The first crash happened on June 15 in Chino, California, when Lockheed N93R was taking part in a Father’s Day airshow. The pilot and copilot were killed when the aircraft crashed during takeoff. The pilot took off with the flaps fully extended. 

Lockheed N93R

The NTSB noted that video of the takeoff shows the flaps down and the aircraft struggling to climb. The vintage twin reached an altitude of approximately 300 feet before plunging to the left. There was a post-impact fire.

The crew had lowered the flaps as part of the preflight inspection but did not retract them before takeoff. The NTSB noted that during engine start the ground crew used arm and hand signals to try to let the pilot and copilot know the flaps were in the fully extended position.

Lockheed N2072

The second accident occurred on June 18 at Seven Lakes Airport (62GA) in Jackson, Georgia. The pilot, the commercially rated copilot, and a passenger were seriously injured when the privately owned 1936 Lockheed 12A Electra Junior (N2072) veered off the turf runway during landing.

Video of the landing taken by a bystander on the ground shows the aircraft on approach to the turf runway with the flaps and gear down. The touchdown appears normal, then as the aircraft slows and the tailwheel settles to the ground, the aircraft veers to the left. The videographer lowers the camera so the aircraft’s impact with a tree is heard but not shown.

• READ MORE: 3 Left Injured in Georgia Lockheed 12A Crash

“The impact crushed the cockpit] aft toward the cabin,” the NTSB report said. “A tree trunk about 2 feet in circumference was observed within the cockpit. The instrument panel was buckled around the tree trunk. The pilot, co-pilot, and passenger seats were crushed up and aft.”

The investigation quickly focused on the brakes and the tailwheel as both are used for directional control on the ground. Examination of the main landing gear braking system revealed hydraulic fluid on the landing gear strut and hydraulic fluid leaking from the brake line fitting.

“The steel-braided brake line B-nut fitting, which connected the right brake caliper to the rigid brake line attached to the right landing gear strut, was finger-tight, and hydraulic fluid was observed leaking from the fitting,” the NTSB said.

The fitting on the left brake could not be moved by hand and there was no fluid leakage.

Investigators stated the tailwheel lock control lever was found in the locked position, but the locking tab on the control-wheel assembly appeared to be unlocked.

The NTSB final report on both accidents is likely several months out as it can take 18 to 24 months for investigations to be completed.

The post NTSB Releases Details on 2 Lockheed 12A Crashes appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The National Transportation Safety Board is citing blade failure as the cause of the crash of a remotely piloted Joby Aviation electric aircraft in 2022. According to the NTSB’s final report, the accident, which took place on February 16, happened during the second test flight of the day for the JAS4-2, the first of two second-generation preproduction prototypes.

Since JAS4-2, an uncrewed experimental aircraft designated N542AJ, was involved in flight testing, it was being observed from a manned chase airplane.

The flight began about 09:42 PST with a normal vertical takeoff, transition to wing-borne flight, and climb up to 11,000 feet msl. The remote pilot in command (PIC) put the aircraft into a descent, with the unit reaching a maximum dive speed of 181 knots. As the aircraft passed through 8,900 feet the propeller from propulsion station 3 located on the right inboard wing experienced oscillations in rpm and motor vibrations.

Per the NTSB report, “after reaching a maximum dive speed of 181 knots indicated airspeed (kias) at an altitude of approximately 8,900 feet, a propeller blade on propulsion station 3 experienced a bending failure near the root of the blade which culminated in the release of the propeller blade.” 

The released blade impacted the propeller on propulsion station 4—located on the right wing outboard—which subsequently resulted in a release of the impacted blade. 

The result was a cascading effect, with the other propeller blade failures and separations from the propulsion motors, resulting in loss of aircraft control. The aircraft rolled to the left then entered an inverted dive, and crashed in an uninhabited area near Jolon, California. There were no injuries, and the aircraft was destroyed.

“Experimental flight test programs are intentionally designed to determine the limits of aircraft performance and, in doing so, provide critical insight and learnings that support the safe operation of aircraft as well as inform final design elements,” Joby said in a statement to FLYING. “Since the accident, we’ve incorporated a range of improvements to our design and testing methodologies, many of which were already planned, and our second preproduction prototype aircraft has flown nearly 25,000 miles, including more than 100 flights flown by a pilot on board as well as exhibition flights in New York City.”

