Week 8
Introduction
The
week of October 11th through the 17th involved working
with crew 4 surprisingly often. On October 13th, both crews were
assigned to aid in Weldon’s search and rescue missions at the Purdue Wildlife
Area (PWA). Additionally, there was a miscommunication between crews on October
16th regarding who was flying the Martell flight for that day. The
issue was quickly resolved, ending with crew 1 (John and Jeff) flying the
Martell mission that day while crew 4 opted to study Bramor procedures in the
lab.
October 13th – PWA Search and Rescue
At 9:30 on October 13th,
crews one and four met with William Weldon and Ethan Hoke at PWA to begin the
search and rescue missions of the day. Weldon made a series of changes to the
standard operations of these missions including reducing the number of data
analysts to only one person utilizing Loc8. Additionally, a map of the flight
area was designed with a grid overlay. These maps were provided to the data
analysts so they could dispatch the recovery team(s) more effectively,
directing them to specific grid locations rather than offering vague directions
toward the target. Jeff Hines took the role as primary data handler and
operator of the Loc8 program. Logan Jones acted as PIC for the Mavic 2 flights.
Other members present acted as visual observers whenever the Mavic 2 was
airborne and recovery teams during data processing. The full breakdown of roles
can be seen in Table 1 below.
Mission Conductor |
William Weldon |
Data Handler & Loc8 Operator |
Jeff Hines |
Mavic 2 PIC |
Logan Jones |
Visual Observer & Recovery Team Member |
John Cox, Conner Cromwell, Kalbe Gould, Joe Hammel, Ethan
Hoke, |
Table 1
PWA responsibilities on
October 13th, 2020
Operations began immediately with
Weldon hiding the target upon initial setup while the other crews continued
setting up their respective areas – the Loc8 program and the Mavic 2. The first
flight took off at 9:51 and completed its mission with no issues at 10:02. All important
times related with the day’s flights can be found in Table 2 – any bolded
entries imply that was the dispatch that recovered the target. The Loc8 operator
had trouble identifying the exact location of the target, so he sent out two
teams to search areas he though the target might be at 10:08. Despite the
increased numbers, both recovery teams returned nearly 10 minutes after with
negative results. The maps were referenced for the first dispatch, but it seems
there was some confusion between the data analyst and the recovery teams in
reading these maps. After both parties gathered, discussed the map and the
location that the target was spotted, the teams were sent out again at 10:21
and the target was recovered at 10:33. To the credit of both parties, the maps
were created such that the fields were not divided evenly which lead to
confusion. Diagram 1 depicts a map with similar characteristics to the ones provided
to the crews present that day. Those present and using the maps suggested a
revised map, one with more standard spacing for the location.
Diagram
1
Representation of the
maps provided to the crews on October 13th, 2020
The second
flight went according to the books, with quick flight and data analysis
turnaround times as well as a first attempt recovery of the target. However, at
the start of the third flight there were some concerns about the steadily
increasing wind speed. After some discussion with the PIC and consulting the
KLAF METAR, we determined it was safe to conduct a third flight and we would
check the updated METAR before conducting a fourth flight. Once again, the
flight and data processing side of the mission went according to the books, but
there was an error when sending out the first recovery team. The Loc8 operator
sent the first team out to the wrong location due to a desire to get boots on
the ground as soon as possible. After
a few more minutes of analyzing
photos, he realized his mistake and sent out another team to the appropriate
location. The target was found quickly after.
Upon completion of the third flight,
the team waited 10 minutes for the KLAF METAR to update, in order to get a more
accurate wind speed. Once the METAR updated, the PIC determined the wind was
too volatile to continue safe operations and cancelled any further PWA flights.
