Which authority should I contact in the event of a flyaway?

[sar104]

@Starstuff posted the link above but just for a visual I have attached the NTSB's flowchart. As a 107 operator I would only report to the NTSB when the FAA report is required per 107.9

§ 107.9 Safety event reporting.​

No later than 10 calendar days after an operation that meets the criteria of either paragraph (a) or (b) of this section, a remote pilot in command must report to the FAA, in a manner acceptable to the Administrator, any operation of the small unmanned aircraft involving at least:

(a) Serious injury to any person or any loss of consciousness; or

(b) Damage to any property, other than the small unmanned aircraft, unless one of the following conditions is satisfied:

(1) The cost of repair (including materials and labor) does not exceed $500; or
(2) The fair market value of the property does not exceed $500 in the event of total loss.

View attachment 160129

That NTSB advisory is very strange. It's dated August 1, 2022, but it repeatedly references the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-95), and specifically sections 333 and 336, which was superseded by the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018.

In any case, its interpretation of reportable incidents, including, for example, that if a UAV used under Part 107 loses part of a prop then that must be reported to the NTSB, is simply absurd.

I've emailed the listed contact requesting clarification.

 

[Ty Pilot]

That NTSB advisory is very strange. It's dated August 1, 2022, but it repeatedly references the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-95), and specifically sections 333 and 336, which was superseded by the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018.

In any case, its interpretation of reportable incidents, including, for example, that if a UAV used under Part 107 loses part of a prop then that must be reported to the NTSB, is simply absurd.

I've emailed the listed contact requesting clarification.

I agree, they need to clear things up.

 

[Deleted member 170899]

Great response and the attitude all 107 pilots should adhere to....

Thank you. I did try to be as clear and helpful as I could be. I thought it was a good way for the OP look at his situation. I certainly don't see it as a straw man argument - or any sort of argument at all.

And given that the rule clearly calls for a call to NTSB and therefore what the NTSB wants - not a waste of time or resources. (Unlike emails that ask them to explain themselves.)

At any rate I found response #13 to be incredibly rude and unhelpful in any way.

 

[RangerEd]

Related topic: I have my contact info on my drone so if such a thing should occur, and the drone lands itself, and someone finds it and chooses to do the right thing, I could get my drone back.

Same here. Phone # and email inside the battery cavity as well as each battery.

 

[jephoto]

I've seen a lot of discussion here about how to handle flyaway replacement, or how to determine the cause of the flyaway. My question is not related to either of those, but instead is which authority should I contact, and when should I contact them in the event of a flyaway? My fear is that in the moments after a flyaway my drone will pose a danger to both aircraft and/or individuals on the ground, and I'd like to mitigate this as much as possible.

I had this exact same problem back in October of last year. When I had. Both loss of connection to my controller and GPS at the same time with my P4 pro V2.
I was flying in the city and there was a 15 mile an hour wind and I was very concerned about the drone drifting far enough that it could crash into either a building or onto the expressway couple miles away. And I was pretty frantic about who to contact to report it. And it wasn’t easy. In the end, I ended up filing a report with NASA that has a division that tracks flyaways and accidents. But even they didn’t get back to me for several weeks after I filled out the form online.
As it turned out, it only drifted less than a mile, and then went into auto land mode. And probably got stuck in a tree where it sat for six weeks before the leaves were gone and weather brought it down. And a couple of university students who found it on the sidewalk Took it home and contacted me bravo for them…
I tried to contact the local FSDO, but since I wasn’t anywhere near an airport or flight patterns, there was nothing to report to them, they didn’t appear concerned.
But I was appalled , at how difficult it was to find someone to report it to that cared about it.
And not only do I have a concern about where it might go, but I wanted to cover my butt in case the FAA came calling about an incident. Luckily, there wasn’t one.

 

[jephoto]

Related topic: I have my contact info on my drone so if such a thing should occur, and the drone lands itself, and someone finds it and chooses to do the right thing, I could get my drone back.

Exact thing happens to me a few months ago

 

[JoelP]

It wasn’t that many years ago that we didn’t have LAANC. The SOP for me was to call the ATC at the Class D airport that controlled the airspace that I was flying in. This airspace covered the corner of the field where I flew to test new features and firmware upgrades. I would tell the timeslot and elevation to be used. I was asked to call back when I was done. When I first called there the first time I was told that if I ever had a fly-away I should call them let them know. I also followed this procedure for the larger Class C airspace I lived near.

Then LAANC became available for which the SOP is far simpler. I have never experienced a fly away near a controlled airspace, but if I did I would still call the ATC which my drone was flying towards or near. They are very busy people, but surely would want to know about this. The NTSB has the function of investigating accidents, not controlling flights that are operating real time in the affected area.

As a Part 107 pilot I know of no regulation that specifically covered this circumstance, but it seems to be common sense to do what you can to prevent a potential collision with a manned aircraft.