The company added it will continue to work with the FAA to resolve any safety issues before type certification. It will also share any relevant findings with other electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft manufacturers.

According to information recorded by Joby during the test flight, “the variable pitch actuator for station 3 was commanding a typical cruise pitch when the blade release occurred, whereas video evidence indicated a steeper pitch on some blades immediately before the initial blade release.”

The company went on to state that accelerometer data for station 3 “showed a rapid growth in vibration after reaching the accident flights test condition before the initial blade release.” There was also an oscillation present for station 3 at the time, and examination of Joby’s prior flight test data revealed “consistent asymmetric behavior between station 2 and station 3, despite identical mirrored designs.” 

About the Pilot

The remote PIC was 62 years old and held a commercial pilot certificate for airplane single-engine and multiengine land along with ratings for helicopter and glider in addition to unmanned aerial systems (UAS). At the time of the event, the PIC had a total of  2,965 hours total time, with 43 hours flying the JAS4-2.

About the Aircraft

The aircraft was all-electric, fly-by-wire, and capable of vertical takeoff and landing. The design has space for five occupants, pilot, and four passengers, though it could be piloted remotely. The design’s maximum gross takeoff weight was 4,200 pounds. 

The aircraft was configured with six tilting propellers directly driven by six dual-powered electric motors with power supplied by four battery packs. The six electric propulsion unit (EPU) stations are identified numerically based on location as station 1 (outboard left wing), station 2 (inboard left wing), station 3 (inboard right wing), station 4 (outboard right wing), station 5 (left tail), and station 6 (right tail). Each of the six variable pitch propeller assemblies were equipped with five blades and actuated by a single variable pitch actuator driving a mechanical pitch change mechanism.

Joby conducted a frame-by-frame review of GoPro video captured during the test flight to help the NTSB reach a conclusion as to the cause of the crash.

The accident did not slow down Joby, as last week the FAA accepted its propulsion system certification plan. According to company officials, this is a “critical step” toward type certification of its electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) air taxi.

The post NTSB Cites Blade Separation in Electric Aircraft Accident appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Stephen Fitzpatrick—founder, CEO, and majority owner of electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft manufacturer Vertical Aerospace—on Monday committed to invest $50 million into the company, which risked running out of cash by September per its own projection.

The funding, which will support the development and planned 2026 certification of Vertical’s flagship VX4 air taxi, extends the firm’s cash runway into mid-2025, it said.

“The company has achieved significant technical progress, both in its prototype program and its certification plans in 2023, that I believe is not reflected in our share price,” Fitzpatrick said. “Given the success I have seen in the past 12 months, I am more confident than ever in our world class team, and I am delighted to further support the company with additional funding.”

Vertical’s stock (NYSE: EVTL) dipped dramatically in 2023 amid delays to its certification timeline and the crash of its Aircraft One prototype in August—so much so that the New York Stock Exchange has threatened to delist it if shares continue to trade below $1. 

The manufacturer has also struggled to attract investors, reportedly missing a target to raise funding by December. Its previous raise of $205 million closed more than two years ago. Like other air taxi manufacturers, Vertical does not yet produce revenue, so investment is required to finance its operations: Net cash used in operating activities in 2023 totaled about $95 million.

Fitzpatrick’s investment is structured in two tranches. An initial $25 million investment—priced at $10 per share of common stock—is expected to close in March. The Vertical CEO will supply a further $25 million by the end of July, but only if the company is unable to raise that amount in alternative equity funding. Whatever it is unable to scrounge up, Fitzpatrick will supplant.

Vertical said it is engaged in discussions for further funding pending the completed flight test campaign of its second VX4 prototype. The company’s first prototype was the one that tumbled 30 feet onto the runway at Cotswold Airport (EGBP) in the U.K. in August, damaging its right wing and landing gear. Vertical later said the crash resulted from a wiring issue that caused a high-voltage short circuit.

The manufacturer’s second-generation prototype, Aircraft Two, promises to address the problem. The piloted full-scale prototype is nearing completion at partner GKN Aerospace’s Global Technology Center in the U.K.

The updated model will have more features aligned with the design Vertical hopes to certify with the U.K.’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). It adds a new propeller, second-generation powertrain, battery packs designed to meet thermal runaway safety requirements, and refined flight control system. Aircraft Two will also feature components made by Vertical certification partners Honeywell, GKN, Hanwha, Solvey, and Leonardo.

