Friday, September 22, 2017

Hastings Municipal Airport (KHSI), Adams County, Nebraska: Council mulls options for airport’s future

Members of the Hastings City Council spent more than half an hour during their work session Monday discussing what they want the Hastings Municipal Airport to be.

Councilman Paul Hamelink, who serves as a council liaison to the airport advisory board, requested discussion about the airport organizational structure at the work session.

“I think it’s something we want to look as an opportunity for economic development for the city,” he said. “For that to happen, we’ve been addressing issues of how we structure the city for other departments, and this is a good opportunity to do that (with the airport).”

One option would be establishing an airport authority. However, Hamelink said because an airport authority would operate autonomous of the city, that is something he opposes.

“Because I see this as an opportunity for economic development, it ought to involve things like Hastings Economic Development Corp., the chamber of commerce, those sorts of things,” he said.

The airport is currently overseen by the city’s engineering department.

Councilwoman Ginny Skutnik asked Hamelink if there are needs that are not being met.

Hamelink said it’s more like opportunities not being met.  

He would like to see the airport operate similar to the Hastings Museum or Hastings Public Library with a functioning board that’s under the umbrella of the city.

Councilman Butch Eley presented Nebraska municipal airport statistics courtesy of the airport advisory board.

Hastings is in the middle based on population of communities with an airport but is the only airport that does not provide aircraft maintenance, flight instruction, aircraft rental and fuel truck services.

“Which is why when people are flying into those other airports they are spending a lot of money on fuel at those airports,” he said.

Skutnik asked how many potential new businesses are asking for aviation services.

Mayor Corey Stutte said the city has had “quite a few” businesses he described as “near wins” that have flown into the community, assessing Hastings.

“If some of these businesses that would bring in 150-300 employees into our community actually happen, they’ll be shuttling people back and forth from their headquarters,” he said. “They would like to fly into Hastings versus Grand Island. From HEDC’s perspective, I do think they see it as an economic development opportunity.”

The area west of the airport is designated for use as an industrial park.

Because of the economic development potential with the airport, Hamelink suggested the city’s development services department might be the best department to oversee it with a part-time employee taking that oversight role.

Stutte asked Hamelink if the city needs a fixed-base operator to run the airport.

Hamelink agreed that would be a good move.

Stutte suggested the city put out a request for proposals for a fixed-base operator to run the airport.

“That doesn’t mean we’re necessarily committing to anything, but at least it gets us off of center where he have been sitting on this issue for the last year,” he said.

Hamelink questioned whether the city could put out a request for proposals if the airport oversight structure has not been identified.

City Administrator Joe Patterson said moving the airport under the oversight of the development services department would be quite a change with regard to city structure.

“It may have merit, but we need to do a lot more discussing and looking at how other cities are managing that resource,” he said. “We know where we’re at. The question is, what does our community need it to be? I’m not so sure we’ve done enough soul searching to really answer that question. Certainly, from what we’ve inherited 17 years ago (from the airport authority) to where it is now from a plant perspective is totally different.”

He said he would work on drafting a request for proposals for an FBO.

The council also went into executive session to discuss personnel.

Original article can be found here ➤ http://www.hastingstribune.com

REVA: Air ambulance crew rescues pregnant military member after Irma



It was an unforgettable mission after an unprecedented storm.

“It is usually a lush, green, tropical island, and we broke out and it was completely brown. The trees were bare. There were no leaves,” said REVA pilot Ben Watsky.

REVA is a medical air transport service with a team based at Schenectady County Airport. After Hurricane Irma ripped through the Virgin Islands, Ben was part of a REVA crew called on to rescue a 35-week pregnant U.S. military member who was trapped in her home on St. Thomas.

“You could see the houses on the coastline and the cliffs, windows were blown out. Roofs were off their houses,” said Watsky.

The woman was flown to a hospital outside Washington, D.C. She and her then-unborn child were both believed to be in good health at the time.

“It was a situation that could’ve turned into a medical emergency. It wasn’t currently, but if she waited any longer, it probably would’ve been,” said Watsky.

The trip was made using one of REVA's new Hawker 800XP airplanes. Two pilots were on board with three medical personnel. The plane can make its way to the U.S. Virgin Islands and back without having to stop and refuel.

Company officials say in recent weeks, their entire fleet has been focused on the Caribbean and Puerto Rico. They’ve transported nearly double the normal number of patients for this time of year.

“We’ve also converted some of our aircraft to more of a cargo configuration,” said Philip Spizale, REVA’s chief sales officer.

In addition to its normal business, REVA is also delivering essential supplies to areas devastated by recent storms.

“Fly those over to Puerto Rico to where the people need it most, and then as soon as we have access, throughout the Virgin Islands where the hospital systems are going to be in dire need over the coming weeks,” said Spizale.

They’re giving back to the very communities that helped REVA get off the ground, allowing them to fly these lifesaving missions.

“It’s like no other flying job that you can do. Having the opportunity to fly these aircraft and go pick these patients up and help people interact one-on-one is absolutely rewarding,” said Watsky.

Story and video:  http://www.twcnews.com

Incident occurred September 22, 2017 at Buffalo Niagara International Airport (KBUF), Cheektowaga, Erie County, New York

CHEEKTOWAGA – An American Airlines flight from Chicago made an emergency landing at Buffalo Niagara International Airport late Friday afternoon.

American Airlines flight 3299 was scheduled to land in Buffalo but declared an emergency after pilots noticed a problem with the plane’s hydraulic system according to NFTA spokesperson Helen Tederous.

The flight is operated by regional air carrier Envoy Air.  The Canadair Regional Jet CRJ-700 landed safely around 5:40 pm.  There were 62 souls onboard.

Original article  ➤ http://cheektowagachronicle.com

AeroCapital Flight Services: Charter flight company adds new Cessna Citation V at Pensacola International Airport (KPNS)

Richard Simpson, AeroCapital Flight Services vice president and general manager, talks on Thursday, Sept. 21, 2017, about the company's decision to add another Cessna Citation V to its fleet. 




By the start of November, AeroCapital Flight Services expects its second Cessna Citation V jet to be ready for charter flight services from Pensacola International Airport.

The company, which operates out of the airport's Innisfree Jet Center and launched in 2015, received the aircraft on Tuesday. In October, the jet will undergo an avionics overhaul and possibly an inspection from the Federal Aviation Administration.

Should the company receive all the necessary approvals, Rick Simpson, AeroCapital Flight Services vice president and general manager, said the jet should be ready by November with capabilities for nonstop flights on journeys as far as Northwest Florida to Northwest Texas.




"It seats nine passengers," said Simpson, whose company already owned a Citation V. "Roughly a range of about 1,400 nautical miles. Basically, from here to Lubbock, Texas, is the way I look at it, or to New York City, nonstop."

Since starting the company, Simpson said his customers have included the region's attorneys as well as celebrities who grew up in the area. The company also conducts medical flights to Atlanta and Birmingham, Alabama, to assist in organ donations. Other flights have included transporting business professionals to locations such as New York City and San Diego.

Most recently, Simpson said AeroCapital Flight Services evacuated an attorney and the attorney's friend out of Tampa to escape Hurricane Irma. The company flew each individual on a separate flight to Cleveland.

Prices vary for the company's services. Simpson said it depends on the trip's distance and duration. The costs for the flight continue until the jet returns to Pensacola, and customers keep the company in the destination they are visiting overnight. Simpson estimated a trip to Las Vegas for a week could cost $35,000.

"The flight starts and ends here at our base in Pensacola," he said. "If we're just dropping you off, we're going to fly you there, but we still have to get the jet back. So you're still paying for that."

It is difficult to say how much charter flights contribute to Pensacola International Airport's operations. The airport does not track the number of corporate charter arrivals and departures separately.

