Thoughts on Mini Mount parachute

[Ty180]

Interested in this parachute, but how much battery time I would lose with it installed? For the price seems like a good investment in minimizing damage from a system failure.AUTEL X-Star MINI Mount - Mars Parachutes

 

[Jagerbomb52]

I wonder if it would put the quad out of balance?

 

[Ty180]

I wonder if it would put the quad out of balance?

I was thinking that as well, I searched YouTube for video of it on the Autel, couldn't find any. Here's a link of one on a phantom.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

At 159.00 for the parachute plus 35 for the mount the price isn't to bad for the protection. But how bad does it affect the flight characteristics?

 

[paul holt]

one thought just plain stupid

 

[amctr]

Over $400 all in cost is probably more than what Autel would charge to replace just your aircraft, less the RC and case.

 

[Brlowe]

To me having a chute on your drone is not as much about saving the drone but if flying near people it would be to lessen the chance of hurting someone on the ground if something goes wrong that you have no control over. The best pilot cannot control everything. Also you could use 1 chute for more than 1 drone, just move it from 1 mount to another as needed. That being said I have not purchased one yet but will in the future.

 

[Delta Blue]

If it deploys above a tree then the chances of the drone being even higher out of reach probably increase.

 

[brian bwin]

To me having a chute on your drone is not as much about saving the drone but if flying near people it would be to lessen the chance of hurting someone on the ground if something goes wrong that you have no control over. The best pilot cannot control everything.

The aircraft could just as easily drift somewhere bad causing damage, injury, who knows what... We definitely have control by deciding not to fly if the conditions don't exist for a safe flight or even a safe crash (nearby people who are unaware of your flight), haha, or by not pushing limits of control, battery time, our physical limitations, etc.

 

[Brlowe]

The aircraft could just as easily drift somewhere bad causing damage, injury, who knows what... We definitely have control by deciding not to fly if the conditions don't exist for a safe flight or even a safe crash (nearby people who are unaware of your flight), haha, or by not pushing limits of control, battery time, our physical limitations, etc.

So you would rather take your chances with it falling out of the sky like a rock?
Just FYI I do not push the limits, I do not fly beyond LOS, I never run to low battery warnings and I do not fly over people but you cannot control when something goes wrong and it fly's off on it's own and then decides to hover somewhere at 300' and then fall out of the sky when the battery dies....and yes that happens just read these forums.

 

[Delta Blue]

If the craft autonomously flies off on its own while ignoring the pilot's sensible commands under favorable conditions, then it might also do something else erratic on its own, such as refusing to deploy a parachute, so pilots might not choose to add another piece of unnecessary or questionable reliability, complexity, imbalance or weight to their flights. An updraft caused by atmospheric instability can carry a three pound drone away even without a parachute, so think of how much farther away the drone might go with a parachute that rides on air, adding even more potential hazards to try to predict. If the craft unreliably "flies off on its own" even while executing autonomously safe and sensible well-thought-out, pre selected waypoints using the Autel-recommended system in Starlink and under favorable conditions, then at least the pilot could save that flight as evidence to show Autel, and/or the F.A.A., lawyers, insurance companies, law enforcement, etc., after the X-Star goes down.

 

[Ty180]

I was thinking it was a good idea in regards to the drone's momentum is slowed therefore won't injure someone as badly or reduce property damage. I plan to fly commercially soon so it seems appealing to me as an added layer of protection if something goes wrong. Having this equipment for my drone would be good for a remote PIC. The FAA is serious about safety as more drone's become registered.

 

[Delta Blue]

I was thinking it was a good idea in regards to the drone's momentum is slowed therefore won't injure someone as badly or reduce property damage. I plan to fly commercially soon so it seems appealing to me as an added layer of protection if something goes wrong. Having this equipment for my drone would be good for a remote PIC. The FAA is serious about safety as more drone's become registered.

I will be flying commercially too, but have not yet considered using a parachute as part of my equipment. I guess my apprehension is based on unpredictability, such as, if something goes wrong with the drone, it follows that something could also go wrong with the parachute itself. For instance, what if it deploys on its own and causes the drone to crash? The FAA rules are to keep sUAVs from flying over humans anyway unless one has a waiver. If it will make you a safer and more confident flyer then I am all for it and I hope to see reports about it in the future, so we others can get more information so as to help us decide about it or not. I think I will personally just make sure I plan my work for as few risks as possible until that time.

 

[Tommy Molnar]

"The FAA rules are to keep sUAVs from flying over humans anyway unless one has a waiver."

So, how does a waiver make it any safer to fly "over humans"?

 

[Delta Blue]

"The FAA rules are to keep sUAVs from flying over humans anyway unless one has a waiver."

So, how does a waiver make it any safer to fly "over humans"?

From FAA: "A small UAS may not fly over people, except those directly involved with the flight." The FAA obviously gets to decide what is safe and what is not. If you apply for a waiver and they grant it then in that instance they have determined that it is safe. You would have to ask the FAA how they determine that.