The upcoming prototype will complete a flight test campaign and several public demonstrations this year. These will include an appearance at the Farnborough International Airshow at Farnborough Airport (EGLF) in July, as well as flights to and from London Heathrow Airport (EGLL).

The demonstrations will put Vertical in position to refine and finalize the VX4 design, the company said. After that, the aircraft will need to pass final regulatory testing before being approved for production.

“I look forward to both our demonstrations and the completion of additional funding rounds to deliver on the promise the VX4 has to offer our customers and their passengers,” said Mike Flewitt, chairman of Vertical. “We are on track to deliver a transformative U.K. developed electric aircraft to our customers across the globe.”

In March, Vertical received design organization approval (DOA) from the CAA, a necessary step in the regulator’s type certification process. Only a handful of eVTOL air taxi firms, including Volocopter and Lilium, have obtained DOA. Vertical also said after the VX4 prototype crash that its timeline for CAA certification activities remained unaffected.

Once certification is obtained, Vertical has a large backlog of customers to serve. As of October, it had received preorders for 1,500 aircraft from dozens of customers worldwide. The company estimates its order backlog comprises $5 billion in value once fully realized.

Like this story? We think you’ll also like the Future of FLYING newsletter sent every Thursday afternoon. Sign up now.

The post Vertical Aerospace Founder Commits $50 Million to Get Air Taxis Flying appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The remains of one crew member on board the aircraft at the time of the mishap have been recovered, Air Forces Special Operations Command (AFSOC) confirmed in a statement Friday morning. According to the command, the seven remaining aircrew were considered to be in “duty status-whereabouts unknown” status.

The CV-22B assigned to the Air Force’s 353rd Special Operations Wing at Yokota Air Base, Japan went down offshore of Yakushima Island Wednesday afternoon during a routine training mission.

“Search and rescue operations consist of a combination of air, surface, and subsurface search of water and coastline in the vicinity of Yakushima, Japan in order to locate the crewmembers,” AFSOC said. Units involved in the operation included Pacific Air Forces; U.S. Pacific Fleet; U.S. Marine Corps Forces, Pacific; Special Operations Command Pacific; 353^rd Special Operations Wing; 18^th Wing, Kadena Air Base, Japan; 1^st Special Forces Group; Japan Coast Guard; and Japanese Self-Defense Forces.

• READ MORE: Crash Prompts Japan To Call on U.S. Military To Ground Ospreys 

Thursday, Japanese military officials announced the country’s Self-Defense Forces (SDF) would suspend operations of its fleet of 14 Ospreys until the cause of the crash was clarified. As of Friday, however, U.S. military operations of Ospreys remained ongoing, according to Japan’s top military official.

“As far as I can confirm based on the latest information, the Ministry of Defense, and visual information, since the accident occurred, U.S. Marine Corps MV-22 Ospreys have been flown a total of 46 times at Futenma Air Base and Kadena,” Japan defense minister Minoru Kihara told reporters Friday. “We confirmed that the U.S. Navy’s CMV Osprey took off and landed at Kadena Air Base a total of four times, and the U.S. Navy’s CMV Osprey took off and landed at Kadena Air Base a total of six times,” he said.

• READ MORE: Investigation Underway after MV-22 Crashes with 23 Marines on Board

“Right now, the Ospreys are still operating in Japan,” Pentagon spokesperson Sabrina Singh told reporters Thursday.

“It’s currently under investigation to see exactly what happened. If the investigation concludes that there need to be additional steps taken, we’ll certainly do that, but at this time, the investigation is underway on what happened,” she said.

The post Search for Missing CV-22 Crew Remains Ongoing in Japan appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

There is no indication the crash was caused by enemy or hostile actions, the Department of Defense (DOD) said. 

“The MH-60 Blackhawk was conducting aerial refueling training when the aircraft experienced an in-flight emergency resulting in the crash,” DOD said Monday.

Immediately following the mishap, a search and rescue mission was launched and included U.S. military aircraft and ships, U.S. European Command said.

The soldiers were based at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, The Tennessean reported.

