Something Went TERRIBLY wrong

[Meta4]

It was just weird what happened at 13:13 with at the exact moment the battery hit 25. It was like it entered atti mode with a strong wind.

What was happening at 13:13 is that you were in RTH mode with hands off the sticks.
RTH will fly at about 22 mph (in still air) but your Phantom was being blown off course as the wind was stronger than 22mph.
It looks like it was coming from the NW so it wasn't a straight headwind and would have been either very difficult to fly directly against it or perhaps, impossible.

 

[Numone]

I had a situation where the AC was completely stationary upon returning. The battery was very hot and it was dropping % at an alarming rate. It was up at 350, so I began to descend and slowly the AC began to accelerate and by 250, it was returning at 15 mph. As it got closer I dropped to 200 and it went upto 25 and it made it back with 14%. Strong lesson was learnt that day!

 

[Numone]

Thanks A TON, just so you know at my location i was under the tree line, so my only option was to fly at a high altitude to combat loss of signal. As you can see in the live stream my signal cut out at 260 feet when through pythagorean theorem you can see that assuming that the signal travels in a straight line my signal was cut out by the trees. I thought of that option, but thought it was too risky.

But you should've attempted to drop to see if that improved the situation, that's the point we're making. And 390 it's not a good RTH altitude - well, in the U.K. there aren't many 390' trees! But the high wind was the killer. If I now find that at nominal input I'm travelling way beyond the speed that it should be experiencing, I turn back... to make sure I get back.

 

[ralphel21]

So should i have not used RTH and taken the bull by its horns in full manual?

 

[Meta4]

So should i have not used RTH and taken the bull by its horns in full manual?

To fight a strong wind you need to go faster than RTH so you can push the right stick full to go faster like you did for some of the flight.
Or let RTH start coming home and then cancel and take over yourself.
But the important point is to come down out of the strong winds.

 

[stones]

I live streamed the whole thing

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=456877714665890

Just watched the vid and at tree top level, looks to be a fair amount of wind, to say the least. As you go up in altitude, the wind usually becomes exponentially stronger. Try using UAV Forecast app beforehand, to get an idea of winds aloft.

 

[randyvanscoy]

dont feel bad. i had same thing happen to me and i had it crash land in a field cause i was too high to come home with the wind wrong way. i learned the lesson hard way too. it was calm on the ground, but at 300 feet it was about 23mph. blowing away from where i took off. could not get back home so i though it was a run away issue. these people on here helped me out and told me what i done wrong. it sure helped me out. i learned to watch the tops of trees and see how much they are moving. i also bought a rf amp system to increase signal to the drone so i can fly it lower and not loose signal so the wind is not as much as a problem. not to fly farther, just more signal through the trees at lower levels works well for me. good luck and glad didnt kill your drone.

 

[sar104]

dont feel bad. i had same thing happen to me and i had it crash land in a field cause i was too high to come home with the wind wrong way. i learned the lesson hard way too. it was calm on the ground, but at 300 feet it was about 23mph. blowing away from where i took off. could not get back home so i though it was a run away issue. these people on here helped me out and told me what i done wrong. it sure helped me out. i learned to watch the tops of trees and see how much they are moving. i also bought a rf amp system to increase signal to the drone so i can fly it lower and not loose signal so the wind is not as much as a problem. not to fly farther, just more signal through the trees at lower levels works well for me. good luck and glad didnt kill your drone.

It's worth taking it up to your desired altitude and then briefly switching to ATTI. The aircraft's resulting speed and direction of travel with no stick input will tell you, very accurately, the wind speed and direction at that height.

 

[Numone]

It's worth taking it up to your desired altitude and then briefly switching to ATTI. The aircraft's resulting speed and direction of travel with no stick input will tell you, very accurately, the wind speed and direction at that height.

Very good point.

 

[ralphel21]

That is a good idea

 

[V tail]

Check your motors spin all 4 and tell me if they all have a nice sound to it, if you hear a little different noise rather than the rest of your motors tell me

I am curious with the attempted diagnosis here...

 

[ralphel21]

Why, is something wrong?

 

[ralphel21]

Ooh sorry didn't see what you were replying too.

 

[Crack The Sky]

I was doing a range test on my phantom 3 pro today, (with faa aproval) and something went terribly wrong. I was at 6351 feet with 45 percent battery, when I decided to turn arround. The phantom was flying normaly when randomly it gave me the motor overload error. It then swerved around at only 4-6 mph. It then suggested that I start RTH, and with my blood pressure rising I said yes. It then streightened out, and started home at 8-13 mph which was slower than I anticipated. Then randomly the aircraft lost all speed towards me and shot right at 45 mph with random twists and turns (shown in the picture) and got further, and further from me (7000 + feet). After trying unsucssessfuly to disable home lock, I watched in horror as my phantom did the dance of the sugar plum fairy. It ran the battery down to 15 percent when it went into rapid decent mode, and I could move it along the x and y axis. I was able to swerve it off its corce on to the trees and watched as the altitude dropped to 290 feet at which point I lost signal. We spent all afternoon tracking it down and we found that it had landed gracefully, but had flipped upside down when it landed on a hill. My phantom is fine but my confidence isn't. What went wrong, and how can I make sure it never happens again. NOTE: I had full gps the whole time, and my firmware is up to date. Thanks, Eli
View attachment 82541

I'm very curious. How long did it take to get FAA "approval" to fly in the Class D Lawrence Airspace and BVLOS?
Was that (2) separate waivers that they approved?
Did the waiver applications(s) state that you were "range testing"?
What did they require from you to approve the applications?
Thanks; just want to know how much trouble you had getting approval before I attempt it.