Dan Flynn, director of the airport, said the flights are tracked as general aviation operations. But he said charter services such as those from AeroCapital Flight Services remain a key component of the airport.




"Corporate charter operations are an integral and important aspect of the overall air transportation alternatives available to the individuals who reside or do business in the region, as this activity provides business travelers an option to meet what may be unique requirements in terms of flight times or destinations," Flynn said.

Moving forward, Simpson anticipates the need for charter services to remain strong in the area. He pointed to his work in the region's aviation field prior to starting AeroCapital Flight Services. He previously worked for a helicopter transport company known as Heliworks.

During that time, he said he noticed a desire for charter services, and he believes that demand will continue.

"I saw a need for a private jet service here," he said. "That's what made us decide to go ahead and do it."

Story, video and photo gallery ➤ http://www.pnj.com

Incident occurred September 21, 2017 at Jefco Skypark Airport (MT41), Whitehall, Jefferson County, Montana

WHITEHALL - A small, single-engine airplane struck a house near Whitehall after the pilot lost control while taxiing on a runway Thursday afternoon.

Jefferson County Sheriff Craig Doolittle confirmed the crash Friday afternoon.

The sheriff said the plane never got off the ground during the incident that happened about 4:30 p.m. at Jefco Skypark near Whitehall.

The home was unoccupied at the time of the accident and no major injuries were reported.

The plane went through one wall and into the home.

The Montana Highway Patrol and Federal Aviation Administration are investigating.

Original article can be found here ➤ http://www.ktvq.com

Federal Aviation Administration faces partial shutdown as authorization approaches expiration



The authority tasked with regulating the nation's aviation industry is facing a partial shutdown as its authorization to do so expires next Saturday.

To avoid such a shutdown of the Federal Aviation Administration, Congress must pass either an extension of the old piece of legislation or pass an entirely new bill.

But how did we get here? What does it mean? Would air travel come to a halt? ABC News breaks it all down:

Your flights would still operate, but many FAA employees would be furloughed

If Congress fails to pass any kind of reauthorization by Sept. 30, thousands of nonessential FAA employees will face a temporary leave of absence and airport construction workers.

While the construction workers are furloughed, government-contracted projects at airports and FAA facilities intended to increase traffic capabilities will be delayed.

The government will also be unable to collect on airfare taxes, potentially surrendering hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue in a matter of weeks.

Airlines will continue to fly safely and passengers are unlikely to see any tangible difference in their flying experience if Congress doesn't pass a reauthorization before October.

Many FAA employees, like air traffic controllers and safety inspectors, would continue to work through the partial shutdown.

Nevertheless, representatives and those in the industry alike are calling the reauthorization a "must-pass" piece of legislation. In addition to furloughing thousands of Americans, it would significantly hinder the FAA's modernization program called NextGen, a project the agency has already spent $7 billion on.

The last time the FAA operated without congressional reauthorization, The Washington Post reported the agency was losing an estimated $30 million a day.

A short-term extension is needed after lawmakers couldn't agree on a long-term plan

The FAA currently operates under a 2016 extension of a 2012 three-year reauthorization, which expires Sept. 30.

The house is scheduled to vote on a six-month extension next week after senators and representatives could not agree on a long-term total reauthorization.

President Donald Trump declared privatizing the FAA's air traffic control responsibilities a formal legislative priority back in June; an agenda for years pushed by House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Rep. Bill Shuster.

Shuster and Trump claim their push to spin the country's air navigation system into a nonprofit corporation is part of their broader plan to modernize infrastructure across the board, but they've struggled to get enough of Shuster's colleagues on the hill onboard.

Democrats have formed a united front in opposition to the privatization plan, but it's Republicans giving Shuster the biggest headache.

Members of Congress and the Senate from more rural areas of the United States believe such a corporation would favor the country's largest airports and airlines, ignoring the needs of the general aviation community and smaller airports.

“This is a tough sell in states like my state of Mississippi, where small airports are very concerned about where this will leave them," said Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., at a hearing.

While Shuster wants to push a short-term path extending through the end of 2017, Democrats on the hill are demanding a slightly longer version.

“We will not support less than six months,” ranking Democrat on the House Transportation Committee Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., said last week.

Original article can be found here ➤ http://abcnews.go.com

Barnwell Regional Airport (KBNL), Barnwell County, South Carolina







A fire in a main hangar of the Barnwell Regional Airport heavily damaged the structure and five planes.

Seven aircraft were inside the hangar at the time of the blaze. Three were destroyed while two more will likely be totaled, said P.F. Beck, chairman of the airport commission. Two others were not damaged as they were in the other end of the hangar.

Shortly after 2 p.m. on Tuesday, Sept. 19, 911 dispatch toned out firefighters from Barnwell Rural, Hilda and Long Branch fire departments. Responders reported flames, explosions and heavy smoke which poured out of the building. Barnwell Rural Fire Chief Jessie Elmore said firefighters had to “break into each hangar unit because the fire distorted the metal so much.”

Emergency personnel indicated the fire was under control within an hour of the first call but were still securing all aspects of the scene.

The airport is located off U.S. Highway 278.

EMS and Emergency Preparedness also responded, but no injuries were reported.

No one was inside the hanger at the time of the fire and “none of the planes had been flown in several days,” said Elmore. The planes were privately owned and the owners were renting space in the hanger.

The cause of the fire is under investigation as the State Law Enforcement Division has been called in to “try to figure out what happened,” said Elmore.

The S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control was called in over worries fuel could have leaked outside, but the scene was cleared, said Elmore.

Original article  ➤ http://www.thepeoplesentinel.com

Pilot sentenced for transporting marijuana in his Piper PA-30 Twin Comanche, N422PC

Piper PA-30 Twin Comanche, N422PC: http://registry.faa.gov/N422PC




Wayne Douglas Brunet




AUSTIN (KXAN) — An Austin pilot will have to spend 37 months in federal prison and pay a fine after he tried to distribute marijuana using his plane.

Wayne Douglas Brunet, 65, was sentenced Friday on a charge of possession with intent to distribute between 50 and 100 kilograms of marijuana.

Authorities arrested Brunet March 20 at the Llano Municipal Airport after they found $5,400 and about 206 pounds of hydroponic marijuana inside 15 duffel bags in his plane. According to a statement from the U.S. States Attorney’s Office, officials became suspicious after they noticed his flight pattern from Oregon to Texas.

They tried to arrest him at two other airports, but both times he spotted authorities on the ground and didn’t land. He tried to run when he landed in Llano, but officials caught him.

Along with serving time in prison, he must pay a $5,000 fine and be on supervised release for three years after he gets out of prison. The judge also said he had to forfeit his 1969 Piper PA-30 as well as the $5,400 in cash and $3,000 in prepaid cards found inside it.

Original article can be found here ➤ http://kxan.com

Sikorsky UH-60M Black Hawk, R20087, operated by United States Army as CAVM087, Caveman 87 -and- Dà-Jiang Innovations (DJI) Phantom 4: Incident occurred September 21, 2017 in Staten Island, New York

DCA17IA202A Aviation Incident Final Report - National Transportation Safety Board: https://app.ntsb.gov/pdf 

DCA17IA202AB Investigation Docket - National Transportation Safety Board:  https://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms


DCA17IA202B Aviation Incident Final Report - National Transportation Safety Board: https://app.ntsb.gov/pdf 


Location: Hoffman Island, NY

Incident Number: DCA17IA202A
Date & Time: 09/21/2017, 1920 EDT
Registration: None
Aircraft: DJI Phantom
Aircraft Damage: Destroyed
Defining Event: Midair collision
Injuries: 1 None
Flight Conducted Under: Part 107: Small UAS

Analysis 


The United States Army UH-60M helicopter was operating under visual flight rules within Class G airspace about 300 ft above mean sea level (msl) when it collided with a privately owned and operated DJI Phantom 4 small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS). The helicopter sustained minor damage and landed uneventfully; the sUAS was destroyed. Although the pilot flying the helicopter saw the sUAS before impact and immediately applied flight control inputs, there was insufficient time to avoid the collision.


