Amazon grounds drone deliveries in Arizona after two crashed into a crane

Amazon has grounded its drone fleet in Arizona after two of the airborne delivery vehicles crashed on Wednesday. The accident occurred at around 1600 UTC on Wednesday over the city of Tolleson, the Federal Aviation Administration told The Register, after two of Amazon's Prime Air delivery drones hit the boom of a crane. Both …

[I am David Jones]

How to parse this?

“we've completed our own internal review of this incident and are confident that there wasn't an issue with the drones or the technology that supports them”

So…er… it was the crane’s fault?

Or maybe the “technology” was having a mental health day and so not at fault?

At least we can rest assured that safety is their main priority! Incidentally, I’d need to work out some more details but the collision would definitely fit well into an excellent Final Destination death sequence :o

[brainwrong]

Re: How to parse this?

"So…er… it was the crane’s fault?"

The company that owned or operated the crane are so unimportant that they aren't even named in the article, but amazon are a very important company, so it's obvious that the big lumbering crane is expected to give way to the agile drones with their very important AA batteries.

[IGotOut]

Re: How to parse this?

Or it's.

"Yeah, it hit a crane, shit happens. Line gotta keep going up".

[John Robson]

Re: How to parse this?

"Line gotta keep going up".

That's what you need a crane for...

[Apocalypso - a cheery end to the world]

Re: How to parse this?

> So…er… it was the crane’s fault?

I'm imagining the crane operators trying to play baseball with the drones as they come near.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: How to parse this?

Boom go BOOM!

[Yorick Hunt]

Re: How to parse this?

"So…er… it was the crane’s fault?"

If we could read the insurance claim form, I've no doubt it would read something like this;

"A perfectly clear path with no obstructions, when suddenly a crane lept out from behind the bushes, we simply didn't have time to stop or swerve!"

[Ol'Peculier]

Re: How to parse this?

I drove into the wrong house driveway and crashed into a tree I don't have.

-- Jasper Carrott.

[Tom Chiverton 1]

Re: How to parse this?

Did yoy see that sad faced, slow moving, older gentleman ?

[Christoph]

Re: How to parse this?

To lose one drone, Mr. Bezos, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness.

[Jason Hindle]

Re: How to parse this?

“we've completed our own internal review of this incident and are confident that there wasn't an issue with the drones or the technology that supports them”

I'd love to see Boing get away with that line. Then again, this is one of the so-called FAANGs that seem to dance to their own laws.

[Anonymous Coward]

Drone went boom when it didn't leave room, soon hit big boom and fell doon to doom

Boom boom.

[David Pearce]

Crane jibs and cables can be hard to spot by a human pilot.

[O'Reg Inalsin]

HLM's, please parse this:

From CNN - “The two MK30 drones crashed into the boom of a crane in Tolleson, Arizona, near Phoenix, Wednesday around 10 a.m., according to the Federal Aviation Administration. No injuries were reported. Helicopter video from CNN affiliates KTVK/KPHO shows the remains of the more than 80 pound drones shattered on the ground. ... We’ve completed our own internal review of this incident and are confident that there wasn’t an issue with the drones or the technology that supports them,” Terrence Clark, an Amazon spokesperson told CNN. “Nonetheless, we’ve introduced additional processes like enhanced visual landscape inspections to better monitor for moving obstructions such as cranes.” ... The MK30 drones are approved by the FAA to fly beyond where the operator can see it, and use a “sophisticated on-board detect and avoid system” to prevent crashes, the company says on its website.

Copilot's spin: Amazon is Controlling the Narrative: Amazon’s spokesperson quickly emphasizes that there was no fault in the drone or its technology, despite the obvious fact that two expensive, advanced drones crashed into a very visible obstruction. This is classic corporate crisis management—reassure the public and regulators that nothing is wrong with the core product or safety systems.

