And that is what started this whole conversation - because you demonstrated that you don't.
Well since you're asking, how many reports have you filled with the NTSB and would you care to share one here and perhaps tell us what the outcome was?
Which authority should I contact in the event of a flyaway?
- Thread starter Theoriginalgregtoo
- Start date
- Status
And that is what started this whole conversation - because you demonstrated that you don't.
Well since you're asking, how many reports have you filled with the NTSB and would you care to share one here and perhaps tell us what the outcome was?
I clearly know the difference.
And I have had no need to contact the FAA or NTSB.
Through many years of flying, I have gotten to know how the FAA and NTSB think. I don't always agree, but I always obey! I stay out of trouble by knowing, ahead of time, things like I have posted here. I also maintain my aircraft, manned or not, impeccably in hopes of never needing to report malfunctions.
Back when I was a student pilot (1975) I landed at the wrong airport (Hobby!). I worked with the FAA and had absolutely no repercussions from the event. I showed them an uncontrolled airport near Hobby with similar runway orientations. I had communicated through UNICOM that I was on approach.
Then, I saw a commercial airliner on right base for the same runway and i immediately diverted away from the airport. The FAA guy wanted to know that I learned something. I told him what I would do differently. He was very pleased and shared with me that more than a few pilots have done that - including experienced military pilots.
I have had no other incidents/accidents.
And I would not hesitate to inform the NTSB of a flyaway. They are NOT the enemy and they DO have time for you.
So, you have this unique understanding of the NTSB and the FAA that allows you and you alone not to report, or rather to know precisely which "accidents" to report?
No! That's the purpose of regulations, advisories, and flight instructors.
But... I do read the available information. And That is My Special Talent.
I also try to share. Sometimes it goes like this thread.
Other times it goes like THIS
This thread makes much about something you've called a "flyaway", but doesn't define it.
What is this "flyaway" that you've imagined that would require notification to the NTSB?
Is it something real and likely to happen?
What could they do about it?
Would you be able to contact them before the battery ran out and the drone was back on the ground?
First, look at the title of the thread. I didn't make up a word. Nor have I "imagined" it.
Second, read the NTSB advisory. It tells you pretty much what a flyaway is. But I'll be happy to provide a definition as best I can.
Flyaway: the act of a UAS taking a flight path not directed by the RPIC and not defined by the UAS itself. For example, if the UAS flight path, in case of a control failure, is set to immediately descend, or to return "home" and that is what takes place, then that is not a flyaway. Any other flight path is a flyaway.
Third, no it is not likely to happen. If it was likely to happen, then UASs would be banned for safety reasons. But it can happen and when it does, the NTSB reporting requirement takes effect.
Fourth, "they" cannot do anything about it. But they can record the make, model, serial number and other data associated with the event. This is a potentially important datapoint as mentioned previously.
Fifth, of course not but that is not the point of the reporting requirement.
Sixth, in spite of the concrete presentation of the NTSB advisory report, the slide from the most reputable 107 course available, and explanations (from someone who spent years as a CFII) of why the reporting requirement exists, there remain persons on this thread who refuse to accept it. 107 pilots are required to follow NTSB reporting requirements.
Hope that answers your questions.
Flyaway is a much misused term in drone forums.
It means anything anyone wants it to mean, but mostly it means nothing.
It's most used for an incident where the drone flyer loses his drone but has no idea how or why.
Actual flyaway incidents are extremely rare.
And most would create no risk to aviation.
Really? That's your takeaway?
You should inform the NTSB that they are wasting their time because most drone pilots are ignorant and don't listen to them anyway. Seems to be proven here.
You should also let Greg know that Pilot Institute is teaching garbage.
Your intelligence is clearly beyond that of us mere mortals. This forum is lucky to have you. And I'm certain you'll get lots of likes. Have a great night.
That's my takeaway after reading hundreds of posts where members said that their drone flew away and analysing the recorded data to find out what actually happened in the incident.
Yes, if you are ever involved in a genuine incident, then follow whatever the official procedure is.
But I'd also suggest that you are getting over-excited about something that is so rare and when/if it ever occurs is almost a non-event.
Thankyou
I'm not excited (or over-excited). It is just so entertaining to see how ignorant people can be in the face of facts. You made me laugh.
Has anyone who contacted the NTSB in order to get clarification in writing or by phone been contacted back yet?
In the mean time, below is what the FAA says about their advisories. I searched to find similar from the NTSB but have come up with nothing.
I find it interesting that the FAA spells out the purpose (and limits) of their advisories. Please note that these advisories are not binding unless "incorporated into a regulation by reference" I find it interesting that 49 CFR 830 makes no mention of the NTSB's advisory that is causing all the confusion.
Click the link below to see the full document.