“We mourn the tragic loss of five U.S. service members during a training accident in the Mediterranean Sea early Saturday morning,” Defense secretary Lloyd Austin said. “While we continue to gather more information about this deadly crash, it is another stark reminder that the brave men and women who defend our great nation put their lives on the line each and every day to keep our country safe. They represent the best of America. We will remember their service and their sacrifice.”  

Defense officials identified those killed as Chief Warrant Officer 3 Stephen R. Dwyer, 38, of Clarksville, Tennessee; Chief Warrant Officer 2 Shane M. Barnes, 34, of Sacramento, California; Staff Sergeant Tanner W. Grone, 26, of Gorham, New Hampshire; Sergeant Andrew P. Southard, 27, of Apache Junction, Arizona; and Sergeant Cade M. Wolfe, 24, of Mankato, Minnesota.

The U.S. Army’s Combat Readiness Center is conducting an investigation into the incident, DOD said.

The post 5 Special Ops Aviation Soldiers Killed in Blackhawk Crash in Mediterranean appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

“The FAA completed the safety review portion of the SpaceX Starship-Super Heavy license evaluation on October 31,” the agency told FLYING.

The safety review is the “principal component” of the FAA’s vehicle operator license evaluation, which grants companies the authority to launch rockets. In its review, the agency assessed the impact of Starship launches on public health and property damage. It also evaluated SpaceX’s safety organization, system safety processes, and flight safety analysis, as well as quantitative risk criteria related to launch, reentry, and vehicle disposal.

Starship—whose two reusable components, the Super Heavy Booster and Starship upper stage, stand close to 400 feet when stacked together—is the largest and most powerful rocket ever built. But its maiden voyage in April began and ended in flames, when the spacecraft lost control and exploded during stage separation just minutes into the flight.

Meanwhile, the impact of Super Heavy’s 33 Raptor engines on the company’s Boca Chica, Texas, launch pad, Starbase, created a massive crater. Starship’s liftoff broke windows, shook buildings, and sprayed ash and debris over an area far larger than expected, including 6 miles away in the town of Port Isabel.

While the FAA’s license evaluation safety review centered around Starship’s impact to people and property, the agency is now working on an environmental review to gauge its effect on nearby wildlife.

Coordinating with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under the Endangered Species Act, the FAA must produce an updated biological assessment for Starship. An initial biological assessment, published in October 2021, assessed threats to wildlife surrounding Starbase.

According to USFWS, the ongoing environmental assessment focuses on a new water deluge system installed at Starbase, one of several upgrades the company has made to the launch pad since April. Most launch pads have either a water deluge system or a flame trench to suppress heat and sound. But Starbase lacked such a system during Starship’s first launch, which may have exacerbated the damage caused by the engines.

The FAA initiated a consultation with USFWS on October 19, giving the latter 135 days to issue an amended biological opinion based on the FAA’s assessment. However, it does not expect to take the full amount of time.

The FAA’s completion of Starship’s safety review and the ongoing work toward the environmental review bring SpaceX closer to modifying its launch license, which would clear the way for the massive rocket to fly again. But the company may still have hurdles beyond the FAA’s evaluation.

Starship’s maiden voyage was permitted under the FAA’s April written reevaluation of the programmatic environmental assessment (PEA) it awarded to SpaceX in 2022. But the April explosion brought scrutiny upon the PEA in the form of a lawsuit brought against the FAA by five environmental groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity.

The plaintiffs claim the FAA could have mitigated the damage from the launch and subsequent explosion. Had the agency conducted an environmental impact statement (EIS) instead of a PEA “based on SpaceX’s preference,” as the groups allege, the impact may have been less severe.

Both a PEA and an EIS can give an operator the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) compliance required to greenlight a launch. But unlike an EIS, the PEA allowed SpaceX to analyze the potential impact of its own launch proposal and may have authorized Starship to fly sooner. The FAA required SpaceX to take more than 75 actions after submitting its PEA. But the lawsuit alleges these were not sufficient to prevent a mishap.

SpaceX in June joined the suit as a codefendant, and it and the FAA are now seeking to dismiss it. If they lose, the FAA would be required to conduct an EIS, which could represent a major setback for Starship.

However, SpaceX last week said Starship is ready to fly pending the approval of its license modification, and the company should still be able to conduct test flights despite the ongoing lawsuit.

Like this story? We think you’ll also like the Future of FLYING newsletter sent every Thursday afternoon. Sign up now.

