Pilot error brought down the Armies Watchkeeper
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,868
Received 2,818 Likes
on
1,200 Posts
Pilot error brought down the Armies Watchkeeper
The drone was doing its thing up until human intervention scuppered it
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/0...050_aberporth/
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/0...050_aberporth/
When it landed at Aberporth, WK050 "landed long", reported the BBC. This means that instead of touching down at the correct point towards the start of the runway, giving it a nice long distance in which to harmlessly roll to a stop, the drone was further along than it ought to have been – risking it overrunning off the far end, damaging the aircraft.Thus, the onboard computer followed its programming and "auto-aborted as it approached the end of the runway". The drone throttled up to full power and took off again, ready to fly itself around in a circuit and have another go at landing. Such things are a fact of life in aviation, whether humans or computers are trying to land.However, WK050's human operators seemingly became confused at this point – and cut the throttle. WK050 "glided over the road" at the end of the runway and "crashed into a tree" around 900 metres beyond the end of the runway."Had no action been taken by the crew the AV (aerial vehicle) would have completed its automatic go-around, from which it could have been commanded to conduct a further approach," the report said.
The ongoing experiment with non-aircrew at the (virtual) controls of a fixed-wing aircraft would have made more sense if the Army had purchased a bunch of otherwise stripped-out, empty and suitably ballasted Hermes aircraft to play with & crash for the last 10 years or so. It would have saved quite a bit of money whilst providing similar operational effect.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ongoing experiment that sees RAF aircrew thinking they know all would make more sense if the 100+ year experiment was ended and the equipment given to the military branches of HM Forces. Have lost count how many times div, bde, pl, tp, section, range of mortar, etc has had to be explained to know-it-all-knobbers.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SW
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC Wales
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-49158509
This picture reminded me of flying "RPV'S" with my son, we never needed anything bigger than a bin bag to remove the wreckage and it went in the boot of my car, not on a flat bad
This picture reminded me of flying "RPV'S" with my son, we never needed anything bigger than a bin bag to remove the wreckage and it went in the boot of my car, not on a flat bad
The ongoing experiment that sees RAF aircrew thinking they know all would make more sense if the 100+ year experiment was ended and the equipment given to the military branches of HM Forces. Have lost count how many times div, bde, pl, tp, section, range of mortar, etc has had to be explained to know-it-all-knobbers.
The ongoing experiment with non-aircrew at the (virtual) controls of a fixed-wing aircraft would have made more sense if the Army had purchased a bunch of otherwise stripped-out, empty and suitably ballasted Hermes aircraft to play with & crash for the last 10 years or so. It would have saved quite a bit of money whilst providing similar operational effect.
Another lucid brown rant. I lost count of the number of times Rupert the donkey walloper failed to understand that the aircraft did not have to be parked on his front lawn for it to be effective at div, bde, coy ..........etc etc
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Lincs
Age: 55
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in all seriousness, this does raise questions about the quality and depth of the training being provided, and the airmanship (or lack of) being applied across the programme, The earlier WK crash as a result of deliberately flying the air vehicle into known icing conditions told me everything I needed to know about the lack of serious RPAS / UAV experience involved.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Where the heart belongs
Age: 55
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
"Pilot error brought down the Armies Watchkeeper" Just how many Armies do we have? Seriously though GIJoe does have a point, can you say with all seriousness that a RAF pilot has never fudged a go-around? I can think of serveral including a Tristar tail strike following a botched landing and go-around at Kandahar.
Shouldn't the operators have known what mode the drone is in and what it will do next? Sounds like some operator's training issue to me.
in all seriousness, this does raise questions about the quality and depth of the training being provided, and the airmanship (or lack of) being applied across the programme, The earlier WK crash as a result of deliberately flying the air vehicle into known icing conditions told me everything I needed to know about the lack of serious RPAS / UAV experience involved.
Never mind the Army, htp. Are you saying that Thales is operating under its own RTS, or under no authority at all?