 

[ralphel21]

I literaly called the lawerence municipal airport and some body answered and gave me the number to the tower, I called that and the tower operator called and after i told him what i was doing, and he literally said "that is a couple miles out right? You're good, enjoy your flying, and for your information there is wind 9-12 mph north west." I kept the aircraft in my "line of sight" which I interpreted as no trees blocking my view even though the aircraft was too small too see

 

[sar104]

I literaly called the lawerence municipal airport and some body answered and gave me the number to the tower, I called that and the tower operator called and after i told him what i was doing, and he literally said "that is a couple miles out right? You're good, enjoy your flying, and for your information there is wind 9-12 mph north west." I kept the aircraft in my "line of sight" which I interpreted as no trees blocking my view even though the aircraft was too small too see

OK - so that was recreational flying with ATC notification - correctly done. Your interpretation of "line of sight" was a bit creative though, since the guidelines require that the aircraft actually be visible without aids (binoculars, etc.).

 

[ralphel21]

I was SHOCKED that he gave me approval that easily. It almost seemed immature to give a 13 year old to pilot a uav that close to the airport at that altitude to do a RANGE TEST for god sake.

 

[sar104]

I was SHOCKED that he gave me approval that easily. It almost seemed immature to give a 13 year old to pilot a uav that close to the airport at that altitude to do a RANGE TEST for god sake.

The tower is not actually approving your flight - you are simply required to notify them. They cannot deny permission, but they can object. They certainly can't waive the Special Rule requirements - that's up to you to know and follow. For reference, this is the wording in the FAA interpretation on VLOS:

By definition, a model aircraft must be “flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft.” P.L. 112-95, section 336(c)(2). Based on the plain language of the statute, the FAA interprets this requirement to mean that: (1) the aircraft must be visible at all times to the operator; (2) that the operator must use his or her own natural vision (which includes vision corrected by standard eyeglasses or contact lenses) to observe the aircraft; and (3) people other than the operator may not be used in lieu of the operator for maintaining visual line of sight. Under the criteria above, visual line of sight would mean that the operator has an unobstructed view of the model aircraft. To ensure that the operator has the best view of the aircraft, the statutory requirement would preclude the use of vision-enhancing devices, such as binoculars, night vision goggles, powered vision magnifying devices, and goggles designed to provide a “first-person view” from the model. Such devices would limit the operator’s field of view thereby reducing his or her ability to see-and-avoid other aircraft in the area. Additionally, some of these devices could dramatically increase the distance at which an operator could see the aircraft, rendering the statutory visual-line-of-sight requirements meaningless. Finally, based on the plain language of the statute, which says that aircraft must be “flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft,” an operator could not rely on another person to satisfy the visual line of sight requirement. See id. (emphasis added). While the statute would not preclude using an observer to augment the safety of the operation, the operator must be able to view the aircraft at all times. ​

 

[Crack The Sky]

The tower is not actually approving your flight - you are simply required to notify them. They cannot deny permission, but they can object. They certainly can't waive the Special Rule requirements - that's up to you to know and follow. For reference, this is the wording in the FAA interpretation on VLOS:

By definition, a model aircraft must be “flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft.” P.L. 112-95, section 336(c)(2). Based on the plain language of the statute, the FAA interprets this requirement to mean that: (1) the aircraft must be visible at all times to the operator; (2) that the operator must use his or her own natural vision (which includes vision corrected by standard eyeglasses or contact lenses) to observe the aircraft; and (3) people other than the operator may not be used in lieu of the operator for maintaining visual line of sight. Under the criteria above, visual line of sight would mean that the operator has an unobstructed view of the model aircraft. To ensure that the operator has the best view of the aircraft, the statutory requirement would preclude the use of vision-enhancing devices, such as binoculars, night vision goggles, powered vision magnifying devices, and goggles designed to provide a “first-person view” from the model. Such devices would limit the operator’s field of view thereby reducing his or her ability to see-and-avoid other aircraft in the area. Additionally, some of these devices could dramatically increase the distance at which an operator could see the aircraft, rendering the statutory visual-line-of-sight requirements meaningless. Finally, based on the plain language of the statute, which says that aircraft must be “flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft,” an operator could not rely on another person to satisfy the visual line of sight requirement. See id. (emphasis added). While the statute would not preclude using an observer to augment the safety of the operation, the operator must be able to view the aircraft at all times. ​

Thanks for saving me the trouble of going through this. I knew where it was going, from the start. When he said, "FAA approval" I knew it was Part 101 with notification, and illegally BLOS.

 

[ralphel21]

I know that, what i was saying is that i was surprised that they didn't object.