Kerrville clarifies search and rescue drone caused military helicopter emergency landing

[mavic3usa]

I had heard rumors about this but waited for it to hit the news:

Kerrville clarifies drone involved in helicopter incident was authorized

KERRVILLE, Texas — The City of Kerrville has clarified that the drone involved in an incident forcing a military helicopter to make an emergency landing was not

news4sanantonio.com

Original thread with member's comments on this incident while it was still "under review."

Drone Hits Helicopter​

 

[mavic3usa]

City of Kerrville TX Facebook page.

 

[GFields]

I have never heard of a drone "stalling"
Seems to me that there is more to this story than is being reported

 

[anotherlab]

I have never heard of a drone "stalling"
Seems to me that there is more to this story than is being reported

Or it was being explained by people, or to people who are unfamiliar with drones and the terminology.

My guess is that it flew higher than it was supposed to, the pilot was hovering, and it was hit a helicopter.

The drone pilot should have had a spotter to notify them that a helicopter was close by. Even with being authorized to operate in that area, it's the drone pilot's responsibility to stay clear of other aircraft.

 

[mavic3usa]

I have never heard of a drone "stalling"
Seems to me that there is more to this story than is being reported

I can only think of 5 reasons why an amateur pilot or a non-drone person who made this statement and I'm not an expert in this but some variation of:

1. If the drone was flying high and far away and it flew so far that it disconnected and the setting was Hover, it the pilot doesn't understand what is happening thinking they can still see the camera view but the drone won't move then it's stalled.....or,

2.If the maximum height is set to 400 feet and you start flying far away and you try to go to 500 feet and but you hit that ceiling at 400 feet and it won't go any higher but you really need to get the drone up and over, the drone might appear to be stalling if you don't know there is a manual setting....or,

3.If you are running a mission (that you didn't set up) and along the way the drone lose the connection and the setting is to Pause or Hover, the drone will "stall" along the route and since you are disconnected.....or,

4.If there is some weird geozone in the drone's software or you are running a rogue drone program and you leave that zone and now you can't get back in from some reason, the drone appears to "stall".....or,

5.What I is believe which is dishonest, deception, and disingenuous on the part of the city and the drone organization, and all the actors involved. No transparency, no accountability. Not saying there is ill-intent from the beginning, this isn't a false flag but they appear to be covering their tracks or failure to admit fault or not making it seem like they jumped to conclusions.

IMHO

 

[GFields]

I can only think of 5 reasons why an amateur pilot or a non-drone person who made this statement and I'm not an expert in this but some variation of:

1. If the drone was flying high and far away and it flew so far that it disconnected and the setting was Hover, it the pilot doesn't understand what is happening thinking they can still see the camera view but the drone won't move then it's stalled.....or,

2.If the maximum height is set to 400 feet and you start flying far away and you try to go to 500 feet and but you hit that ceiling at 400 feet and it won't go any higher but you really need to get the drone up and over, the drone might appear to be stalling if you don't know there is a manual setting....or,

3.If you are running a mission (that you didn't set up) and along the way the drone lose the connection and the setting is to Pause or Hover, the drone will "stall" along the route and since you are disconnected.....or,

4.If there is some weird geozone in the drone's software or you are running a rogue drone program and you leave that zone and now you can't get back in from some reason, the drone appears to "stall".....or,

5.What I is believe which is dishonest, deception, and disingenuous on the part of the city and the drone organization, and all the actors involved. No transparency, no accountability. Not saying there is ill-intent from the beginning, this isn't a false flag but they appear to be covering their tracks or failure to admit fault or not making it seem like they jumped to conclusions.

IMHO

I agree. There is too much speculation to the details.
I would think that a drone that was authorized to fly in a TFR would be flown by an experienced pilot, not someone who has no clue to "RTH" vs "Hover", etc.

 

[High_Order1]

Don't know anything about this. Guess I'll search.

In the meantime, did the drone ruin the helicopter or what?

 

[mavic3usa]

This might shed some light on the incident. It's a very interesting article but not sure about the details whether they are factual or not. The part about the automatic flight or waypoints is the most interesting. No real surprises when it comes to the shenanigans.

M

Post in thread 'The Truth about the Texas Flood drone crash'

Jul 31, 2025

Here's a link to the article you mentioned in your video.