 

[Tim40]

I've had three flyaways. But those drones were model airplanes. And it was years ago - when nobody went Karen over model airplanes (now called drones, thanks to the FAA) on their roofs, their yards or driveways - that's right. All of them were friendly - and very curious about the hobby. In some way, I got the impression that they felt a bit special - that they were part of something interesting. The driveway shattered my foamy - and the two ladies there helped me pick up the pieces. They'd been outside in lawn chairs when it came down. And as I was driving by looking for it - they flagged me down. My kids found the other two. But this was back in the day - well before the FAA began their anti drone campaign. It's not about safety - and I believe that the full scale pilots manning the FAA are threatened by our drones. Their livelihoods are threatened, by our drones. Specially ag pilots. Otherwise, they wouldn't be doing insane things like banning 30g ducted tinywhoops from being flown FPV/BVLOS sans spotters. Not to mention RID. And add to that the obvious implications of the fact they don't want to know that you have an active flyaway going on - the implication being that they don't really think it's a threat to be dealt with in real time.

 

[jephoto]

It wasn’t that many years ago that we didn’t have LAANC. The SOP for me was to call the ATC at the Class D airport that controlled the airspace that I was flying in. This airspace covered the corner of the field where I flew to test new features and firmware upgrades. I would tell the timeslot and elevation to be used. I was asked to call back when I was done. When I first called there the first time I was told that if I ever had a fly-away I should call them let them know. I also followed this procedure for the larger Class C airspace I lived near.

Then LAANC became available for which the SOP is far simpler. I have never experienced a fly away near a controlled airspace, but if I did I would still call the ATC which my drone was flying towards or near. They are very busy people, but surely would want to know about this. The NTSB has the function of investigating accidents, not controlling flights that are operating real time in the affected area.

As a Part 107 pilot I know of no regulation that specifically covered this circumstance, but it seems to be common sense to do what you can to prevent a potential collision with a manned aircraft.

In my case I was a couple miles west of Downtown chicago, nowhere near any airport or high enough for manned aircraft unless there was a Helicopter taking off. My Phantom was @ 187' up flying East (towards downtown) with a 15mph wind also blowing east. My concern was buildings on the U. of Illinois campus and an expressway beyond that.

But because I lost both GPS (first) and then transmission,Thankfully, it did what it was supposed to - Auto land. Safely. But at the time I didn't know it would do that.

And I was a bit frantic on who I should notify. Surprised me really when I realized there wasn't any clear protocol on who to call.

 

[Maviac]

Thank you. I did try to be as clear and helpful as I could be. I thought it was a good way for the OP look at his situation. I certainly don't see it as a straw man argument - or any sort of argument at all.

And given that the rule clearly calls for a call to NTSB and therefore what the NTSB wants - not a waste of time or resources. (Unlike emails that ask them to explain themselves.)

At any rate I found response #13 to be incredibly rude and unhelpful in any way.

I (and apparently others) found it helpful, as it points out what appears to be erroneous (or at least inconsistent) information being disseminated by a federal agency. And I agree, reviewing the rule, that portions of the flow chart and advisory don’t make sense and don’t appear to be supported by the actual regulatory text.

In my view it’s better to get clarification than continue with uncertainty (or what appears to be bad information), especially when the rule itself does NOT clearly require a call to the NTSB.

 

[Deleted member 170899]

I (and apparently others) found it helpful, as it points out what appears to be erroneous (or at least inconsistent) information being disseminated by a federal agency. And I agree, reviewing the rule, that portions of the flow chart and advisory don’t make sense and don’t appear to be supported by the actual regulatory text.

In my view it’s better to get clarification than continue with uncertainty (or what appears to be bad information), especially when the rule itself does NOT clearly require a call to the NTSB.

Training is an important factor in any aviation endeavor. For those who took the Pilot Institute 107 course, this slide was included. Make of it what you will.

 

[Tim40]

If the FAA actually thought our drones were a lethal danger - they'd insist on instant notification of flyaways so they could shoot them down before they killed everybody on the planet (everybody? poetic license to be sarcastic). But - the FAA knows nobody's likely gonna get hurt - that no aircraft will be downed by the flyaway - so they ignore them. Proving that it's not really about safety - but more about restricting drones. Talk to an agriculture crop spraying pilot to learn more.

 

[JoelP]

I have wondered about the point listing “flight control system malfunction or failure”. Every one of us has likely experienced a loss of connection between our drone and our controller. It would seem that this is a malfunction, but seems excessive to report this to the FAA, especially if the drone is recovered and no damage was done to person or property.

 

[Ty Pilot]

I have wondered about the point listing “flight control system malfunction or failure”. Every one of us has likely experienced a loss of connection between our drone and our controller. It would seem that this is a malfunction.

I would think that "most" loss of communication between the controller and drone experienced is not a malfunction of equipment; but rather a misuse of the equipment.

For instance if a pilot flies out 2 or 3 miles, or around buildings, or behind trees, or whatever, they should expect at some point, to go beyond the limit of available signal strength. Most drone user manuals even spell this out in multiple warnings. Just like flying till the battery dies and force lands in the sea, this is not a malfunction of the battery, it is pilot error.

 

[Deleted member 170899]

I have wondered about the point listing “flight control system malfunction or failure”. Every one of us has likely experienced a loss of connection between our drone and our controller. It would seem that this is a malfunction, but seems excessive to report this to the FAA, especially if the drone is recovered and no damage was done to person or property.