In the mean time, below is what the FAA says about their advisories. I searched to find similar from the NTSB but have come up with nothing.
I find it interesting that the FAA spells out the purpose (and limits) of their advisories. Please note that these advisories are not binding unless "incorporated into a regulation by reference" I find it interesting that 49 CFR 830 makes no mention of the NTSB's advisory that is causing all the confusion.
Click the link below to see the full document.
For those who took the Pilot Institute course, you have permanent access to your course. Watch the Maintenance & Inspections section, Loss of Control Link & Flyaways lesson. Greg mentions a guy in Nevada who had a flyaway. The drone ended up landing on Vegas airport property. Someone found it and turned it in to the FAA. The FAA found the pilot and fined him five figures.
And if you took the Pilot Institute course, then you saw in the Regulation section, NTSB Requirements lesson stating that you are to report immediately to NTSB any flight control system malfunction or failure.
But hey, the chance of a flyaway is practically zero, right?
And if you took the Pilot Institute course, then you saw in the Regulation section, NTSB Requirements lesson stating that you are to report immediately to NTSB any flight control system malfunction or failure.
But hey, the chance of a flyaway is practically zero, right?
Last edited by a moderator:
The chance of your drone randomly flying away out of your control is close to zero.
The chance of someone who doesn't properly understand how his drone works and how to use it, having an operator caused incident and saying his drone flew away is very high.
Do you know what actually caused the Las Vegas incident?
It doesn't matter what caused the flyaway. The NTSB wants to know about it so they can determine the cause (if they see fit).
And this thread is a request from someone who had a flyaway. So the close to zero probability is moot.
You can be a "probabilities" pilot, or you can know the regulations. If you experience a flyaway, you can shrug your shoulders and say, "Eh, it's probably no big deal," or you can do the right thing. I just hope your drone doesn't crash and start a (battery) fire on someone's roof.
So the NTSB should be contacted every time an inexperienced flyer loses their drone or imagines it's uncontrollable?
That's obviously nonsense and completely unrealistic..
And I tried to explain to you that the word you keep using is vague and mostly meaningless.
Instead of talking about "flyaways" how about being more specific.
The NTSB doesn't want to be bothered by everything that gets labelled a "flyaway".
The number of incidents that they might be interested in would probably be something less than 1%.
Continuing to harp on about this makes it hard to take you seriously.
The term I keep using?
Then contact the NTSB and let them know that. Again, it is NOT my term.
Tell them that.
Clearly, it is difficult for you.
Did the course mention that; at that time, flying over the Las Vegas Strip or flying within five miles of controlled airspace could only be achieved by a certificated remote pilot with specific permission from the FAA?
Did the course mention that this pilot was not certified and the very act of flying where and when he did was illegal?
Did the course mention that, the pilot had no clue what Atti mode is, or what to expect when it happens? His Flight Control system did NOT fail or malfunction. The flight data from that drone was recovered and showed he had very low GPS signal at take-off and he launched anyway. Typical rookie move. Invulnerability.
Did the course mention that while the drone pilot played the "I didn't know" card after being caught, he actively avoided being found by transposing his registration number but was caught anyway?
Everything that happened to that pilot was predictable and should be expected by a qualified pilot which he wasn't. And this gets to the heart of this discussion: the term "flyaway" got its roots in very public screw ups by unqualified pilots like that one.
The fact that the NTSB uses the term "flyaway" in an advisory and not in the actual regulations, is probably a reflection of the misuse of the term among the UA community as evidenced in this thread.
For anyone that wants to read the truth about the Las Vegas incident, Click HERE
The course (superb, BTW) or a Pilot Institute video did mention where to find more details. One thing not mentioned in the link you provided is that the pilot claimed that Trump was in town, which means that the pilot would also have violated a TFR. (from DroneDJ)
At any rate, the reason for the flyaway does not matter in terms of the reporting requirement. He should have reported the incident to the NTSB. Doing so might have helped his case a bit, but his actions were so despicable that even that might not have helped.
Why is reporting a flyaway (I provided a definition earlier so you know what I mean by flyaway.) to the NTSB so ridiculous to you and others on this thread? While it has been stated that there are many reasons for a flyaway, I have never experienced one. Nor have other pilots I know.
At any rate, the reason for the flyaway does not matter in terms of the reporting requirement. He should have reported the incident to the NTSB. Doing so might have helped his case a bit, but his actions were so despicable that even that might not have helped.
Why is reporting a flyaway (I provided a definition earlier so you know what I mean by flyaway.) to the NTSB so ridiculous to you and others on this thread? While it has been stated that there are many reasons for a flyaway, I have never experienced one. Nor have other pilots I know.
- Status
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
1. Mini 2
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
Forum statistics
