DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

2 spotters. My longest flight so far!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Archon<>Procyon

Active Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2020
Messages
37
Reactions
59
Age
43
Location
Ohio
I’ve seen on YouTube this distance being flown, so I had to give it a shot, and with 2 spotters (2 farms along the flight path are relatives) which normally I don’t worry about, but for this length of flight I played it safe, and I topped 50k feet!
Very excited about this, I know I wasn’t 100% legal, but I was no more out of line then when someone fails to buckle up in a car, basically I was not doing anything unsafe enough to warrant any negativity that’s why I posted details as to the planning, the route, spotters o did everything within reason to accomplish this flight!
I’d like to see the top distances of others and if they want to post their experience and details I’d like to hear that as well ??2A612839-4793-43A5-8A2E-FA3F835DCD78.jpeg
 
well where i live if i forget to put my seat belt on, then i get a fine and points on my licence ,
 
Not expressing an opinion, merely asking a question, do 'spotters' not right 'beside' the pilot count as spotters?
That's some distance.
 
well where i live if i forget to put my seat belt on, then i get a fine and points on my licence ,
Yup agreed and that’s why I referenced it because it’s another arbitrary rule that will not harm ANYONE OR ANYTHING other than the one that didn’t wear it. So as to say, IF I broke a rule there was no danger to anyone at all and in this case in particular there was no danger not even to myself. A truly harmless and successful flight! Thx for immediately getting that out of the way I was hoping that someone would lock that up pretty quick and by doing so any doubts or questions as to whether or not it was a safe flight was summed up nicely by using that as comparison to relevance of the flight. Completely safe ??
 
Flight seemed reasonable enough and of all those YouTube posts, nobody ever placed spotters. No highways, power lines... OK maybe not legs but I’d say you played it pretty safe. Love to see the telemetry if you recorded your phone. What altitude? Wind??

nice job
Altitude 345-375 wind absolutely none. I didn’t record it but the telemetry I’m sure is there. The flight log is what your referring to correct?
 
Not expressing an opinion, merely asking a question, do 'spotters' not right 'beside' the pilot count as spotters?
That's some distance.
Nope they were 1.5 miles apart appx. Communication was simple, handheld radios, everything was perfect and everything went perfect!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gindra
Nope they were 1.5 miles apart appx. Communication was simple, handheld radios, everything was perfect and everything went perfect!
Meant to say yes they do so long as immediate contact is available which it definitely was. Good question though.
 
Congratulations!
I’ve seen on YouTube this distance being flown, so I had to give it a shot, and with 2 spotters (2 farms along the flight path are relatives) which normally I don’t worry about, but for this length of flight I played it safe, and I topped 50k feet!
Very excited about this, I know I wasn’t 100% legal, but I was no more out of line then when someone fails to buckle up in a car, basically I was not doing anything unsafe enough to warrant any negativity that’s why I posted details as to the planning, the route, spotters o did everything within reason to accomplish this flight!
I’d like to see the top distances of others and if they want to post their experience and details I’d like to hear that as well ??View attachment 107348
Congratulations! Nice safe flight, over farmland is perfect!

Paul
 
Congratulations!

Congratulations! Nice safe flight, over farmland is perfect!

Paul
Thanks man, I was hesitant to post this on here simply because i knew I would be criticized or critiqued for doing nothing more then flying my drone WAY out of VLOS even though I had 2 relatives spaced perfectly apart along the flight path. I’m glad you also noticed it was farmland I neglected to bring that up. It was an absolute rush for sure! I guess SZ DJI was being completely honest on their claims that the craft could pull this distance off, even though they said that the data was acquired in an indoor controlled and obviously wind free environment so the data was for reference only. I’m impressed to see the craft able to do this in real world conditions AND to do so without any lag or weak signal messages at all, it was an awesome experience!