The sUAS pilot was operating the aircraft recreationally and did not hold a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Remote Pilot certificate. Hobby and recreational pilots are expected to operate their aircraft in accordance with Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 101, which includes maintaining visual contact with the aircraft at all times and not interfering with any manned aircraft. There are no training or certification requirements for model aircraft pilots.


During the incident flight, the pilot of the sUAS intentionally flew the aircraft 2.5 miles away, well beyond visual line of sight and was just referencing the map on his tablet; therefore, he was not aware that the helicopter was in close proximity to the sUAS. Although the pilot stated that he knew that the sUAS should be operated at an altitude below 400 ft, flight logs revealed that he had conducted a flight earlier on the evening of the incident, in which he exceeded 547 ft altitude at a distance of 1.8 miles, which was unlikely to be within visual line of sight. In addition, even though the sUAS pilot indicated that he knew there were frequently helicopters in the area, he still elected to fly his sUAS beyond visual line of sight, demonstrating his lack of understanding of the potential hazard of collision with other aircraft. In his interview, the sUAS pilot indicated that he was not concerned with flying beyond visual line of sight, and he expressed only a general cursory awareness of regulations and good operating practices.


A Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) was in effect for the area of the flight; the helicopter was authorized for flight within this area. The helicopter was operating over water and not in the vicinity of any vessels; therefore, its operating altitude was in accordance with FAA regulations and Army guidance. The sUAS pilot was unaware of the active TFRs in the area that specifically prohibited both model aircraft and UAS flight. Further, the sUAS pilot relied only on the DJI GO4 app for airspace awareness. Although the TFR airspace awareness functionality in the DJI app (GEO) was not active at the time of the incident, this feature is intended for advisory use only, and sUAS pilots are responsible at all times to comply with FAA airspace restrictions. Sole reliance on advisory functions of a non-certified app is not sufficient to ensure that correct airspace information is obtained. Had the functionality been active, the sUAS pilot would still have needed to connect his tablet to the internet before the flight in order to receive the TFR information. Since the sUAS pilot's tablet did not have cellular connection capability, it is unlikely that he would have been able to obtain TFR information at the time of the flight. Because the pilot solely relied on the app to provide airspace restriction information; he was unaware of other, more reliable methods to maintain awareness.


The collision occurred 2 minutes before the end of civil twilight. Although modeler (recreational) sUAS pilots may fly at night under certain conditions, when asked about night flight, the incident pilot only stated that he had built-in position lights; thus he was likely unaware of any guidelines or practices for night operations.


There was no evidence of any mechanical or software problems with the sUAS relevant to the flight. The pilot did not report any anomalies, and stated the recorded information on the flight logs accurately reflected the incident flight. The sUAS operated as expected at all times. Although the recorded data showed a 9-second gap in telemetry, this was likely due to distance from the remote controller. 


Probable Cause and Findings

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident to be:

the failure of the sUAS pilot to see and avoid the helicopter due to his intentional flight beyond visual line of sight. Contributing to the incident was the sUAS pilot's incomplete knowledge of the regulations and safe operating practices. 

Findings


Personnel issues


Monitoring other aircraft - Pilot (Cause)

Use of policy/procedure - Pilot (Cause)
Knowledge of procedures - Pilot (Factor)
Knowledge of regulatory reqs - Pilot (Factor)

Factual Information 


HISTORY OF FLIGHT


On September 21, 2017, at 1920 eastern daylight time, a Sikorsky UH-60M Black Hawk helicopter, R20087, operated by the U.S. Army as CAVM087 ("Caveman 87"), collided with a privately owned and operated Dà-Jiang Innovations (DJI) Phantom 4 small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS). The collision occurred about 300 ft above mean sea level (msl) and 1 mile east of Midland Beach, Staten Island, New York, in the vicinity of Hoffman Island. The helicopter received minor damage, and the sUAS was destroyed. There were no injuries or ground damage.


The incident helicopter was the lead aircraft of a flight of two, and was operating as a local orientation flight for the Hudson Class B Airspace Exclusion and the United Nations General Assembly Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) operations. The flight had flown south along the Hudson River, then turned east at the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge toward Coney Island, New York. The crew then decided to make a right turn toward the west and return to their base at Linden Airport (LDJ), Linden, New Jersey. Air traffic control (ATC) radar obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) showed the flight heading toward LDJ between 200 and 300 ft msl. The crew reported that the flight had just passed Hoffman Island when the lead helicopter made contact with what appeared to be a sUAS. Recorded data from the helicopter indicated that it was flying at an altitude of 274 ft msl at the time of the collision.


The helicopter co-pilot was the pilot flying when the collision occurred. He reported that he immediately and rapidly reduced the collective as the sUAS suddenly came into his view in close proximity to the helicopter. The pilot-in-command took the controls and recommended that they return to LDJ. Radar data indicated that the flight proceeded to LDJ, climbing to about 800 ft as it passed over the shore and overflew more populated areas. The flight landed uneventfully, and the air mission commander subsequently reported the collision to the air traffic control tower at Newark Liberty International Airport.


The sUAS pilot was unaware that a collision had taken place until he was contacted by the NTSB. The pilot reported that he initiated the pleasure flight from the shore adjacent to Dyker Beach Park, southeast of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge, in the Fort Hamilton neighborhood of Brooklyn, New York, and that he intended to fly "over the ocean." Data logs from the control tablet provided by the pilot indicated that the sUAS took off at 1911:34 and, after takeoff, climbed to a recorded altitude of 89 meters (292 ft). The sUAS altitude is based on height above the takeoff point ("home point"); the elevation of the park is about 7 ft msl.


The sUAS then proceeded on a straight, southwesterly course toward Hoffman Island, about 2.5 miles from the takeoff location. The data log showed the aircraft briefly paused over the ship channel and completed some yawing turn maneuvers, consistent with the pilot looking through the camera view at points of interest, then resumed the straight course toward the island.


At 1914:30, ATC radar indicated the flight of helicopters was travelling south-southeasterly from the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge toward Coney Island at 400 ft (Figure 1). The helicopters passed the sUAS pilot's position from his right to left about 1 mile from his location. The sUAS was about 1 1/2 miles from the sUAS pilot at that time and along a common line of sight. Shortly afterward, at 1915:30, data logs indicated the sUAS paused and hovered northeast of Hoffman Island for about 2 minutes before resuming a southwesterly track toward the island. During this time, the helicopters were flying east along the Coney Island shoreline about 300 ft msl.


Figure 1: Approximate route of flight of the UH-60 and sUAS


At 1919:15, the sUAS pilot pressed the return-to-home (RTH) button on the control tablet, and the aircraft turned around and began tracking northeast toward the home point. The helicopters had completed a turn toward LDJ, and were just west of Coney Island at 300 ft. At 1919:51, the sUAS battery endurance warning activated, indicating that only enough charge remained to return directly to the home point. The pilot did not have visual contact with the sUAS or the helicopters at that time. As the sUAS was tracking northeast, telemetry data dropped out for about 9 seconds but returned just before the collision. The position of the aircraft was near the maximum range of the remote controller. At 1920:17.6, the data logs ended. The last position and altitude logged correlated with the position and altitude of the incident helicopter's recorded data and ATC radar information; about 300 ft west of Hoffman Island. The sUAS pilot reported that he lost signal with the aircraft and assumed it would return home as programmed. After waiting about 30 minutes, he assumed it had experienced a malfunction and crashed in the water.