The post SpaceX’s Starship—the Most Powerful Rocket in History—Nears Return to Flight appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

This week, the FAA closed its mishap investigation into New Shepard 23, an uncrewed, suborbital cargo mission that crashed in September 2022. The investigation, which looped in NASA and the National Transportation Safety Board as official observers, grounded Bezos-owned Blue Origin’s New Shepard rocket, which in the months prior had ferried a total of 31 people to the edge of the atmosphere.

To be clear, New Shepard is not yet cleared for takeoff. That won’t happen until Blue Origin implements 21 corrective actions identified by the FAA—including an engine redesign—to prevent a similar incident. After that, the company can modify its launch license, giving it the green light to resume flying.

In a statement to FLYING and a post on X, formerly Twitter, Blue Origin confirmed it received the FAA’s notice and “[plans] to fly soon.”

We’ve received the FAA’s letter and plan to fly soon. https://t.co/J2bCKETQe7

— Blue Origin (@blueorigin) September 27, 2023

But just how soon? In a March update, Blue Origin said higher-than-expected operating temperatures created a “thermo-structural failure” in one of New Shepard’s nozzles. It added that it had already begun tweaking the spacecraft and expected to fly again late this year.

“Blue Origin is implementing corrective actions, including design changes to the combustion chamber and operating parameters, which have reduced engine nozzle bulk and hot-streak temperatures,” the company said. “Additional design changes to the nozzle have improved structural performance under thermal and dynamic loads.”

The company appeared to reiterate the late 2023 target in its statement—and that may be more than just talk. Earlier this month, two sources familiar with Blue Origin’s launch manifest told Ars Technica the company is tentatively planning an uncrewed test flight for early next month. If all goes well, it could launch its first crewed mission since August 2022 in mid-February.

How We Got Here

Included in the FAA’s announcement of the investigation’s closure was an agency assessment of what went wrong last September. It agreed with Blue Origin: “Higher than expected engine operating temperatures” caused a structural failure in one of the engine nozzles.

Just over one minute into the flight, which lifted off from the company’s Launch Site One in Texas, both New Shepard and its cargo capsule reversed course back to Earth. An onboard launch vehicle system detected the issue with the nozzle, triggering an abort and separation of the capsule from the rocket (as intended) and shutting down the engine.

The capsule floated gently to the desert floor on parachutes. The propulsion module, on the other hand, was destroyed on impact. However, all debris landed within a designated hazard area, and no injuries or property damage were reported.

Now, Blue Origin will need to address the 21 actions laid out by the FAA. These include a redesign of both the engine and nozzle components and unspecified “organizational changes.” The latter is detailed in the FAA’s letter to Blue Origin, which is not publicly available because it includes proprietary data and U.S. Export Control information, the FAA said.

What’s Next?

New Shepard is the vehicle Blue Origin relies on for its space tourism business, which carries people and cargo to about 340,000 feet in altitude for a few minutes of weightlessness. The experience is similar to the one offered by rival Virgin Galactic, owned by another billionaire business mogul, Richard Branson.

So far, Blue Origin has made a handful of successful flights with New Shepard. The company’s passengers have included Bezos himself, Star Trek icon William Shatner, and Good Morning America host and former NFL defensive end Michael Strahan. Aerospace pioneer and “Mercury 13” candidate Wally Funk set several records during her flight—some since superseded. Actor and comedian Pete Davidson also booked a seat before backing out. 

While the “organizational changes” specified by the FAA are unclear, Blue Origin this week shook up its top brass with the appointment of Dave Limp, who will depart his role as senior vice president of devices and services at Amazon. Limp spearheaded the launches of products such as Alexa and Echo, known to be pet projects of Bezos.

The Amazon executive will replace outgoing CEO Bob Smith, who oversaw New Shepard’s maiden voyage, in December. Under Smith, Blue Origin has struggled to launch its New Glenn super-heavy lift rocket, missed out on lucrative Pentagon contracts to rivals SpaceX and United Launch Alliance, and faced accusations of a toxic workplace permeated with discomfort and misogyny. The firm’s Orbital Reef space station partnership with Sierra Space is also reportedly on the rocks.