For reference only. This article is dated 7/29/2025 so it appears to be 2 days older than the article in your video:

Official Narrative Unravels: Sources Say Blackhawk Was Struck by Law Enforcement Drone in Kerrville Flood Response

Officials blamed a rogue drone operator. But sources say it was a law enforcement drone on a routine return flight—raising serious questions about what DPS isn’t saying.

www.thezerolux.com

• mavic3usa

 

[Felix le Chat]

This might shed some light on the incident. It's a very interesting article but not sure about the details whether they are factual or not. The part about the automatic flight or waypoints is the most interesting. No real surprises when it comes to the shenanigans.

M

Post in thread 'The Truth about the Texas Flood drone crash'

Jul 31, 2025

Here's a link to the article you mentioned in your video.

For reference only. This article is dated 7/29/2025 so it appears to be 2 days older than the article in your video:

Official Narrative Unravels: Sources Say Blackhawk Was Struck by Law Enforcement Drone in Kerrville Flood Response

Officials blamed a rogue drone operator. But sources say it was a law enforcement drone on a routine return flight—raising serious questions about what DPS isn’t saying.

www.thezerolux.com

• mavic3usa

Still waiting to hear the whole story (factual, not supposition).

I'm struck by the similarities with the "...rogue drones caused a crisis shutdown of Gatwick..." story (December 2018). That started out as being down to the actions of anonymous recreational mischief makers.

It took nearly 3 years for the truth to come out.... the only drone Aeroscope caught being operated around Gatwick airport on those three days was a DJI Matrice that belonged to the police.

 

[AnzacJack]

I think the word 'drone' and a picture of a phantom could be misleading. This could very well have been a VTOl or fixed wing drone that was operating autonomously and not specifically a multirotor that everyone is assuming. Here in Australia, we have a lot of fixed wing drones operating in situations just like this, ( I was doing just this yesterday) and could very well stall if something went wrong in the flight dynamics.

 

[AnzacJack]

running a rogue drone program

what are you defining a rogue drone program as?
Anything not DJI?

 

[mavic3usa]

what are you defining a rogue drone program as?
Anything not DJI?

Obviously none of this likely happened since we are closer to the truth about whatever happened. But I imagine safeguards built into the drones to keep them "contained" but if you use some other 3rd party software that may not be approved or doesn't play well with the approved safeguards, things could go wrong cause the drone path to be unpredictable maybe even appear to be erratic.

I guess my mind wanders like that when I'm being lied to by my government. Like many others, I tend to believe the authorities at first take even when I have doubts in the back of my mind. To me it would be ludicrous to incorrectly blame a consumer drone but I now see the incompetence knows no bounds. Almost makes it seem to me to be intentional; I hate to think of this way but what else could it be?

 

[AnzacJack]

but if you use some other 3rd party software that may not be approved

Im not 100% over all of the regs in the US, but do you have a list of approved software over there?

 

[mavic3usa]

Im not 100% over all of the regs in the US, but do you have a list of approved software over there?

I don't work for any agency, I would imagine you just can't load any kind of drone software you want to control or use with the drone but I could be wrong. Who knows but it's no longer an issue since that's not what happened here.

 

[High_Order1]

Im not 100% over all of the regs in the US, but do you have a list of approved software over there?

This is an interesting thought.

As far as I know, for general remote pilot use, I don't think so. For certain governmental operations, I... wonder.

I also wonder if the FCC approval is contingent on using the factory software. Hope no one kicks that nest...

 

[High_Order1]

I think the word 'drone' and a picture of a phantom could be misleading. This could very well have been a VTOl or fixed wing drone that was operating autonomously and not specifically a multirotor that everyone is assuming. Here in Australia, we have a lot of fixed wing drones operating in situations just like this, ( I was doing just this yesterday) and could very well stall if something went wrong in the flight dynamics.

My head is clogged today, but if this is the incident I am thinking it is, there is a picture of the drone with a tx highway patrol FAA ID sticker on it.

They are kind of stuck. They want to use these as examples of why greater regulation is necessary, but they can't let people dig too deep because then they find out usually it is not the average drone pilot, and then some even realize that in all the incidents, the drone doesn't really take the manned craft out.

 

[AnzacJack]

This is an interesting thought.

As far as I know, for general remote pilot use, I don't think so. For certain governmental operations, I... wonder.

I also wonder if the FCC approval is contingent on using the factory software. Hope no one kicks that nest...

In the early day here in Aust, it was stated in the regs that software was not to be tampered with. But it is no longer the case, and we dont have a list of approved mission software