[Peter-Waterman1]

Re: HLM's, please parse this:

Should have used Amazon Nova to rat out its own maker

[Valeyard]

Re: HLM's, please parse this:

there's always one isn't there "let me ask an AI because i have no input of my own"

no one cares or we would've done it ourselves

[O'Reg Inalsin]

Re: HLM's, please parse this:

You are right. My bad. My apologies, no excuses.

[Valeyard]

Re: HLM's, please parse this:

what an absolute gent

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: HLM's, please parse this:

So if Amazon says its drones and technology have no issues, it follows that crashing into a crane is a feature, not a defect.

Amazon PR just boxed itself in legally, it seems to me, someone who has no idea what he’s talking about.

[I ain't Spartacus]

Re: HLM's, please parse this:

Bug report response: Undocumented feature. Will not fix.

[/\/\j17]

"Crane jibs and cables can be hard to spot by a human pilot."

True, but also part of the reason aircraft don't generally fly 1,000ft above the highest point within 5nm of the planned flight path and cranes aren't generally 3,000ft tall.

But when you're talking about drones, which I'm guessing have a mandated minimum altitude of a few hundread feet to keep them out of the way of general air traffic, you're very much flying in cluttered, dynamic airspace where you will get cranes/kites/power lines/...

[David Pearce]

I used to fly Cessna. I was capped at 2000 ft by controlled airspace and supposed to keep 500 ft from buildings, so tightly sandwiched. Cranes near the airport caused NOTAMs. Drones and later, robot air taxis, are going to want to fly in denser populated surroundings because that is where the demand is. Some of the buildings already exceed the 2000 ft cap, so any optical detection system is looking against a building background, not sky. Are these drones under VFR rules?

[MachDiamond]

"Are these drones under VFR rules?"

No, as they can't "see and avoid" going by this incident. My Part 107 certificate requires that I can see my drone with my own eyes at all time (within reason). I have a maximum non-waiver altitude limit of 400' AGL (Above Ground Level) which can, in some circumstances, increase over buildings and other structures. When I have to get an airspace authorization, I am strictly limited in altitude.

An 80lb drone falling out of the air could kill. Amazon's reassurances are completely worthless as they have to avoid obstacles that could cause the aircraft to crash. Hitting a crane is a bad show as they are usually painted a nice bright yellow/orange to stand out. They also don't move very quickly so it should be no problem for a drone to see and avoid.

I find drone deliveries to be silly to start with. Yeah, it's not great to find you've just run out of toilet paper, but there are other options to getting more that doesn't require a whole load of tech.

[ComputerSays_noAbsolutelyNo]

A problem creating even more problems on the way still looking for a solution. Or so ...

Who exactly needs this?

[abend0c4]

When you're one of the few people left on the planet, in your New Zealand lair, you're going to need some sort of aerial vehicle to hunt down the feral sheep to supply your automated pie-making production line. Might as well test it all first on unimportant stuff.

[snowpages]

Energy

Does the energy used to deliver the AA batteries exceed the amount of energy stored in the batteries?

[Andy the ex-Brit]

Re: Energy

Just estimating here.... the drone can carry a 5 lb (2.3 kg) package and reportedly has a maximum take-off weight of 83 lb. So, 78 lb empty, or about 35 kg.

Let's assume it's just 50% battery by weight, which I think is realistic. 17.5 kg.

The battery is probably somewhere around 200-300 W·h/kg, I'll use 250.

That gives us a battery with a capacity of just under 4400 W·h.

A single AA cell is about 4 W·h and weighs 23 g (0.023 kg.) So if we use the whole 2.3 kg capacity for AA cells, we can carry 100 of them. That would be 400 W·h, which is about one order of magnitude less than the battery in the drone.

[MachDiamond]

Re: Energy

"Does the energy used to deliver the AA batteries exceed the amount of energy stored in the batteries?"

Yes.

[Irongut]

Bezos ego.

Owning delivery drones and spacecraft makes him feel like a Bond villan.

[Pascal Monett]

"two [..] delivery drones hit the boom of a crane"

But there is no problem with the technology, of course.