The airspace in the area of the flight is Class G, underlying a shelf of the New York Class B airspace. A Notice to Airmen (NOTAM 7/4755), issued by the FAA Flight Data Center, was in effect at the time of the incident flight. The NOTAM established a Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR)due to the United Nations General Assembly meeting. The TFR restricted operations within the lateral limits of the New York Class B airspace from the surface up to 17,999 ft msl, and included a prohibition on model aircraft and unmanned aerial systems (UAS).


Additionally, another NOTAM (7/8423) was in effect establishing a VIP Presidential TFR within 30 nautical miles (nm) of Bedminster, New Jersey, from the surface up to 17,999 ft msl, which also included a prohibition on model aircraft and unmanned aerial systems (UAS). The incident sUAS launch point was 30.35 nm from the center of that TFR; Hoffman Island was 29.22 nm from the center point.


DAMAGE TO AIRCRAFT


A 1 1/2-inch dent was found on the leading edge of one of the UH-60's main rotor blades, surrounded by various scratches and material transfer. Some cracks were observed in the composite fairing and window frame material.


The Phantom 4 sUAS was destroyed and several components were lodged in the helicopter.


PERSONNEL INFORMATION


The helicopter flight crew comprised two pilots and two crew chiefs. The pilot-in-command had 1,570 hours of experience in the UH-60, and the co-pilot had 184 hours. The crew reported that they had no previous encounters with sUAS in flight and no outside knowledge or experience with sUAS.


The sUAS pilot stated he was a recreational operator, and that he flew only for enjoyment. He did not hold an FAA Remote Pilot certificate or a manned aircraft pilot certificate. He flew only DJI products, and he did not have experience with conventional radio-control airplanes. He said he had "a lot" of experience with sUAS; the data logs provided by him indicated that he had flown 38 flights in the previous 30 days. He had owned the incident sUAS for about one year and owned a Phantom 3 and another Phantom 4 before purchasing the incident sUAS. Five days after the collision, he purchased a Phantom 4 Pro. He had registered with the FAA as a model aircraft operator during the time period that the registration requirement was in effect. He had taken no specific sUAS training other than the tutorials that are included in the DJI GO4 operating application (app). At the time of the collision, there were no training or certification requirements for hobbyist or modeler pilots.


The pilot said that he was familiar with the area and had flown there many times before. He said that he had flown at night before, and that his sUAS did not have any extra lighting, stating that, "it has four lights."


When asked about specific regulations or guidance for sUAS flights, he stated that he knew to stay away from airports, and was aware there was Class B airspace nearby. He said that he relied on "the app" to tell him if it was OK to fly. He stated he knew that the aircraft should be operated below 400 ft. When asked about TFRs, he said he did not know about them; he would rely on the app, and it did not give any warnings on the evening of the collision. He said he was not familiar with the TFRs for the United Nations meeting and Presidential movement.


When asked, he did not indicate that he was aware of the significance of flying beyond line of sight and again stated that he relied on the app display. He said he did not see or hear the flight of helicopters involved in the collision but said that helicopters fly in the area all the time.


AIRCRAFT INFORMATION


The UH-60M is a four-bladed, twin-engine, medium utility helicopter manufactured by Sikorsky Aircraft. It is widely used by the US military for many missions.


The Phantom 4 is a small unmanned aircraft system of quadcopter configuration, about 13 inches in diameter. It is powered by four electric, brushless motors and a 4-cell, 15.2-volt lithium-polymer battery. The maximum takeoff weight is 3 pounds; maximum altitude is about 19,685 ft msl. Maximum endurance is 28 minutes. Specified maximum range of the remote controller is 3.1 miles. The aircraft is equipped with a GPS/GLONASS navigation system and a flight controller enabling various automated functions. The aircraft is equipped with a 12-megapixel digital camera capable of still or video recording and first-person view display. Aircraft telemetry and video is transmitted to the remote controller in the 2.4 gHz band and displayed on a smartphone or tablet of the pilot's choice using an app supplied by the manufacturer or various third-party app developers. The pilot used a Samsung tablet with wi-fi but no cellular data capability. He did not use any third-party apps to control the aircraft.


The Phantom 4 includes a feature called Geospatial Environment Online (GEO), which is designed to aid pilots in avoiding certain types of airspace. When available, the pilot receives a message on the control smartphone or tablet advising of the type of airspace and other information. According to DJI:


"GEO provides pilots with up-to-date guidance on areas where flight may be limited by regulation or raise safety concerns. In addition to airport location information, flyers will have real-time access to live information on temporary flight restrictions [and] locations such as prisons, nuclear power plants and other sensitive areas where flying may raise non-aviation security concerns. The GEO system is advisory only. Each user is responsible for checking official sources and determining what laws or regulations might apply to his or her flight."


The GEO system categorizes features into one of four zones: Warning, Enhanced Warning, Authorization, and Restricted zones. Temporary Flight Restrictions are typically coded as Authorization Zones, which appear yellow in the DJI GO4 map. Users will be prompted with a warning and flight is limited by default. A user with appropriate authorization may unlock the Authorization Zone by using a DJI-verified account. This is called "self-unlocking" and can be accomplished before the flight via DJI's website for a period of up to three days, or at the time of flight if the user has an internet connection in the field.


The incident pilot's tablet did not have a cellular data connection, so the GEO system information regarding the TFRs would not download in real time at the takeoff location. In order for the system to have warned the pilot, he would have had to connect to the internet at some point while the TFR was active; however, at the time of the incident, the TFR system within DJI GEO and displayed to customers through DJI GO4 was not active. During August 2017, an issue was identified with the GEO function that inadvertently and intermittently rendered the self-unlock feature for certain TFRs ineffective for some users. After a significant number of complaints about the problem, DJI decided to temporarily disable the TFR functionality in GEO until the feature was investigated and confirmed to be working properly. Therefore, at the time of the incident, no TFR information was available in GEO. Since GEO is meant to be an advisory system to pilots, DJI decided it was better to disable this feature until the problem could be corrected to enable authorized users to support recovery efforts and other authorized missions across the country, including firefighting response and demonstrations at air shows. There was no notice or advisory to users that this advisory function had been disabled. The TFR functionality in GEO was restored in October 2017.


METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION


The LDJ surface observation at 1915 reported clear skies, 10 miles visibility and light northeasterly winds. Sunset was at 1855 and the end of civil twilight occurred at 1922.


FLIGHT DATA


Flight data was extracted from the incident helicopter's Health and Usage Management System (HUMS) by the Army Combat Readiness Center and provided to the investigation. Altitude and other flight data is cited in the History of Flight section of this report.


The Phantom 4 records full flight parameters on non-volatile memory on board the aircraft. This data was not available to the investigation, as the aircraft flight controller circuit boards were not located, presumably destroyed and in the water. The DJI GO4 app records select telemetry parameters to the pilot's display tablet. The sUAS pilot provided his data logs to the investigation for analysis. Data from the incident flight is cited in the History of Flight section of this report. The logs also included a flight the sUAS pilot made earlier on the evening of the incident, and indicated that he flew toward the Seagate area of western Coney Island, about 1.8 miles from the takeoff point, up to an altitude of 547 ft above takeoff elevation.


WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION


One motor and a portion of an arm of the sUAS was recovered from the helicopter. Debris was found in the engine oil cooler fan by Army maintenance personnel. The components were transferred by the US Army to a representative of the FAA Teterboro, New Jersey, Flight Standards District Office, then to the NTSB. Manufacturing serial number information inscribed on the motor enabled sales records provided by the manufacturer to aid in identifying the pilot, as the sUAS was purchased directly from the manufacturer. The remainder of the sUAS was not recovered.


ADDITIONAL INFORMATION


The investigation reviewed pertinent regulations and guidance regarding helicopter and sUAS operation.


Helicopter Operating Altitude


14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91.119 states in part:


Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:


(c) Over other than congested areas.An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure….(d) Helicopters,… If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface - (1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c).


