Power Lines: 1 - Airlander: 0

A lot of times it is the little things that get missed during test planning. These airships are not easy to work with. Fortunately, it would seem that the recent incident may simply serve as a wake-up call to the test team.

(Photo Credit: EEDS News Agency)

http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/24/technology/worlds-largest-aircraft-crash-airlander-10/

Hybrid Air Vehicles Airlander 10 Completes First Flight

While not a totally new design (it is an adaptation of a previous DOD test article) the aircraft has still undergone major modifications. The article is non-technical, but provides a little bit of information on the vehicle.

http://phys.org/news/2016-08-giant-helium-filled-airship-airlander.html

NASA Ikhana UAS is Testing Collision Avoidance Software

The article at the link below doesn't necessarily sound all that exciting or difficult, but it is actually both. This project started about 9 years ago and was expected to take about 5 years. It is impossible to overstate the difficulty of introducing leading-edge technologies into an airspace structure that is very resistant to change. And the idea of orchestrating traffic conflicts specifically to generate other conflicts that are supposed to be recognized by the (test) software should make the hair on the back of your neck stand up.

Congrats! Now, how about a couple of words regarding the sensors that are being used? Why so mum about how the planes are detecting one another? Radar? ADS-B? TCAS? Something new? Come on, guys (or apparently "ladies" in this case) what hardware is required to make this happen?

http://www.uasmagazine.com/articles/1513/nasa-completes-first-phase-of-tests-readies-for-next-phase

Okay, looks like the answer to the "how did you do that?" question is "All of the above." That provided by NASA in the press release at the link below.

http://www.nasa.gov/feature/two-month-uas-flight-test-series-concludes
 

BAE Taranis Flight Test Approach

While most of the information at the link below is dated, the article itself is relatively recent and provides an interesting "how to" for doing autonomous and semi-autonomous UCAV flight testing. Some of BAE's "walk before you run" approach is described, which may offer clues to future testers.

A bit of an enigma is the mysterious "Third Phase" of testing mentioned in the article. Anything written here would be purely conjecture, but a few years ago NASA did some work along with DARPA on the idea of "packs" of autonomous vehicles working together to improve effectiveness and survive-ability in contested airspace. There is no talk in the article about more than a single vehicle, but a digital surrogate could easily have been injected into scenarios to evaluate multi-ship software.

But, hey... what do I know?

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/aerospace/2016-07-07/taranis-flight-test-details-described

Bell 525 Relentless May Have Suffered Rotor-Fuselage Contact

It is natural to suspect the new fly-by-wire flight control system, but it is obviously too early to be certain. Aircraft from the R-22 all the way to the HH-53 have experienced similar issues.

http://www.star-telegram.com/news/business/aviation/sky-talk-blog/article93468772.html

 

Airlander 10 Moving Closer to First Flight...

... sort of. The same vehicle, with a slightly different configuration, has actually flown several years ago. It has been modified to go from the defense mission to a commercial role. The article at the link below has a few details about plans for the upcoming flight series, but it is about five times as long as it needs to be, since every fact is repeated at least 3 times, and a number of the pictures have nothing to do with the vehicle at all. I continue to applaud the optimism of anyone who decides to develop a new airship.  It is right up there with flying cars and Brussels sprouts based desserts.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3676614/Flying-Bum-air-Route-test-flight-world-s-largest-aircraft-Airlander-10-announced.html