Blue Origin isn’t the only company tied up with the FAA. Elon Musk-owned SpaceX faces its own mishap investigation into the April 20 crash of Starship, a super-heavy lift rocket akin to New Glenn. That investigation remains open, and as of July 31, SpaceX had yet to file paperwork outlining the corrective actions it would take. 

However, the company continues to launch droves of Starlink satellites and conduct International Space Station crew rotation missions for NASA with its Crew Dragon. Virgin Galactic, meanwhile, has flown commercial missions in back-to-back-to-back months, with a fourth planned for Thursday.

When New Shepard was first sidelined, Blue Origin looked like the clear leader in space tourism, with a half dozen commercial flights under its belt. At the time, Virgin Galactic itself was grounded and had yet to serve paying customers. 

By now, Blue Origin’s competitors have leapfrogged it in the modern space race. But with New Shepard getting closer to reintroduction, the door is still very much open for Bezos to recapture the lead.

Like this story? We think you’ll also like the Future of FLYING newsletter sent every Thursday afternoon. Sign up now.

The post Blue Origin Flights to ‘Soon’ Resume After FAA Closes Investigation appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The NTSB has also named the FAA, Piper Aircraft, and Lycoming engines as parties to the investigation, NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy said in a briefing Wednesday.

The Piper PA-18 150 Super Cub piloted by Eugene “Buzzy” Peltola Jr., 57 and husband of Alaska Rep. Mary Peltola, went down shortly after takeoff around 8:45 p.m. Alaska Daylight Time Tuesday, approximately 64 miles north of St. Mary’s, Homendy said.

St, Mary’s is located north of Bethel, Alaska, in mountainous terrain.

• READ MORE: ‘Flying Wild Alaska’ Pilot Jim Tweto Dies in Accident

Citing preliminary information, Homendy said Peltola had flown to the remote area to drop off a hunter with their equipment. Peltola was departing the area and was alone in the airplane when it went down shortly after takeoff. 

Witnesses to the accident will be interviewed by the NTSB, she said.

The NTSB said the Alaska Rescue Coordination Center at Anchorage’s Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson received a satellite signal from the airplane’s emergency locator transmitter at 8:48 p.m. ADT and deployed an Alaska Air National Guard rescue team, which arrived at the scene early Wednesday.

• READ MORE: NTSB Cites Weather, Terrain as Possible Factors in Denali Accident

Alaska State Troopers reported that Peltola initially survived the accident and was cared for by two hunters, but he succumbed to his injuries before additional help could arrive.

Because of the remote location, there are no reports of weather in the area at the time of the accident. According to Timetable.com, sunset was approximately 9:29 p.m. ADT.

Peltola was issued a commercial pilot’s certificate in 2004, according to The New York Times.

Homendy noted it is unclear if the flight was conducted under Part 91 or Part 135. Local media noted that Eugene Peltola had recently retired from his position as regional director of Alaska’s Bureau of Indian Affairs.

• FAA: Safety Improvements Needed In Alaska

The accident follows calls by the NTSB for improvement to aviation safety in Alaska. In 2020, the agency reported that the accident rate is 2.35 times higher and the fatal accident rate 1.34 higher in the state than the rest of the U.S. 

“Whether it is a Part 135 flight or a pleasure trip, all pilots must deal with Alaska’s challenging geography and weather,” former NTSB Chairman Robert Sumwalt said at the time of the report. “We need to give them all the tools and resources to do so safely.”

VIDEO: NTSB virtual media briefing with @ChairHomendy on the St. Mary’s, Alaska plane crash investigation: https://t.co/lfi0RJHUAe

— NTSB Newsroom (@NTSB_Newsroom) September 13, 2023

The post NTSB Launches Probe After Lawmaker’s Husband Killed in Alaska Crash appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Vertical Aerospace, whose VX4 preproduction prototype eVTOL air taxi crashed during uncrewed testing last month, has some answers. The U.K.-based manufacturer on Thursday revealed what caused its aircraft to tumble from about 30 feet in the air onto the runway surface at Cotswold Airport (EGBP).

Vertical confirmed the accident damaged the VX4’s right wing and landing gear. But it asserted its certification activities with the U.K. Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) remain on schedule, and it is preparing for the next phase of flight testing.

