't believe that aircraft was 'ditched'. It looks like it went in where it went in and as we all know, multi rotors just drop out of the sky! A matter of opinion of course. But surely this should lead to the requirement of the 'little black box'?? Then there's no doubt. My aircraft has full logging and has the ability to show exactly what happened and when. This should be implemented on all commercial aircraft as a standard requirement along side the fail safe IMO.
There is suggestion that the FC used was a WKM - and that it cannot be flown manually if the GPS is out of action. This is not the case. In the early days of WKM when some pilots experienced the 'toilet bowl of death' effect. You could switch to manual and gain control of the aircraft again.
Providing of course that you can actually fly an aircraft and not just operate it in GPS mode all the time like soooo many other pilots. (What is the pilot in this cases flying background? Can they actually fly? - or is it another GPS hero?)
A prime example is photographers deciding they want to take some aerial snaps etc with no previous flying experience. I'd say about 50% of the attendees on my BNUC-S course were that way, and others I have spoken to had similar experience.
Frankly, I find the BNUC-S substantially lacking. How exactly can the CAA not see that pilot competence needs to go deeper than 'flying a simple flight plan' etc etc. The flight test for the BNUC-S is the weak link. It needs to be more in depth, actually proving a pilots competence to operate the aircraft in every single way. Not once was I asked to do anything particularly challenging. Just perform the task. I actually 'flew' my test, because I can. But many other would have just flicked that switch and away they went. Many having never flown manually before!
I want to see ALL commercial pilots tested extensively in a range of flying scenarios in all orientations and actually PROVE that they can fly in anything apart from GPS mode! It needs to be a full and proper licence and needs implementing sooner rather than later. Sure, that might push out some who might not be able to afford it, but the quality of flying will vastly improve, and ultimately, the safety of our industry.
A chimp can fly in GPS mode, I let my payload operator, who had never flown a damn thing in his life have a go of my little quad, he could move it around, happy as anything because he was 'flying'. But when it all goes wrong and you haven't got the skills to actually pilot the thing, you're gunna end up with a pile of bits and some explaining to do.
There is too much of the attitude that anyone can have a crack at this. That should not be the case. If you want to get involved, actually learn to fly properly first would be my advice.
But until the CAA actually step in and do something about it (which by looking at the RPAS integration plan, might be some time!), then we will definitely see a rise in incidents.
Pilot competence and safety should be the number one priority. At the moment there isn't enough in place within any national CAA to do it properly. (The UK CAA is actually leading the way on this front). Sure, it will come, but it might not be soon enough.
Comment