Statutes, Regulations, and Guidelines applicable to sUAS


Public Law 112-95 section 336(c) (Feb. 14, 2012) defines "model aircraft" as an unmanned aircraft that is:


(1) Capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;


(2) Flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and


(3) Flown for hobby or recreational purposes.


14 CFR 1.1 (and 101.1) state in part:


Model aircraft means an unmanned aircraft that is:


(2) Flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and


(3) Flown for hobby or recreational purposes.


14 CFR 101.41 states in part:


Applicability.


This subpart prescribes rules governing the operation of a model aircraft that meets all of the following conditions …


(a) The aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;


(b) The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines;…


(d) The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft…


The Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) publishes such safety guidelines. The AMA Safety Code states in part:


9. The pilot of an RC model aircraft shall:


(a) Maintain control during the entire flight, maintaining visual contact without enhancement other than by corrective lenses prescribed for the pilot.


Temporary Flight Restrictions


According to the FAA, TFRs are tools used by the FAA to restrict aircraft operations within designated areas. [In recent] years, TFRs, along with Air Defense Identification Zones and Flight Restriction Zones, have been widely used to restrict overflights through certain airspace for reasons of national security. Two TFRs were in effect in the area and time of the incident, as noted in the History of Flight section above.


History of Flight


Enroute 

Midair collision (Defining event) 

Pilot Information


Certificate: None

Age: 58 
Airplane Rating(s): None
Seat Occupied: None
Other Aircraft Rating(s):  None
Restraint Used:
Instrument Rating(s): None
Second Pilot Present:
Instructor Rating(s): None
Toxicology Performed: No
Medical Certification: None
Last FAA Medical Exam:
Occupational Pilot: No
Last Flight Review or Equivalent:
Flight Time: (Estimated) 100 hours (Total, all aircraft), 38 hours (Total, this make and model) 

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information


Aircraft Manufacturer: DJI

Registration: None
Model/Series: Phantom 4
Aircraft Category: Helicopter
Year of Manufacture:
Amateur Built: No
Airworthiness Certificate:
Serial Number: 07DDD640B11457
Landing Gear Type: Skid
Seats: 0
Date/Type of Last Inspection:
Certified Max Gross Wt.: 4 lbs
Time Since Last Inspection:
Engines: 4 Electric
Airframe Total Time:
Engine Manufacturer: DJI
ELT:
Engine Model/Series:
Registered Owner: On file
Rated Power:
Operator: On file
Operating Certificate(s) Held: None 

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan


Conditions at Accident Site: Visual Conditions

Condition of Light: Dusk
Observation Facility, Elevation: KLDJ
Observation Time: 2315 UTC  
Distance from Accident Site: 10 Nautical Miles
Direction from Accident Site: 290°
Lowest Cloud Condition: Clear 
Temperature/Dew Point: -11°C
Lowest Ceiling: None
Visibility:  10 Miles
Wind Speed/Gusts, Direction: 3 knots, 40°
Visibility (RVR):
Altimeter Setting: 29.99 inches Hg
Visibility (RVV):
Precipitation and Obscuration:
Departure Point: Brooklyn, NY
Type of Flight Plan Filed: None
Destination: Brooklyn, NY
Type of Clearance: None
Departure Time: 1911 EDT
Type of Airspace: Class G 

Wreckage and Impact Information


Crew Injuries: 1 None 

Aircraft Damage: Destroyed
Passenger Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Fire: Unknown
Ground Injuries: N/A 
Aircraft Explosion: None
Total Injuries: 1 None
Latitude, Longitude:  40.500000, -74.000000 (est)

The National Transportation Safety Board did not travel to the scene of this incident.

Aviation Incident Preliminary Report - National Transportation Safety Board:  https://app.ntsb.gov/pdf


NTSB Identification: DCA17IA202A
14 CFR Unknown
Incident occurred Thursday, September 21, 2017 in Staten Island, NY
Aircraft: DJI Phantom, registration: None
Injuries: 2 Uninjured.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators used data provided by various sources and may not have traveled in support of this investigation to prepare this aircraft incident report.



On September 21, 2017, at 1920 eastern daylight time, a Sikorsky UH-60M Black Hawk helicopter, R20087, operated by the U.S. Army as CAVM087 ("Caveman 87"), collided with a Dà-Jiang Innovations (DJI) Phantom 4 small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS, commonly known as a drone) operated by an individual. The collision occurred at about 300 feet above mean sea level, 1 mile east of Midland Beach, Staten Island, NY, in the vicinity of Hoffman Island. The helicopter experienced minor damage, the drone was destroyed. There were no injuries or ground damage.

Aviation Incident Preliminary Report - National Transportation Safety Board: https://app.ntsb.gov/pdf

NTSB Identification: DCA17IA202B
14 CFR Armed Forces
Incident occurred Thursday, September 21, 2017 in Staten Island, NY
Aircraft: SIKORSKY UH60, registration: R20087
Injuries: 2 Uninjured.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators used data provided by various sources and may not have traveled in support of this investigation to prepare this aircraft incident report.


On September 21, 2017, at 1920 eastern daylight time, a Sikorsky UH-60M Black Hawk helicopter, R20087, operated by the U.S. Army as CAVM087 ("Caveman 87"), collided with a Dà-Jiang Innovations (DJI) Phantom 4 small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS, commonly known as a drone) operated by an individual. The collision occurred at about 300 feet above mean sea level, 1 mile east of Midland Beach, Staten Island, NY, in the vicinity of Hoffman Island. The helicopter experienced minor damage, the drone was destroyed. There were no injuries or ground damage.


Location: Hoffman Island, NY 
Incident Number:DCA17IA202B
Date & Time: 09/21/2017, 1920 EDT
Registration: R20087
Aircraft: SIKORSKY UH60
Aircraft Damage: Minor
Defining Event: Midair collision
Injuries: 4 None
Flight Conducted Under: Armed Forces

Analysis


The United States Army UH-60M helicopter was operating under visual flight rules within Class G airspace about 300 ft above mean sea level (msl) when it collided with a privately owned and operated DJI Phantom 4 small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS). The helicopter sustained minor damage and landed uneventfully; the sUAS was destroyed. Although the pilot flying the helicopter saw the sUAS before impact and immediately applied flight control inputs, there was insufficient time to avoid the collision.

The sUAS pilot was operating the aircraft recreationally and did not hold a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Remote Pilot certificate. Hobby and recreational pilots are expected to operate their aircraft in accordance with Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 101, which includes maintaining visual contact with the aircraft at all times and not interfering with any manned aircraft. There are no training or certification requirements for model aircraft pilots.

During the incident flight, the pilot of the sUAS intentionally flew the aircraft 2.5 miles away, well beyond visual line of sight and was just referencing the map on his tablet; therefore, he was not aware that the helicopter was in close proximity to the sUAS. Although the pilot stated that he knew that the sUAS should be operated at an altitude below 400 ft, flight logs revealed that he had conducted a flight earlier on the evening of the incident, in which he exceeded 547 ft altitude at a distance of 1.8 miles, which was unlikely to be within visual line of sight. In addition, even though the sUAS pilot indicated that he knew there were frequently helicopters in the area, he still elected to fly his sUAS beyond visual line of sight, demonstrating his lack of understanding of the potential hazard of collision with other aircraft. In his interview, the sUAS pilot indicated that he was not concerned with flying beyond visual line of sight, and he expressed only a general cursory awareness of regulations and good operating practices.

A Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) was in effect for the area of the flight; the helicopter was authorized for flight within this area. The helicopter was operating over water and not in the vicinity of any vessels; therefore, its operating altitude was in accordance with FAA regulations and Army guidance. The sUAS pilot was unaware of the active TFRs in the area that specifically prohibited both model aircraft and UAS flight. Further, the sUAS pilot relied only on the DJI GO4 app for airspace awareness. Although the TFR airspace awareness functionality in the DJI app (GEO) was not active at the time of the incident, this feature is intended for advisory use only, and sUAS pilots are responsible at all times to comply with FAA airspace restrictions. Sole reliance on advisory functions of a non-certified app is not sufficient to ensure that correct airspace information is obtained. Had the functionality been active, the sUAS pilot would still have needed to connect his tablet to the internet before the flight in order to receive the TFR information. Since the sUAS pilot's tablet did not have cellular connection capability, it is unlikely that he would have been able to obtain TFR information at the time of the flight. Because the pilot solely relied on the app to provide airspace restriction information; he was unaware of other, more reliable methods to maintain awareness.

The collision occurred 2 minutes before the end of civil twilight. Although modeler (recreational) sUAS pilots may fly at night under certain conditions, when asked about night flight, the incident pilot only stated that he had built-in position lights; thus he was likely unaware of any guidelines or practices for night operations.

There was no evidence of any mechanical or software problems with the sUAS relevant to the flight. The pilot did not report any anomalies, and stated the recorded information on the flight logs accurately reflected the incident flight. The sUAS operated as expected at all times. Although the recorded data showed a 9-second gap in telemetry, this was likely due to distance from the remote controller. 

Probable Cause and Findings

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this incident to be:
the failure of the sUAS pilot to see and avoid the helicopter due to his intentional flight beyond visual line of sight. Contributing to the incident was the sUAS pilot's incomplete knowledge of the regulations and safe operating practices.

Findings

Personnel issues
Incorrect action performance - Pilot of other aircraft (Cause)

Environmental issues
Aircraft - Effect on equipment (Cause)

Factual Information 

HISTORY OF FLIGHT

On September 21, 2017, at 1920 eastern daylight time, a Sikorsky UH-60M Black Hawk helicopter, R20087, operated by the U.S. Army as CAVM087 ("Caveman 87"), collided with a privately owned and operated Dà-Jiang Innovations (DJI) Phantom 4 small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS). The collision occurred about 300 ft above mean sea level (msl) and 1 mile east of Midland Beach, Staten Island, New York, in the vicinity of Hoffman Island. The helicopter received minor damage, and the sUAS was destroyed. There were no injuries or ground damage.

The incident helicopter was the lead aircraft of a flight of two, and was operating as a local orientation flight for the Hudson Class B Airspace Exclusion and the United Nations General Assembly Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) operations. The flight had flown south along the Hudson River, then turned east at the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge toward Coney Island, New York. The crew then decided to make a right turn toward the west and return to their base at Linden Airport (LDJ), Linden, New Jersey. Air traffic control (ATC) radar obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) showed the flight heading toward LDJ between 200 and 300 ft msl. The crew reported that the flight had just passed Hoffman Island when the lead helicopter made contact with what appeared to be a sUAS. Recorded data from the helicopter indicated that it was flying at an altitude of 274 ft msl at the time of the collision.

The helicopter co-pilot was the pilot flying when the collision occurred. He reported that he immediately and rapidly reduced the collective as the sUAS suddenly came into his view in close proximity to the helicopter. The pilot-in-command took the controls and recommended that they return to LDJ. Radar data indicated that the flight proceeded to LDJ, climbing to about 800 ft as it passed over the shore and overflew more populated areas. The flight landed uneventfully, and the air mission commander subsequently reported the collision to the air traffic control tower at Newark Liberty International Airport.

The sUAS pilot was unaware that a collision had taken place until he was contacted by the NTSB. The pilot reported that he initiated the pleasure flight from the shore adjacent to Dyker Beach Park, southeast of the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge, in the Fort Hamilton neighborhood of Brooklyn, New York, and that he intended to fly "over the ocean." Data logs from the control tablet provided by the pilot indicated that the sUAS took off at 1911:34 and, after takeoff, climbed to a recorded altitude of 89 meters (292 ft). The sUAS altitude is based on height above the takeoff point ("home point"); the elevation of the park is about 7 ft msl.

The sUAS then proceeded on a straight, southwesterly course toward Hoffman Island, about 2.5 miles from the takeoff location. The data log showed the aircraft briefly paused over the ship channel and completed some yawing turn maneuvers, consistent with the pilot looking through the camera view at points of interest, then resumed the straight course toward the island.

At 1914:30, ATC radar indicated the flight of helicopters was travelling south-southeasterly from the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge toward Coney Island at 400 ft (Figure 1). The helicopters passed the sUAS pilot's position from his right to left about 1 mile from his location. The sUAS was about 1 1/2 miles from the sUAS pilot at that time and along a common line of sight. Shortly afterward, at 1915:30, data logs indicated the sUAS paused and hovered northeast of Hoffman Island for about 2 minutes before resuming a southwesterly track toward the island. During this time, the helicopters were flying east along the Coney Island shoreline about 300 ft msl.

Figure 1: Approximate route of flight of the UH-60 and sUAS

At 1919:15, the sUAS pilot pressed the return-to-home (RTH) button on the control tablet, and the aircraft turned around and began tracking northeast toward the home point. The helicopters had completed a turn toward LDJ, and were just west of Coney Island at 300 ft. At 1919:51, the sUAS battery endurance warning activated, indicating that only enough charge remained to return directly to the home point. The pilot did not have visual contact with the sUAS or the helicopters at that time. As the sUAS was tracking northeast, telemetry data dropped out for about 9 seconds but returned just before the collision. The position of the aircraft was near the maximum range of the remote controller. At 1920:17.6, the data logs ended. The last position and altitude logged correlated with the position and altitude of the incident helicopter's recorded data and ATC radar information; about 300 ft west of Hoffman Island. The sUAS pilot reported that he lost signal with the aircraft and assumed it would return home as programmed. After waiting about 30 minutes, he assumed it had experienced a malfunction and crashed in the water.

The airspace in the area of the flight is Class G, underlying a shelf of the New York Class B airspace. A Notice to Airmen (NOTAM 7/4755), issued by the FAA Flight Data Center, was in effect at the time of the incident flight. The NOTAM established a Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR)due to the United Nations General Assembly meeting. The TFR restricted operations within the lateral limits of the New York Class B airspace from the surface up to 17,999 ft msl, and included a prohibition on model aircraft and unmanned aerial systems (UAS).

Additionally, another NOTAM (7/8423) was in effect establishing a VIP Presidential TFR within 30 nautical miles (nm) of Bedminster, New Jersey, from the surface up to 17,999 ft msl, which also included a prohibition on model aircraft and unmanned aerial systems (UAS). The incident sUAS launch point was 30.35 nm from the center of that TFR; Hoffman Island was 29.22 nm from the center point.

DAMAGE TO AIRCRAFT

A 1 1/2-inch dent was found on the leading edge of one of the UH-60's main rotor blades, surrounded by various scratches and material transfer. Some cracks were observed in the composite fairing and window frame material.

The Phantom 4 sUAS was destroyed and several components were lodged in the helicopter.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

The helicopter flight crew comprised two pilots and two crew chiefs. The pilot-in-command had 1,570 hours of experience in the UH-60, and the co-pilot had 184 hours. The crew reported that they had no previous encounters with sUAS in flight and no outside knowledge or experience with sUAS.

The sUAS pilot stated he was a recreational operator, and that he flew only for enjoyment. He did not hold an FAA Remote Pilot certificate or a manned aircraft pilot certificate. He flew only DJI products, and he did not have experience with conventional radio-control airplanes. He said he had "a lot" of experience with sUAS; the data logs provided by him indicated that he had flown 38 flights in the previous 30 days. He had owned the incident sUAS for about one year and owned a Phantom 3 and another Phantom 4 before purchasing the incident sUAS. Five days after the collision, he purchased a Phantom 4 Pro. He had registered with the FAA as a model aircraft operator during the time period that the registration requirement was in effect. He had taken no specific sUAS training other than the tutorials that are included in the DJI GO4 operating application (app). At the time of the collision, there were no training or certification requirements for hobbyist or modeler pilots.