The crews packed up the equipment for the day and returned to COMP 101. After ensuring
there were no further tasks that Weldon needed or wanted done, crew 1 completed
their search and rescue missions for the day around 12:30.
|
Takeoff Time |
Landing Time |
Search Begins |
Discovery
|
Dispatch |
Second
Dispatch |
Recovery |
Flight 1 |
9:51 |
10:02 |
10:04 |
10:07 |
10:08 |
10:21 |
10:33 |
Flight 2 |
10:43 |
10:55 |
10:56 |
11:01 |
11:02 |
N/A |
11:07 |
Flight 3 |
11:16 |
11:28 |
11:29 |
11:36 |
11:39 |
11:42 |
11:49 |
Table
2
Important time markers
for each flight at PWA on October 13th, 2020
October 16th – Martell M600
Flight
When our flight crew assembled at the
lab to prepare for the days flight, we encountered a scheduling issue - flight
crews 1 and 4 had scheduled a flight at the same time. After a brief
discussion, the crews realized that the communication error was due to a nuance
in using the google calendar system. If someone creates an event in the
calendar, everyone in the group can see the event but only those assigned to
the event will receive a notification. After resolving that issue, another
mistake was made; while packing for the flight, the PPK case was not opened and
checked before it was loaded. This lead to the flight crew going out to the
mission area without realizing they had left the PPK batteries on the charger
back at the lab. Upon realizing this, the PIC the return to retrieve them while
the SO stayed on site with the aircraft and equipment. Once the above issues
had been addressed, at 10:23am John Cox and Jeff Hines began another set of
flights over the Martel forest northwest and northeast plots.
Having learned from last week
that Jeff’s car was too small to fit the M600 case they tried John’s car; his
was also too small for the entire M600 case. The team was able to transport the
M600 partially assembled in John’s car without its case much like last week.
Once the aircraft was assembled John acted
as PIC for the mission and Jeff the FO/VO to encourage flight safety. The team
was under a bit of a time crunch, as John had a class to attend at 11:30, so
they decided to remain in familiar roles for this set of missions for the sake
of time. The missions went smoothly with no further issues. The relevant
metadata and important times for the two flights are recorded in the Table 3
below. Upon completion of the flights, the aircraft was partially disassembled
in order to fit it into the vehicle. The data gathered from the flight was post
processed according to standard procedure by Jeff. In the meantime, John
disassembled and stored the aircraft in the COMP 101 lab, ensuring all
batteries and controllers were placed on their charging ports to be used by the
next flight crew.
|
Aircraft
|
Sensor(s) |
Batteries |
Takeoff Time |
Landing Time |
Flight 1 - Martell Northwest |
M600 |
Sony A6000 & Zenmuse XT2 |
Yellow |
10:23 |
10:44 |
Flight 2 - Martell Northeast |
M600 |
Sony A6000 & Zenmuse XT2 |
Pink |
10:51 |
11:16 |
Table 3
Abridged metadata for the flights
on October 16th, 2020
Upon concluding
the days operations, flight crew 1 gathered to discuss the issues in the
mission's preparation. Jeff and John identified 3 main problems that needed to
be addressed:
1.) 2
flight crews being assigned to the same aircraft at the same time due to
miscommunication
2.) Not
checking the PPK case before packing it
3.) Not
checking to make sure the PPK batteries were in their appropriate case prior to
departing the lab
The flight crew
determined that the miscommunication was mainly due to the inexperience of
various members of the class with Microsoft Teams. As corrective action, it has
been suggested that every flight crew have their flights scheduled at least 1
week in advance and check the calendar on the Sunday of each week. The PPK case
incident and the batteries was determined to follow this chain of events:
Flight crew 1 was delayed by the miscommunication with flight crew 4, this
caused the flight crew to rush to get the aircraft loaded. The SO, Jeff, did
not check the PPK case prior to loading it in the vehicle. The PIC, John, did
not ask and then verify with the SO that the PPK case and its batteries were
ready. It is in flight crew 1’s own opinion that the rush to get into the mission
area, a degree of complacency, and a failure to follow the proper checklist and
procedures led to our failure to bring the PPK batteries to the field.
Corrective measures to be taken by the flight crew will be a much stricter
adherence to the checklists. It is recommended among our members that the PIC
of the mission give a mission brief to the rest of the flight crew before the
vehicle is packed, this briefing should include: The mission location, aircraft
and sensor to be used, the roles of the individual flight crew members, and a
verbal reading of the aircraft packing and preflight checklist.
No comments:
Post a Comment