So I received an email from DJI earlier today I just now noticed it and it states: DJI user******* we have taken notice in the flight you recently piloted on aircraft serial # ????????? and would like to honor this impressive display of our product with a gift surprise gift pack. We only ask that you release the rights to any possible monetary gain and/or allow SZ DJI Holdings Company to exclusively use the flight data for advertisement and product endorsements, royalty free. We have not yet decided if we will use this particular flight as part of our campaign or not, but dear user, we will definitely be sending a gift basket to you simply for your loyalty to us and for the expertise and professionalism displayed while using our product.

HOW COOL IS THIS!!!
Though it’s pretty obvious they are keen to every flight so privacy is definitely questionable here, especially since I’ve never posted anything about it till I did on this forum, but that’s kind of implied from the beginning in order to safely use their products.
I am pretty excited
 
Last edited:
Not expressing an opinion, merely asking a question, do 'spotters' not right 'beside' the pilot count as spotters?
That's some distance.

If you're flying under Part 107 regulations the only "Visual Observer" that really counts is the one that is Co-Located with the RPIC. Communication to remain within Part 107 has to be audible or visual (nothing electronic).

Currently there is no allowance (without a waiver) to extend flight BVLOS with additional VO's.
 
Last edited:
If you're flying under Part 107 regulations the only "Visual Observer" that really counts if the one that is Co-Located with the RPIC. Communication to remain within Part 107 has to be audible or visual (nothing electronic).

Currently there is no allowance (without a waiver) to extend flight BVLOS with additional VO's.

This has been one of the most confusing aspects of Part 107. The law as written isn't even self-consistent:

§107.31 Visual line of sight aircraft operation.
(a) With vision that is unaided by any device other than corrective lenses, the remote pilot in command, the visual observer (if one is used), and the person manipulating the flight control of the small unmanned aircraft system must be able to see the unmanned aircraft throughout the entire flight in order to:​
(1) Know the unmanned aircraft's location;​
(2) Determine the unmanned aircraft's attitude, altitude, and direction of flight;​
(3) Observe the airspace for other air traffic or hazards; and​
(4) Determine that the unmanned aircraft does not endanger the life or property of another.​
(b) Throughout the entire flight of the small unmanned aircraft, the ability described in paragraph (a) of this section must be exercised by either:​
(1) The remote pilot in command and the person manipulating the flight controls of the small unmanned aircraft system; or
(2) A visual observer.

107.31 (a) says that the RPIC, the VO and the pilot must be able to see the aircraft throughout the entire flight. 107.31 (b) then contradicts that by saying that the ability to see the aircraft must be maintained by either the RPIC and the pilot or the VO, which implies that, subject to acceptable communication, a remote VO is permitted.

And then there is advisory circular 107-2, which supports that latter interpretation:

5.7.2.1 To ensure that the VO can carry out his or her duties, the remote PIC must ensure that the VO is positioned in a location where he or she is able to see the small UA sufficiently to maintain VLOS. The remote PIC can do this by specifying the location of the VO. The FAA also requires that the remote PIC and VO coordinate to 1) scan the airspace where the small UA is operating for any potential collision hazard, and 2) maintain awareness of the position of the small UA through direct visual observation. This would be accomplished by the VO maintaining visual contact with the small UA and the surrounding airspace, and then communicating to the remote PIC and person manipulating the controls the flight status of the small UA and any hazards which may enter the area of operation, so that the remote PIC or person manipulating the controls can take appropriate action.​
5.7.2.2 To make this communication possible, the remote PIC, person manipulating the controls, and VO must work out a method of effective communication, which does not create a distraction and allows them to understand each other. The communication method must be determined prior to operation. This effective communication requirement would permit the use of communication-assisting devices, such as a hand-held radio, to facilitate communication from a distance.

In contrast, the law for using visual observers for recreational flight is perfectly clear:

§44809. Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft
(a)(3) The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co-located and in direct communication with the operator.​
 
This has been one of the most confusing aspects of Part 107. The law as written isn't even self-consistent:

§107.31 Visual line of sight aircraft operation.
(a) With vision that is unaided by any device other than corrective lenses, the remote pilot in command, the visual observer (if one is used), and the person manipulating the flight control of the small unmanned aircraft system must be able to see the unmanned aircraft throughout the entire flight in order to:​
(1) Know the unmanned aircraft's location;​
(2) Determine the unmanned aircraft's attitude, altitude, and direction of flight;​
(3) Observe the airspace for other air traffic or hazards; and​
(4) Determine that the unmanned aircraft does not endanger the life or property of another.​
(b) Throughout the entire flight of the small unmanned aircraft, the ability described in paragraph (a) of this section must be exercised by either:​
(1) The remote pilot in command and the person manipulating the flight controls of the small unmanned aircraft system; or
(2) A visual observer.

