eVT360 — In-Flight Structural Failure Report

Viewpro tested and approved this aircraft in Thailand on 21 Nov 2025. 62 days later, the left motor arm detached in flight. Viewpro was contacted with full evidence and refused to accept responsibility.

Summary: On 6 February 2026, a Viewpro eVT360 suffered an in-flight structural failure. The left vertical motor arm detached at approximately 80-120 meters above ground. The ArduPilot flight log shows the flight controller detected the problem 83 seconds before failure and attempted to compensate — but the failure was mechanical and unrecoverable. Viewpro (the manufacturer) was provided with the complete flight log, independent technical analysis, and photographic evidence. They refused to take responsibility for the defective product. The aircraft was 62 days old.

Photographic Evidence

Post-crash documentation showing structural damage to the airframe and components.

Deformed mounting bracket Chipped bracket with visible wear Fuselage crack — overview Fuselage crack — close-up Motor housing — cracked casing Drone on table with laptop — field inspection Fuselage fracture — side view Vegetation lodged in airframe — impact evidence

Incident Summary

On 6 February 2026, during the second flight of the day, the left vertical motor arm of a Viewpro eVT360 detached in flight at approximately 80 meters AGL. The aircraft lost lift on the left side and dropped rapidly. The emergency landing protocol (QLAND) was triggered automatically.

The aircraft was tested by the manufacturer (Viewpro) on 21 November 2025 and received in Mexico on 6 December 2025 — only 62 days before the incident.

The ArduPilot flight log shows that the flight controller detected a developing mechanical problem on the left arm 83 seconds before the catastrophic failure and was actively compensating by increasing power to motors C2 and C3. At the moment of failure, both left-arm motors were at full saturation (1,949 PWM) with zero response — confirming the arm was no longer attached to the airframe.

Flight Parameters

Airspeed
28 m/s
Height AGL
80 m
Flight Mode
FBWA
Wind
2.5-4 m/s
Warning Lead
83 sec

Full Timeline

21 Nov 2025
Manufacturer test (Viewpro) — aircraft tested and approved by Viewpro prior to shipping.
6 Dec 2025
Aircraft received in Mexico. 15 days between factory test and delivery.
6 Feb 2026 — Flight 1
t = 1,849 s
First flight of the day. Takeoff, 271 GPS points recorded. Normal landing at t = 2,454 s. No anomalies.
6 Feb 2026 — Flight 2
t = 3,238 s
Second flight of the day. Takeoff in QLOITER. Pre-programmed waypoint mission.
t = 3,584.24 s
First anomaly detected: C3 (left rear motor) begins showing consistently higher output than C1 (right front). The flight controller is actively compensating for a mechanical issue on the left arm.
t = 3,600-3,660 s
C3 demand continues rising progressively. No pilot command change or mission plan alteration.
t = 3,667.07 s
Transition to FBWA (forward flight mode). Moments later, the left arm structure fails.
t = 3,667.23 s → 3,667.51 s
Catastrophic failure: C3 already at maximum saturation. Within 280 milliseconds, C2 also hits saturation. Both left-arm motors at 1,949 PWM with no response. Aircraft enters uncontrolled spiral and begins falling.
t = 3,703.69 s
QLAND activated (emergency auto-landing). Touchdown at 21.2155597, -102.4064838.

Motor Outputs — Failure Sequence

Values in PWM microseconds. C1 = front-right, C2 = rear-left (failed arm), C3 = front-left (failed arm), C4 = rear-right, C5 = forward cruise motor.

Time (s)C1 (FR)C2 (RL) ⚠️C3 (FL) ⚠️C4 (RR)C5Event
3,584.241,5201,5401,6501,5101,490Asymmetry onset
3,620.001,5301,5801,7201,5201,500C3 escalating
3,650.001,5401,6501,8101,5301,510C3 near saturation
3,667.071,5301,7501,8821,5201,520FBWA transition
3,667.231,5401,8401,9231,5201,510Arm detaches
3,667.431,4701,8481,9491,4601,440C2 begins saturation
3,667.51+1,3201,9491,9491,2901,280Both left motors at max — no response

Technical Analysis

What the flight log reveals

The ArduPilot flight log (00000031.BIN) recorded all telemetry data during the incident. The analysis shows:

"Channel 3 (C3) output is consistently and progressively higher than Channel 1 (C1) — 83 seconds before the crash. This differential indicates the flight controller was already compensating for reduced effectiveness on the left arm."
— Flight Incident Analysis (from .BIN log)

1. Evidence of progressive mechanical failure: The flight controller did not "decide" to crash. It detected a growing imbalance on the left arm and attempted to compensate by increasing motor power — exactly as ArduPilot is programmed to do. When the structure failed, even maximum power to two motors could not keep the aircraft airborne.

2. No pilot error or software fault: There were no aggressive maneuvers, anomalous commands, or sensor failures. The first flight (1,849 to 2,454 s) was uneventful. The second mission was proceeding normally up to the moment of failure.

3. Aircraft was virtually new: The eVT360 was factory-tested by Viewpro on 21 November 2025 and delivered on 6 December 2025. The incident occurred 62 days after delivery — well within any reasonable expectation of structural integrity.

4. Manufacturer's response: Viewpro was contacted with the complete flight log, flight log analysis, and photographic documentation of the failure. The company declined to accept responsibility for the structural defect that caused the crash.

Manufacturer's Position

The aircraft was purchased and paid in full via direct wire transfer (no marketplace intermediary). The manufacturer was contacted with complete technical documentation: .BIN flight log, incident analysis report, damage photos, and a detailed factual description of events.

The company's response was to decline any responsibility for the structural defect, despite objective evidence that the arm detached due to a manufacturing or material failure — not pilot error or misuse.

The full purchase price was not refunded. The Chinese manufacturer, operating outside Brazilian jurisdiction, offers no effective recourse channel for foreign customers.

Timeline: Factory test → 21 Nov 2025 • Delivery → 6 Dec 2025 • Incident → 6 Feb 2026
The aircraft was 62 days old when the arm detached in flight.

Conclusion

The ArduPilot flight log shows, without ambiguity, that the Viewpro eVT360 suffered an in-flight structural failure: the left vertical motor arm detached from the airframe due to a manufacturing defect or material fatigue.

The flight controller detected the problem 83 seconds in advance and attempted to compensate — unsuccessfully, because the failure was mechanical and unrecoverable. Fortunately, there were no injuries or third-party damage.

Viewpro was notified with all evidence and chose not to accept responsibility.

Raw flight data available: Complete ArduPilot flight log (.BIN, 495 GPS points, full motor output history, and system events) is available for independent verification upon request.