 

[brian bwin]

So you would rather take your chances with it falling out of the sky like a rock? .... you cannot control when something goes wrong and it fly's off on it's own and then decides to hover somewhere at 300' and then fall out of the sky when the battery dies....and yes that happens just read these forums.

There are pros/cons to both, I was just trying to highlight that even though the parachute reduces velocity of a crash it is still an uncontrolled descent and could still cause damage or injury. I have not seen where these events (flying off somewhere random and hovering) are happening to x-stars but I have seen battery will drop suddenly/quickly. At that point I would rather it crash like a rock to the ground on my flight path than drift off.

Hopefully the situation will never arise where the chute would deploy and it sounds like you have safety in mind to begin with. Best of luck, please share your experience positive or negative so we all can learn and be more knowledgeable on the subject!

I would definitely consider getting one if applying for a waiver to fly directly over non-participants (actors, for example).

To get the waiver you need to demonstrate to the FAA how you will mitigate risks and perform the operation safely, that's how the waiver makes it safer. I'm sure there are some examples out there of granted waivers/coas (certificate of authorization) to learn what criteria is important.

 

[Ty180]

From FAA: "A small UAS may not fly over people, except those directly involved with the flight." The FAA obviously gets to decide what is safe and what is not. If you apply for a waiver and they grant it then in that instance they have determined that it is safe. You would have to ask the FAA how they determine that.

I know a few people that are commercial flyers and they apply for waivers constantly because most missions arent over unpopulated land. I agree as some people say this is a bit stupid for the average user that just flies in unpopulated areas, but someone that's going to fly commercially how could this parachute be a bad thing?

 

[Brlowe]

There are pros/cons to both, I was just trying to highlight that even though the parachute reduces velocity of a crash it is still an uncontrolled descent and could still cause damage or injury. I have not seen where these events (flying off somewhere random and hovering) are happening to x-stars but I have seen battery will drop suddenly/quickly. At that point I would rather it crash like a rock to the ground on my flight path than drift off.

Hopefully the situation will never arise where the chute would deploy and it sounds like you have safety in mind to begin with. Best of luck, please share your experience positive or negative so we all can learn and be more knowledgeable on the subject!

I would definitely consider getting one if applying for a waiver to fly directly over non-participants (actors, for example).

To get the waiver you need to demonstrate to the FAA how you will mitigate risks and perform the operation safely, that's how the waiver makes it safer. I'm sure there are some examples out there of granted waivers/coas (certificate of authorization) to learn what criteria is important.

Unfortunately I have read a few reports of the X-Star having battery issues and doing odd things like just having where it is until it dies and falls out of the sky or returns to home and the waits and falls out of the sky, both not great.

I do agree there is not a lot of historical info yet on how the parachutes do and if they deploy unexpectedly. I just think in some cases it may be a nice added layer of protection. Someone above also said if the drone is unresponsive how is the chute going to deploy. They can be set up completely stand alone and auto deploy on free fall. So we may just have to wait and see. I know I read that the FAA may be adding the ability to fly over people and I would not be surprised if they required a chute of something just like the 3 mile lighting for night flights.

 

[Lima6]

From FAA: "A small UAS may not fly over people, except those directly involved with the flight." The FAA obviously gets to decide what is safe and what is not. If you apply for a waiver and they grant it then in that instance they have determined that it is safe. You would have to ask the FAA how they determine that.

FAA waivers (either 333 or Part 107) are always based on the concept of "equivalent level of safety." The prohibition on operations over people is one of the waivable provisions.

The criteria used for this waiver (and any of the Part 107 waivers), can be found in the Performance Based Standards document. https://www.faa.gov/uas/request_waiver/media/performance_based_standards.pdf
You're going to need data and an actual operations plan to get the waiver, rather some vague idea that putting a parachute on the aircraft will make it safer for non-participants.

 

[Ty180]

FAA waivers (either 333 or Part 107) are always based on the concept of "equivalent level of safety." The prohibition on operations over people is one of the waivable provisions.

The criteria used for this waiver (and any of the Part 107 waivers), can be found in the Performance Based Standards document. https://www.faa.gov/uas/request_waiver/media/performance_based_standards.pdf
You're going to need data and an actual operations plan to get the waiver, rather some vague idea that putting a parachute on the aircraft will make it safer for non-participants.

I'm aware of the criteria when applying for a waiver and I'm well-versed on part 107, I'm just referring to the chute as an added level of safety which can't hurt, don't really think it's a vague idea really thanks for your input!

 

[Lima6]

I'm aware of the criteria when applying for a waiver and I'm well-versed on part 107, I'm just referring to the chute as an added level of safety which can't hurt, don't really think it's a vague idea really thanks for your input!

Since you're using yours commercially, I didn't mean to insinuate that you aren't familiar with 107. With slower vertical speed meaning less impact force, I suppose that would be an added level of safety. But I'm not sure that the increased level of safety in that regard wouldn't come at the cost of a decreased level of safety due to flying an aircraft outside of the manufacturer's design center of gravity envelope.

I guess the ultimate arbitrater wouldn't be the FAA, but the insurance premiums for with parachute vs. without parachute.