107.31 (a) says that the RPIC, the VO and the pilot must be able to see the aircraft throughout the entire flight. 107.31 (b) then contradicts that by saying that the ability to see the aircraft must be maintained by either the RPIC and the pilot or the VO, which implies that, subject to acceptable communication, a remote VO is permitted.

And then there is advisory circular 107-2, which supports that latter interpretation:

5.7.2.1 To ensure that the VO can carry out his or her duties, the remote PIC must ensure that the VO is positioned in a location where he or she is able to see the small UA sufficiently to maintain VLOS. The remote PIC can do this by specifying the location of the VO. The FAA also requires that the remote PIC and VO coordinate to 1) scan the airspace where the small UA is operating for any potential collision hazard, and 2) maintain awareness of the position of the small UA through direct visual observation. This would be accomplished by the VO maintaining visual contact with the small UA and the surrounding airspace, and then communicating to the remote PIC and person manipulating the controls the flight status of the small UA and any hazards which may enter the area of operation, so that the remote PIC or person manipulating the controls can take appropriate action.​
5.7.2.2 To make this communication possible, the remote PIC, person manipulating the controls, and VO must work out a method of effective communication, which does not create a distraction and allows them to understand each other. The communication method must be determined prior to operation. This effective communication requirement would permit the use of communication-assisting devices, such as a hand-held radio, to facilitate communication from a distance.

In contrast, the law for using visual observers for recreational flight is perfectly clear:

§44809. Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft
(a)(3) The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co-located and in direct communication with the operator.​
And with that kind of confusion I will choose safe. And regardless of definition, especially as it’s written, instant communication is safe as can be. It’s not like hand signaling a crane operator when lives are on the line. Not trying to be a smart *** either but in reality it’s a tiny drone that is traveling 30 mph over open farmland with spotters. If this is not a safe practice then I have no use for this hobby, nothing screams excitement like flying VLOS at all times and following every nitpick rule to a tee, it’s an ambitiously boring set of rules and to adhere to all of them all the time is pretty laughable actually. Perfection is a myth, and that’s why it does not exist in the nature of humans it never has and it never will! Some may lay fame to the claim of perfection but they have only themselves to feed the line too, I would imagine 99% of people feel the same regardless of the face the put forth...
 
And with that kind of confusion I will choose safe. And regardless of definition, especially as it’s written, instant communication is safe as can be. It’s not like hand signaling a crane operator when lives are on the line. Not trying to be a smart *** either but in reality it’s a tiny drone that is traveling 30 mph over open farmland with spotters. If this is not a safe practice then I have no use for this hobby, nothing screams excitement like flying VLOS at all times and following every nitpick rule to a tee, it’s an ambitiously boring set of rules and to adhere to all of them all the time is pretty laughable actually. Perfection is a myth, and that’s why it does not exist in the nature of humans it never has and it never will! Some may lay fame to the claim of perfection but they have only themselves to feed the line too, I would imagine 99% of people feel the same regardless of the face the put forth...

From what I have seen it depends somewhat on your background. Many people seem to regard sUAS regulations as equivalent to vehicle speed limits, for example, which most people exceed, at least occasionally and if only by a small amount. And it is clearly heavily influenced by perception of risk.

If you think about it as similar to occasional speeding on clear roads with good visibility then the perceived risk is going to be low because, for most people, the probability of that leading to an accident will be seen as low, and the consequence of an accident is generally ignored. In the case of flying an sUAS the probability of a collision with another aircraft in most situations is certainly low, but the potential consequence (bringing down a manned aircraft) is catastrophic, and so anyone with awareness of that is likely to be more cautious. Pilots often seem to take that more conservative view, in line with their typical overall approach to aviation law and the level of risk management training involved in obtaining a pilot certificate.
 
