Jump to content

No wonder the CAA are concerned with UAS

Recommended Posts

Picked this up from an AAIB report


Routine checks were completed, and the aircraft set up according to the test card. At 0712:16 hrs aircraft flight mode was selected, and all the electric propulsion units (EPUs) began idling. At 0714:25 hrs G-EVTL completed a normal vertical takeoff with all EPUs operating. Once the aircraft was stable in ground effect, the remote pilot shutdown EPU1 in accordance with the test card. At 0714:40 hrs the remote pilot then began a gentle climb to 30 ft agl. The test card required the aircraft to be stable at this height for 10 seconds before proceeding with the flight. This was completed and the remote pilot began a gentle acceleration towards 7 kt ground speed (GS). At 0715:47 hrs, as the aircraft speed passed 2-4 kt GS, a loud ‘pop’ was heard, and a propeller blade was released from EPU3. The resulting imbalance caused the structural failure of the right inboard pylon (pylon 3). Despite EPU1 restarting automatically the aircraft was unable to maintain height and at 0715:50 hrs it struck the ground on the left edge of the runway with a vertical descent rate of 19.45 ft/sec. During the impact the right wing failed outboard of pylon 3, the nose gear collapsed and there was other structural damage. There were no injuries and no damage to any third party.



Guess what surprised me?      MTOW!




Aircraft description G-EVTL is an Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing (eVTOL) prototype with a carbon fibre composite structure, fixed tricycle landing gear, V-tail and a high wing. In its configuration for this test the aircraft had a maximum takeoff mass of 3,737 kg and could be flown with a pilot onboard or remotely.





  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


G-ETVL is its CAA registration.


At its MTOW of 3900kg or just a bit heavier than an EC135 air ambulance 😮 I expect it requires a very specific Permit to Fly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


25 minutes ago, Chris Walby said:

You lot are missing the point


3,737 kg or 8,221 lbs in old money


Or am I the only one that thinks that's a darn big UAS!...when it falls out of the sky

So is an EC135 (at nearly 3 tons MTOW) when it falls out of the sky. Just ask the people involved in The Clutha pub incident in Glasgow in 2013.

Edited by EvilC57
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at some pictures the movable mounts for the motor/prop combos look a bit flimsy. I know they will have been engineered and should be suitable. They will experience a mix of forces, torque from the prop rotation along with tension from prop thrust not to mention the gyroscopic forces when the props transition from hover to forward flight and back again and added in to that in hover the prop is forward of the hinge point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like they were doing experiments to see how the thing handled when losing a motor or two. . You know, real world stuff. 


They should be applauded for their work. 

I am sure nobody wants something like this to fall out of the sky at the slightest hiccup. 


Keep experimenting, lads. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...