“We are pleased with our flight test progress to date and the data, insights, and invaluable learnings we have collected,” said Stephen Fitzpatrick, founder and CEO of Vertical. “While a fault of any sort is disappointing, it is not wholly unexpected at this stage of testing a novel aircraft. I am pleased that as a result of our expert team we have isolated the cause of the fault and been able to provide the [Air Accidents Investigation Branch] with our report within 14 days of the incident. Our planned second upgraded prototype, which will include most of our top tier partners’ technology, will have us in the air early next year.”

Though Fitzpatrick said the company’s certification activities are “on track,” the early 2024 target is later than originally anticipated. Crewed, untethered flights were supposed to begin later this year, lengthening the timeline after the firm pushed back certification from 2025 to 2026 in May.

What Went Wrong?

Fitzpatrick and Vertical chief engineer David King sat down in an exclusive interview with The Air Current to share more details on the August crash, which FLYING draws from here.

The company’s Aircraft One VX4 prototype—which features four tilt propellers on the front of its wing and four lift propellers on the back, each powered by electric motors—has been flying untethered tests at up to 40 knots in thrust-borne flight at its flight test center at Cotswold since June.

The goal of those tests was to fly at 40 knots and “verify acceptable stability, battery efficiency and control characteristics, aerodynamics, structural loads, performance and vibration throughout this speed range—all of which were achieved,” Vertical said in Thursday’s announcement.

At the time of the accident, the aircraft was performing tests with the electrical propulsion unit for the left outboard tilt propeller intentionally disabled. The test followed Vertical’s completion of an uncrewed flight testing campaign in July and aimed to see how the prototype—expected to be retired soon after—would react in adverse conditions.

The VX4 had just completed a “hover-out-of-ground-effect test point” and was beginning its transition to forward flight about 30 feet above the runway when a blade departed the right inboard tail propeller. As the sheathing came off the spar of the blade, the blade bent and snapped off at the root because its adhesive bonding had degraded, causing a supporting pylon to fail.

King explained the pylon failure followed “prior modeling of the scenario.” The aircraft’s flight control system was designed to automatically shut down the motor of the blade that snapped and spool up the intentionally disabled engine, which it did.

However, the failed pylon had “an unexpected effect on [the VX4’s] Controller Area Network (CAN) bus, the digital data bus through which the flight control computers communicate with the motors,” according to The Air Current interview. This degraded the power of two motors on the right wing, causing a rapid descent and crash, the company said.

Vertical noted that the aircraft’s core proprietary technology, including its battery and high voltage systems, performed as expected during the accident. Its voltage, current, and power all stayed within acceptable limits, and cell temperatures were considered normal during and after the impact.

However, the aircraft’s right wing bore the brunt of the crash, with the section beyond the inner pylons folding under torsional pressure. The landing gear was also damaged, though the cabin, cockpit, and onboard battery packs “withstood the impact.”

Vertical Aerospace has suffered what appears to be a significant setback after the electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft crashed during an unmanned test flight https://t.co/4HvYnqrmCm pic.twitter.com/DZ708GsMAz

— Evans Electric (@tsport100) August 10, 2023

After the crash, Vertical informed the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and submitted a report to the U.K. Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB). The AAIB investigation is still ongoing, and Vertical said it will provide a full update when it ends.

The company will continue to use the damaged prototype for ground testing, but said it will not repair it to airworthy standards.

The Outlook

Though Vertical insisted its certification activities are on track, the August incident raises several questions.

The propeller problem is likely a simple fix—the company said it had already redesigned the early-generation technology prior to the crash and that the issue would be “fully resolved” ahead of the next testing phase. Its second-generation propeller will feature on Aircraft Two, another prototype under construction at partner GKN Aerospace’s Global Technology Center in Bristol, U.K. The firm said it is also implementing recommendations from the AAIB investigation.

The CAN bus issue, though, could pose a greater challenge. The company is still analyzing what went wrong. But it believes a wiring failure caused a high-voltage short circuit, which King said is “a very difficult thing to analyze.”

King and Fitzpatrick told The Air Current all crewed tests will be performed on Aircraft Two. The updated prototype is expected to have features more in line with the aircraft Vertical hopes to certify with the CAA. It will include the new propeller design, a second-generation powertrain featuring lithium-ion batteries from partner Molicel, and battery packs built to meet thermal runaway safety requirements.

A more refined flight control system will cover the full flight transition envelope, while an ejection seat will give pilots an escape hatch in an emergency. Aircraft Two will also include components made by certification partners Honeywell, GKN, Hanwha, Solvey, and Leonardo.

