Survey drone hits tower crane top and falls 120m at Manchester construction site

An Air Accidents Investigation Branch bulletin says the aircraft was flying a pre-selected survey path with obstacle avoidance enabled when it struck the crane.

A drone carrying out an aerial survey over a construction site in the Cheetham Hill area of Manchester struck the top of a tower crane and fell 120 metres to the ground, according to the Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB).

The incident happened in August. It was notified to the AAIB, but no formal investigation was launched, and neither the site nor the contractor has been identified. The details appeared in the branch's latest bulletin.

The AAIB said the unmanned aircraft was operating on a pre-selected flight path over a construction site in an urban area. Although its obstacle avoidance feature was enabled, the aircraft hit the top of the crane and dropped 120 m.

Software limits questioned

An internal investigation by the construction company found that the company and its remote pilots may not have fully understood the limitations of the obstacle avoidance software, the bulletin states.

The account points to the gap between an automated safeguard being switched on and operators knowing what it can and cannot handle. On a crowded urban site where cranes rise well above surrounding buildings, the feature appears to have acted as an aid rather than a guarantee. The bulletin does not give further detail on the flight, the equipment used or any consequences beyond the fall.

AO

Amara Osei

Amara Osei covers building-material and assembly testing evidence across fire-rated doors, concrete, masonry, roofing, insulation and moisture-control products. Her analysis ties claims to named test methods and measurable parameters such as ASTM E119 fire-resistance testing of assemblies, ASTM E331 water-penetration testing, compressive strength, moisture content and load deflection. She helps specifiers, general contractors, quality teams and building inspectors decide which evidence to request, how to compare field and laboratory results, and when a product claim needs jurisdiction-specific review.