Thanks man, I was hesitant to post this on here simply because i knew I would be criticized or critiqued for doing nothing more then flying my drone WAY out of VLOS even though I had 2 relatives spaced perfectly apart along the flight path. I’m glad you also noticed it was farmland I neglected to bring that up. It was an absolute rush for sure! I guess SZ DJI was being completely honest on their claims that the craft could pull this distance off, even though they said that the data was acquired in an indoor controlled and obviously wind free environment so the data was for reference only. I’m impressed to see the craft able to do this in real world conditions AND to do so without any lag or weak signal messages at all, it was an awesome experience!

So I received an email from DJI earlier today I just now noticed it and it states: DJI user******* we have taken notice in the flight you recently piloted on aircraft serial # ????????? and would like to honor this impressive display of our product with a gift surprise gift pack. We only ask that you release the rights to any possible monetary gain and/or allow SZ DJI Holdings Company to exclusively use the flight data for advertisement and product endorsements, royalty free. We have not yet decided if we will use this particular flight as part of our campaign or not, but dear user, we will definitely be sending a gift basket to you simply for your loyalty to us and for the expertise and professionalism displayed while using our product.

HOW COOL IS THIS!!!
Though it’s pretty obvious they are keen to every flight so privacy is definitely questionable here, especially since I’ve never posted anything about it till I did on this forum, but that’s kind of implied from the beginning in order to safely use their products.
I am pretty excited


Watch out if you get a similar message from the FAA ;)
 
So I received an email from DJI earlier today I just now noticed it and it states: DJI user******* we have taken notice in the flight you recently piloted on aircraft serial # ????????? and would like to honor this impressive display of our product with a gift surprise gift pack. We only ask that you release the rights to any possible monetary gain and/or allow SZ DJI Holdings Company to exclusively use the flight data for advertisement and product endorsements, royalty free. We have not yet decided if we will use this particular flight as part of our campaign or not, but dear user, we will definitely be sending a gift basket to you simply for your loyalty to us and for the expertise and professionalism displayed while using our product.

HOW COOL IS THIS!!!
Though it’s pretty obvious they are keen to every flight so privacy is definitely questionable here, especially since I’ve never posted anything about it till I did on this forum, but that’s kind of implied from the beginning in order to safely use their products.
I am pretty excited

In all seriousness, you genuinely believe that’s from DJI??
 
I'd be wary of accepting or even replying to such an 'offer', for several reasons.
1) Is it a scam? How did they get your email address and the drone's serial number from the information you have posted in this and perhaps other threads? The latter is a question I would be asking if I were in your shoes.
2) Ignoring for the moment any commercial considerations, would the gift constitute "ill gotten gains" i.e. reward for an activity that you yourself consider illegal as in ".... this, I know I wasn’t 100% legal, but I ....."?
3) Taking you at your word that the flight is illegal, it is throwing it in the face of your FAA to profit from it and might provoke their ire. For the same reasoning l think it would actually be pretty stupid of DJI to consider using an illegal flight for " for advertisement and product endorsements " themselves.
4) Would it move the flight into the commercial flying bracket? I have, I think, seen comments suggesting that whether or not the flight is commercial depends on the pilot's intention at the time of flight, (it would seem that was not your intention ) but is that specified in print by the FAA?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What an irresponsible (and as you mentioned, illegal) act. Yes, you were over farm land. But you flew over roads, even if they weren't very busy.

There could have been ag pilots out, or even other private fixed wing aircraft. While it's unlikely there is a private pilot flying that low, it would be legal for them to do so. There are no minimums over unpopulated areas. And yes, dumb people own manned aircraft, just like dumb people own unmanned aircraft.

And if you have two dumb people flying in a situation like this, a catastrophe could result. Luckily, it seems there was only one dumb person in the air in this case.

Please don't pull a moronic stunt like this again!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
131,080
Messages
1,559,638
Members
160,065
Latest member
mlaut