The pilot said that he was familiar with the area and had flown there many times before. He said that he had flown at night before, and that his sUAS did not have any extra lighting, stating that, "it has four lights."

When asked about specific regulations or guidance for sUAS flights, he stated that he knew to stay away from airports, and was aware there was Class B airspace nearby. He said that he relied on "the app" to tell him if it was OK to fly. He stated he knew that the aircraft should be operated below 400 ft. When asked about TFRs, he said he did not know about them; he would rely on the app, and it did not give any warnings on the evening of the collision. He said he was not familiar with the TFRs for the United Nations meeting and Presidential movement.

When asked, he did not indicate that he was aware of the significance of flying beyond line of sight and again stated that he relied on the app display. He said he did not see or hear the flight of helicopters involved in the collision but said that helicopters fly in the area all the time.

AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

The UH-60M is a four-bladed, twin-engine, medium utility helicopter manufactured by Sikorsky Aircraft. It is widely used by the US military for many missions.

The Phantom 4 is a small unmanned aircraft system of quadcopter configuration, about 13 inches in diameter. It is powered by four electric, brushless motors and a 4-cell, 15.2-volt lithium-polymer battery. The maximum takeoff weight is 3 pounds; maximum altitude is about 19,685 ft msl. Maximum endurance is 28 minutes. Specified maximum range of the remote controller is 3.1 miles. The aircraft is equipped with a GPS/GLONASS navigation system and a flight controller enabling various automated functions. The aircraft is equipped with a 12-megapixel digital camera capable of still or video recording and first-person view display. Aircraft telemetry and video is transmitted to the remote controller in the 2.4 gHz band and displayed on a smartphone or tablet of the pilot's choice using an app supplied by the manufacturer or various third-party app developers. The pilot used a Samsung tablet with wi-fi but no cellular data capability. He did not use any third-party apps to control the aircraft.

The Phantom 4 includes a feature called Geospatial Environment Online (GEO), which is designed to aid pilots in avoiding certain types of airspace. When available, the pilot receives a message on the control smartphone or tablet advising of the type of airspace and other information. According to DJI:

"GEO provides pilots with up-to-date guidance on areas where flight may be limited by regulation or raise safety concerns. In addition to airport location information, flyers will have real-time access to live information on temporary flight restrictions [and] locations such as prisons, nuclear power plants and other sensitive areas where flying may raise non-aviation security concerns. The GEO system is advisory only. Each user is responsible for checking official sources and determining what laws or regulations might apply to his or her flight."

The GEO system categorizes features into one of four zones: Warning, Enhanced Warning, Authorization, and Restricted zones. Temporary Flight Restrictions are typically coded as Authorization Zones, which appear yellow in the DJI GO4 map. Users will be prompted with a warning and flight is limited by default. A user with appropriate authorization may unlock the Authorization Zone by using a DJI-verified account. This is called "self-unlocking" and can be accomplished before the flight via DJI's website for a period of up to three days, or at the time of flight if the user has an internet connection in the field.

The incident pilot's tablet did not have a cellular data connection, so the GEO system information regarding the TFRs would not download in real time at the takeoff location. In order for the system to have warned the pilot, he would have had to connect to the internet at some point while the TFR was active; however, at the time of the incident, the TFR system within DJI GEO and displayed to customers through DJI GO4 was not active. During August 2017, an issue was identified with the GEO function that inadvertently and intermittently rendered the self-unlock feature for certain TFRs ineffective for some users. After a significant number of complaints about the problem, DJI decided to temporarily disable the TFR functionality in GEO until the feature was investigated and confirmed to be working properly. Therefore, at the time of the incident, no TFR information was available in GEO. Since GEO is meant to be an advisory system to pilots, DJI decided it was better to disable this feature until the problem could be corrected to enable authorized users to support recovery efforts and other authorized missions across the country, including firefighting response and demonstrations at air shows. There was no notice or advisory to users that this advisory function had been disabled. The TFR functionality in GEO was restored in October 2017.

METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION

The LDJ surface observation at 1915 reported clear skies, 10 miles visibility and light northeasterly winds. Sunset was at 1855 and the end of civil twilight occurred at 1922.

FLIGHT DATA

Flight data was extracted from the incident helicopter's Health and Usage Management System (HUMS) by the Army Combat Readiness Center and provided to the investigation. Altitude and other flight data is cited in the History of Flight section of this report.

The Phantom 4 records full flight parameters on non-volatile memory on board the aircraft. This data was not available to the investigation, as the aircraft flight controller circuit boards were not located, presumably destroyed and in the water. The DJI GO4 app records select telemetry parameters to the pilot's display tablet. The sUAS pilot provided his data logs to the investigation for analysis. Data from the incident flight is cited in the History of Flight section of this report. The logs also included a flight the sUAS pilot made earlier on the evening of the incident, and indicated that he flew toward the Seagate area of western Coney Island, about 1.8 miles from the takeoff point, up to an altitude of 547 ft above takeoff elevation.

WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

One motor and a portion of an arm of the sUAS was recovered from the helicopter. Debris was found in the engine oil cooler fan by Army maintenance personnel. The components were transferred by the US Army to a representative of the FAA Teterboro, New Jersey, Flight Standards District Office, then to the NTSB. Manufacturing serial number information inscribed on the motor enabled sales records provided by the manufacturer to aid in identifying the pilot, as the sUAS was purchased directly from the manufacturer. The remainder of the sUAS was not recovered.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

The investigation reviewed pertinent regulations and guidance regarding helicopter and sUAS operation.

Helicopter Operating Altitude

14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91.119 states in part:

Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(c) Over other than congested areas.An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure….(d) Helicopters,… If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface - (1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c).

Statutes, Regulations, and Guidelines applicable to sUAS

Public Law 112-95 section 336(c) (Feb. 14, 2012) defines "model aircraft" as an unmanned aircraft that is:

(1) Capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;

(2) Flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and

(3) Flown for hobby or recreational purposes.

14 CFR 1.1 (and 101.1) state in part:

Model aircraft means an unmanned aircraft that is:

(2) Flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and

(3) Flown for hobby or recreational purposes.

14 CFR 101.41 states in part:

Applicability.

This subpart prescribes rules governing the operation of a model aircraft that meets all of the following conditions …

(a) The aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;

(b) The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines;…

(d) The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft…

The Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA) publishes such safety guidelines. The AMA Safety Code states in part:

9. The pilot of an RC model aircraft shall:

(a) Maintain control during the entire flight, maintaining visual contact without enhancement other than by corrective lenses prescribed for the pilot.

Temporary Flight Restrictions

According to the FAA, TFRs are tools used by the FAA to restrict aircraft operations within designated areas. [In recent] years, TFRs, along with Air Defense Identification Zones and Flight Restriction Zones, have been widely used to restrict overflights through certain airspace for reasons of national security. Two TFRs were in effect in the area and time of the incident, as noted in the History of Flight section above. 

