Adriano Araujo
First Officer
Flight distance : 731565 ft
Brazil
Offline
|
Charles Adams Posted at 2017-8-16 19:02
I definitely would not have flown here, and i agree that pilots have a responsibility to fly safely. But the results seem quite unusual. I guess one analogy would be that if I were to be speeding in my car (a law I should follow), I would still expect the antilock breaks to engage. Or the horn to still function.
I personally don't think a compass complication should result in a fly away, even if caused by poor pilot judgement.
I do not understand why a compass (or other system / subsystem) error should trigger a flyaway.
There are five different systems on Spark, and they do not seem to work in cooperation.
1 – Compass
2 – Accelerometers
3 – GPS
4 – Vision System
5 - Barometer
The Aircraft should work well with three, or even two. I really don´t understand why error on just one triggers a fail.
Let´s say:
1 - you lose compass: You still have GPS (from which you can get heading). The AC can even RTH very, very, safely. I DON’T UNDERSTAND A COMPASS ERRO COMPROMISES THE FLIGHT
2 – you lose GPS: You still have Accelerometers, compass, and if not too high, vision system. The AC should not RTH, but it can use those subsystems to hover in place (not flying away), AND, yes, WITH ACELEROMETESR YOU can CONTERACT THE WIND, making it simple to control it back (as you still have connection)
With Accelerometers, it would even be possible to make what in aviation is called INS (Inertial navigation system). You know where you were when you lost GPS, and you know where you shoud RTH. Using accelerometers and compass, you can get really near launch place.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_navigation_system
Just trying to figure it out. Bad software design? Not getting full potential of the system?
|
|