Except for the fact that, apparently, the drone software isn't looking for obstacles in its path. Or, in any case, obstacles that are smaller than a building.

Maybe all the empty spaces in a crane confused the drone's software into thinking that it would just pass through ?

Amazon is going to have to make updates to drone software, ergo there is a problem with its technology. But hey, it's PR, so . . .

Goebbels would be proud.

[Anonymous Coward]

"couple of peeved Amazon customers out there still waiting for their goods."

AA batteries for their "intimate" toys ?

[Fred Dibnah]

‘Your Amazon package has been delivered to your neighbouring building site’

[DrXym]

Well that's not surprising

These things will be crashing into birds, trees, aircraft (including other drones), pylons, signs, buildings, towers, flying debris, hailstones & snow. They're going to be hit by bullets, nets or anything else humans can grief them with. It is an inevitable consequence of having autonomous drones flying around. Eventually some drones are going to land on somebody and kill them. But hey, Amazon saved a few cents and that's all that matters.

The sensible mitigation is ban them entirely from operating over populated areas entirely or severely limit the reason they are permitted to fly.

[I am David Jones]

Re: Well that's not surprising

Amazon has come up with a solution: Selling hard hats, extra cheap for Prime members!

[HorseflySteve]

Re: Well that's not surprising

The problem isn't just the damage to whatever they hit, it's the fact that they then fall out of the sky in an uncontrolled manner.

Here in the UK, drones are limited to a maximum height above surface of 400ft (120m). Anything that falls out of the sky from that height is likely to encounter the surface at a little over 100mph (nearly 170km/h) which is likely to "modify" anything that already occupied that point.

Consumer class drones massing < 250g are permitted to fly over built up areas and people (but not crowds), 250g or more are not without special permission, a pilot holding a Certificate of Competence, and public liability insurance. Even then the operatort must maintain visual line of sight throughout the flight.

These Amazon drones are quite likely to cause serious harm if they fall on someone; it's reasonable to assume that people would have been working near the crane that was hit so it sounds as though Amazon have been lucky in this instance, no matter how they try to spin it.

[Richard 12]

Re: Well that's not surprising

If either aircraft had hit the cabin, or someone had been out on the boom doing inspection or maintenance then the results could have been far worse.

35kg dropped from a height is easily enough to kill someone on the ground, no matter what it's made of. The battery pack alone...

Aside from that, Amazon's response is either a lie or an admission their internal process is unlawfully inadequate. There is clearly a fault, because the incidents occurred. And it's clearly a significant issue, because it happened twice!

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Well that's not surprising

"Consumer class drones massing < 250g are permitted to fly over built up areas and people (but not crowds), 250g or more are not without special permission, a pilot holding a Certificate of Competence, and public liability insurance. Even then the operatort must maintain visual line of sight throughout the flight."

While they seem to be quite some time late in coming, Amazon drone delivery trials are due to start sometime "soon" in Darlington, UK. They will have all sorts of special exemptions that human drone pilots don't get. Fun times ahead</sarc>

I suspect they'll have about the same "success" as tundlebots. ir a novelty for a year or so then they'll begin to disappear from the skies. Maybe even sooner, since the cargo carrying capacity is even lower than the trundlebots.

[ICL1900-G3]

Our top priority

So many companies have so many things as their top priority, I'm amazed they manage to achieve anything else.

[MeeDeeCee]

To be fair, the crane should have used its advanced ML / AI and walked 10 feet to the left!!!

[TimMaher]

What about the crane?

Was it nesting on wetlands?

Can it stand on just one leg after injury?

We should be told.

[JWLong]

Our top priority

Our priority is...,..... customer, safety, security.......your top priority is operating your warehouses and delivery trucks without humans and always has been!.

And it ain't working is it?

Corporate speak by corporate assholes.

[ArguablyShrugs]

No worries...

…just disband the NTSB, FAA and all incident reporting and suddenly, there will be zero accidents hence on!