History of Flight

Enroute
Midair collision (Defining event) 

Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information

Aircraft Manufacturer: SIKORSKY
Registration: R20087
Model/Series: UH60
Aircraft Category: Helicopter
Year of Manufacture: 
Amateur Built: No
Airworthiness Certificate:
Serial Number: Unknown
Landing Gear Type: 
Seats:
Date/Type of Last Inspection:
Certified Max Gross Wt.:
Time Since Last Inspection:
Engines:
Airframe Total Time:
Engine Manufacturer:
ELT:
Engine Model/Series:
Registered Owner: US Army
Rated Power:
Operator: US Army
Operating Certificate(s) Held: None 

Meteorological Information and Flight Plan

Conditions at Accident Site: Visual Conditions
Condition of Light:Dusk
Observation Facility, Elevation: KLDJ
Observation Time: 2315 UTC
Distance from Accident Site: 10 Nautical Miles 
Direction from Accident Site: 290°
Lowest Cloud Condition: Clear
Temperature/Dew Point: -11°C
Lowest Ceiling: None
Visibility:  10 Miles
Wind Speed/Gusts, Direction: 3 knots, 40°
Visibility (RVR):
Altimeter Setting: 29.99 inches Hg
Visibility (RVV): 
Precipitation and Obscuration:
Departure Point: Linden, NJ (KLDJ)
Type of Flight Plan Filed: VFR
Destination: Linden, NJ (KLDJ)
Type of Clearance: None
Departure Time: 1845 EDT
Type of Airspace: Class G 

Wreckage and Impact Information

Crew Injuries: 4 None
Aircraft Damage: Minor
Passenger Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Fire: None
Ground Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Explosion: None
Total Injuries: 4 None

Latitude, Longitude:  40.500000, -74.000000 (est)
Damaged rotor blades on the Army UH-60 helicopter. 


WASHINGTON — (Oct. 5, 2017) The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating the Sept. 21 collision between a civilian drone and an Army UH-60 helicopter east of Staten Island, New York.

At approximately 7:20 p.m. Sept. 21, the drone, or unmanned aerial vehicle, and the helicopter collided.  The Army helicopter sustained damage to its main rotor blade, window frame and transmission deck.  A motor and arm from a small drone, identified as a DJI Phantom 4, were recovered from the helicopter. The NTSB was notified of the incident Sept. 22 and began its investigation that day. In the following days investigators were able to identify and subsequently interview the drone operator. The drone operator also provided flight data logs for the incident flight.

The NTSB is investigating the incident because the drone was a civilian aircraft. DJI and the Federal Aviation Administration are participating in the investigation. The Army is conducting a mishap investigation.

The NTSB’s investigation is ongoing and investigators are reviewing air traffic control radar data, flight data from the helicopter, the flight data logs provided by the drone operator and FAA airspace and temporary flight restriction documents.

https://www.ntsb.gov







FORT BRAGG, N.C. (WNCN) – A Fort Bragg 82nd Airborne helicopter was forced to land after it was hit by a civilian drone over New York City Thursday night, officials said.

The incident happened around 7:30 p.m. in “congested airspace” and involved a UH 60 Black Hawk that was being used to support security at the United Nations, a Fort Bragg official told CBS North Carolina.

The damaged helicopter was near Midland Beach at an altitude of 500 feet and was alongside another Black Hawk when the incident happened, according to NJ.com.

The helicopter, which has been grounded since the incident, sustained damage to the main blade and windows. No one was injured.

The Black Hawk was able to land in New Jersey at the Linden Airport, officials said. WNYW reported that part of the drone was later found in the Black Hawk’s oil cooler.

The drone was operating illegally, according to the New York Post.

Repair parts were sent on Friday and Fort Bragg officials expect to have the helicopter repaired by mid-day Saturday.

The FAA was notified about the incident, which officials said was an accident and that the Black Hawk was not targeted.

It’s unknown who was operating the drone.

Original article can be found here ➤ http://wncn.com






MIDLAND BEACH, Staten Island (WABC) -- An Army Black Hawk helicopter was struck by a drone at approximately 500 feet over a residential neighborhood on Staten Island.

The helicopter, based out of Fort Bragg, N.C., was in New York City for the United Nation patrol.

A piece of the drone bounced off the rotor and became lodged in the aircraft.

The pilot, who was not injured, was able to land the helicopter at Linden Airport in New Jersey.

The military is investigating the incident.

Story and photo gallery ➤ http://abc7ny.com

A recreational drone operator whose device smashed into a U.S. Army helicopter in September flew undetected into a no-fly zone over New York set up to protect President Donald Trump and the United Nations.

The National Transportation Safety Board on Thursday said the drone flew in air space closed because of the visit by Trump, highlighting gaps in safety and security protections involving the devices that are the size of a medium pizza box. Moreover, the pilot was in Brooklyn but the drone was offshore of Staten Island, violating a rule that operators must keep drones in their sight.

“The pilot of the sUAS intentionally flew the aircraft 2.5 miles away, well beyond visual line of sight,” the NTSB said in the report, referring to the drone as a small unmanned aircraft system.

The crash occurred just off Staten Island on Sept. 21 as light was fading in the evening. The Black Hawk helicopter suffered damage to one of its rotor blades, but was able to land safely. The collision was the first confirmed midair impact in the U.S. between a manned aircraft and one of the millions of drones sold in recent years. Reports of safety incidents involving drones have climbed steadily, and averaged more than 200 a month last summer, according to federal data.

The helicopter was one of two flying in the area as part of the security efforts for the United Nations General Assembly, which was meeting that week. Trump had spoken to the UN two days earlier and security restrictions for his visit were still in effect.

The NTSB report comes as the Federal Aviation Administration is wrestling with multiple drone-safety issues. They include whether to allow routine flights over people, which drones should be required to send radio beacons with their identity and location, and how to build a low-level air-traffic system for the small consumer flying devices.

The recreational operator, who wasn’t identified, told investigators he didn’t know that federal authorities had temporarily banned all drone flights in New York. 

A notification system included with the device, made by SZ DJI Technology Co., didn’t advise him of those flight restrictions, the NTSB said. The FAA, which regulates drones and has fined operators in the past, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on the incident.

While the accident occurred at an altitude of 274 feet (84 meters), the drone operator had earlier flown to a height of 547 feet, above the FAA’s 400-foot flight limit, the NTSB said. When it reached that height the device was 1.8 miles away from the operator, where it would have been difficult to see any other aircraft, according to the report.

Read More: Amazon’s Dream of Drone Delivery Gets Closer With Trump Move

“Even though the sUAS pilot indicated that he knew there were frequently helicopters in the area, he still elected to fly his sUAS beyond visual line of sight, demonstrating his lack of understanding of the potential hazard of collision,” the report said.

The drone was a DJI Phantom 4, a small device made by the world’s largest civilian unmanned aircraft manufacturer.

It’s equipped with what’s known as “geo-fencing,” designed to prevent operators from flying in prohibited zones. However, “this feature is intended for advisory use only, and sUAS pilots are responsible at all times to comply with FAA airspace restrictions,” the NTSB said.
Resolving Glitches

In addition, DJI had temporarily shut off its flight-restriction advisories as it worked to resolve glitches in the system, according to the report.

Even if the system had been functioning, it wouldn’t have alerted the drone operator, the NTSB said. He was guiding the drone with a tablet computer, but it wasn’t connected to the internet and thus couldn’t download the information on the FAA’s flight restrictions.

“DJI believes pilot education is the most important factor to ensure drones share the skies safely with other aircraft, and has led the industry with technology to accomplish this goal,” the company said in a statement.

The company recently began an educational initiative that requires new drone pilots to pass a safety quiz before taking initial flights. The quiz was developed in collaboration with FAA, the company said.
Metal Motors

Small drones like the one involved in the New York collision weigh only a few pounds, but they contain metal motors and cameras that can cause significant damage to a jetliner at high speeds, a study commissioned by the FAA found in November. While the study found it was unlikely a drone impact alone could take down an airliner, it could cause enough damage to shut down a jet engine.

FAA incident reports include numerous examples of drones flying close to passenger airplanes or beyond legal restrictions. For example, on Sept. 28, pilots on a Boeing Co. 737-800 that had just taken off from Chicago O’Hare International Airport reported spotting a drone at 9,000 feet altitude. The aircraft is a widely used airliner; the name of the carrier wasn’t identified.

The Transportation Safety Board of Canada is also looking into an incident in Quebec on Oct. 12 in which a small drone struck a charter flight carrying six passengers. The plane suffered minor damage to its left wing and landed safely.


Original article can be found here ➤  https://www.bloomberg.com