This is not an FAA reporting requirement. It is an NTSB reporting requirement.

The NTSB's responsibility is to prevent accidents. If you have a flyaway the NTSB wants to know about it. Why? Because it provides a datapoint. If yours is the only flyaway then it might be a fluke. But if your report is one of several in the past week or so then the NTSB will want to look into why. It's a pattern that they may choose to investigate. Perhaps a DJI software update has introduced an error.

Others have reacted to the advisories and reporting requirements posted here as if they are erroneous or a conspiracy to restrict UAS pilots unfairly, and have wished me luck in reporting to the NTSB such ridiculous things like flyaways that will waste the agency's time. Those responses are not informed by facts, and the number of likes for those posts is frankly scary.

 

[Ty Pilot]

This is not an FAA reporting requirement. It is an NTSB reporting requirement.

The NTSB's responsibility is to prevent accidents. If you have a flyaway the NTSB wants to know about it. Why? Because it provides a datapoint. If yours is the only flyaway then it might be a fluke. But if your report is one of several in the past week or so then the NTSB will want to look into why. It's a pattern that they may choose to investigate. Perhaps a DJI software update has introduced an error.

Others have reacted to the advisories and reporting requirements posted here as if they are erroneous or a conspiracy to restrict UAS pilots unfairly, and have wished me luck in reporting to the NTSB such ridiculous things like flyaways that will waste the agency's time. Those responses are not informed by facts, and the number of likes for those posts is frankly scary.

The post you quoted by @JoelP never mentioned a "flyaway". Most loss of signal in our consumer drones is not a fly away as I posted above. Pilot error is not a fly away.

95% of all "supposed" fly aways are not fly aways because most folks don't even know what it (a fly away) is, or what causes it.

With almost a million drone pilots in the US, if every time one of these pilots made a mistake and called it a flyaway, how many do you think that would be in a day, a week, a month?

As I said in my first post in this thread, as a 107 certified pilot, I will report to the NTSB ONLY when or if, I am ever required to report to the FAA. As a recreational pilot I would never report to the NTSB because as of now their own material says I don't have to.

 

[Deleted member 170899]

The post you quoted by @JoelP never mentioned a "flyaway". Most loss of signal in our consumer drones is not a fly away as I posted above. Pilot error is not a fly away.

95% of all "supposed" fly aways are not fly aways because most folks don't even know what it (a fly away) is, or what causes it.

With almost a million drone pilots in the US, if every time one of these pilots made a mistake and called it a flyaway, how many do you think that would be in a day, a week, a month?

As I said in my first post in this thread, as a 107 certified pilot, I will report to the NTSB ONLY when or if, I am ever required to report to the FAA. As a recreational pilot I would never report to the NTSB because as of now their own material says I don't have to.

This whole thread is about flyaways. And an instance of flight control system malfunction (mentioned in the post) is a flyaway.

And feel free to ignore all advisories and everything taught in good 107 courses. Ignorance seems to be a new right these days.

 

[Ty Pilot]

This whole thread is about flyaways.

Actually this thread is also about when to report to the NTSB. And no, signal loss between drone and controller due to poor understanding by the pilot of the limits of their equipment - is not a fly away. No matter how many times you say it.

And an instance of flight control system malfunction (mentioned in the post) is a flyaway.

Him calling an act of control signal loss that should by expected by a pilot is not a malfunction
From the 4 page Advisory PDF put out by the NTSB on August 1st 2022. . . .

• Flight control system malfunction or failure: For an uncrewed aircraft, a true “fly-away” would qualify. A lost link that behaves as expected does not qualify.

Have you considered why they would use the term . . . . . . True to describe a flyaway?

95% of all "supposed" fly aways are not fly aways because most folks don't even know what it (a fly away) is, or what causes it.

Like I said . . . .

if a pilot flies out 2 or 3 miles, or around buildings, or behind trees, or whatever, they should expect at some point, to go beyond the limit of available signal strength. Most drone user manuals even spell this out in multiple warnings. Just like flying till the battery dies and force lands in the sea, this is not a malfunction of the battery, it is pilot error.

 

[Deleted member 170899]

Actually this thread is also about when to report to the NTSB. And no, signal loss between drone and controller due to poor understanding by the pilot of the limits of their equipment - is not a fly away. No matter how many times you say it.


Him calling an act of control signal loss that should by expected by a pilot is not a malfunction
From the 4 page Advisory PDF put out by the NTSB on August 1st 2022. . . .

• Flight control system malfunction or failure: For an uncrewed aircraft, a true “fly-away” would qualify. A lost link that behaves as expected does not qualify.

Have you considered why they would use the term . . . . . . True to describe a flyaway?

Like I said . . . .

Now you're just repeating things I already posted. The "true" flyaway information was part of my earlier (#10) post.
Yes, the NTSB expects a RPIC to know the difference. You have already said that you know the difference. If your UAS returns to home after a lost signal, don't alert the NTSB. Anything new?

 

[Deleted member 170899]

Perhaps this will help, since lawyers will be lined up to ensure that you have followed every single piece of information available to you.
LEGAL ADVICE