Before it’s cleared for crewed flight, the new prototype will need to be tested on certification standards. It will require rigorous oversight, including a Permit to Fly from the CAA. But the company said its first Aircraft Two prototype will fly in early 2024, with a second, identical model expected to be ready for the second half of the year.

Vertical said it is funded into the second half of 2024, and it has about $114 million in cash and cash equivalents on hand per a June update. However, it plans to spend $101 million over the 12 months following August 1 and previously announced it was seeking additional capital to finance activities beyond next August.

The company has significantly less cash and short-term investments on hand than rivals Joby Aviation, Archer Aviation, Lilium, and others. In fact, per SMG consulting, Vertical trails all major competitors in capital raised. Its previous raise of $205 million closed almost two years ago.

Vertical ranked 12th on SMG’s August Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) Reality Index, a ranking of AAM companies based on their ability to mass produce and deliver certified aircraft. But it boasted the second highest aircraft order backlog, trailing only Embraer subsidiary Eve Air Mobility. It has an estimated 1,500 preorders from firms such as American Airlines, Bristow Group, Japan Airlines, Iberojet, and most recently South Korea’s Kakao Mobility, which is expected to be a key launch customer.

When that launch takes place, however, could be a mystery. Vertical continues to stand by its 2026 target. But given previous revisions and the fallout of August’s crash, that may not be a hard deadline.

Like this story? We think you’ll also like the Future of FLYING newsletter sent every Thursday afternoon. Sign up now.

The post Vertical Aerospace Shares Details on eVTOL Crash, Gears Up for Crewed Testing appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

According to reports, the accident occurred around 4 p.m., shortly after Rathbun took off from the Duluth International Airport (KDLH). Preliminary data from Flightaware.com shows the 2016 SR22 registered as N929DR reached a speed of 181 knots and an altitude of 2,975 feet. The last known contact was made at just over 1,000 feet and showed the aircraft at 128 knots. Weather at the time of the accident was reported as VFR. 

Rathbun was the sole occupant on board.

Eyewitness accounts say it appeared the aircraft had skidded across the ice before becoming partially submerged. Multiple agencies responded to the scene.

Cirrus released a statement Monday afternoon stating the company is in close contact with Rathbun’s family, and their thoughts and prayers are with them at this time.

“His passing is a profound loss for the Cirrus family. His presence and character will be missed, but his legacy will be indelible,” Cirrus said in the statement. “A key contributor throughout his 26 years at Cirrus Aircraft, Dave played a crucial role in the early design and certification of the SR20.  Following similar work on the SR22 and SR22T, Dave was instrumental in the development and successful entry into service of the SF50 Vision Jet.”

Since joining Cirrus in 1996, Rathbun held a number of positions with the aircraft manufacturer, including engineering flight test pilot. He held a master’s degree in engineering from Louisiana Tech.

In a social media post, David’s brother, Daniel Rathbun, called him a “brilliant” engineer and credited him for being instrumental in the design of the Cirrus single-engine jet that recently won the coveted Robert J. Collier Trophy bestowed each year by the National Aeronautic Association. “David was indeed a gifted mover and shaker in the aviation world and will be horribly missed,” Daniel said.

The FAA and NTSB are currently investigating the accident. Preliminary reports typically take around two weeks, while final NTSB reports could take more than a year to identify the cause. Cirrus says it is fully engaged in supporting all authorities but will not comment on the accident details or speculate about the cause in respect to those involved.

• READ MORE: Potential Crankshaft Flaw Prompts FAA To Issue Continental Engine AD

The accident comes just two days after an FAA airworthiness directive was released affecting thousands of U.S. aircraft concerning safety with Continental engines. However, based on its serial number, the aircraft involved in Rathbun’s accident was not impacted by the AD.

Earlier this month, prior to the FAA’s AD, Cirrus temporarily grounded aircraft manufactured in the last two years because of suspected issues with engines manufactured by Continental.  

“Cirrus Aircraft continues to operate without restriction all its SR20s, as well as SR22s and SR22Ts manufactured before June 1, 2021, or after February 7, 2023,” noted the company in a February 9 statement.

The post Cirrus Aircraft Engineer Killed in Accident appeared first on FLYING Magazine.