Very interesting. That does sound like a non-emergency waiver. I wonder what kind of testing it took to convince the FAA that the sense and avoid technology is robust enough.
- Status
Skywatcher2001
Well-Known Member
Agreed. Also, can that type of technology be be scaled down and put into a 2lb drone . . .
I will also try to take a shot at this question.
I think it is already mentioned in other forum.
At least for recreational flying BVLOS, it think it is akin to driving above the posted speed limit. People fly BVLOS is related to people driving above the posted speed limit. The risks are there (we all have to be reminded that driving above speed limit does increase our chances of fatal crashes as well as for others). But lots of people drive above speed limit, likely most people on this forum do at one point or other.
So let’s extend that line of thinking to General aviation pilots and air transport pilots. They shouldn’t have to follow the regulations either and just fly how they want and where they want. Hang the consequences because the chances of having an accident are remote.
The expected response to this is there is a big difference between a 2 to 4 pound drone and a full size aircraft will not cut it. Regulation of the NAS is in the best interest of everyone, not just the person that wants to be Superman with their drone.
MARK (LI)
Well-Known Member
What is ironic, is that there was a BVLOS thread last week in which @BigAl07 was questioned for using bold capitals and exclamation points to make the intent of his response clear.
......This type of trying to find a loop hole makes it necessary to be really clear, as was @BigAl07 in that thread.
If someone thinks there is "wiggle room" in flying ..then flying is not the right hobby for him.
A few months ago a guy posted on here that he was flying and he was BVLOS and couldn't figure out why he lost his drone...it was out there...he hit RTH and expected it to come back to him...well, on its way back it flew into the other side of a lighthouse that the operator couldn't even see...he submitted his flight logs and a few guys on here figured it out for him....aside from possible damage or harm to others and their property...this is what can happen to you
......This type of trying to find a loop hole makes it necessary to be really clear, as was @BigAl07 in that thread.
If someone thinks there is "wiggle room" in flying ..then flying is not the right hobby for him.
A few months ago a guy posted on here that he was flying and he was BVLOS and couldn't figure out why he lost his drone...it was out there...he hit RTH and expected it to come back to him...well, on its way back it flew into the other side of a lighthouse that the operator couldn't even see...he submitted his flight logs and a few guys on here figured it out for him....aside from possible damage or harm to others and their property...this is what can happen to you
GregS
Well-Known Member
They are probably the some people that pass me in their vehicle doing 10 MPH or more over the speed limit. Maybe they think they don't have to follow the rules...
Many probably lose their drones due to flying BVLOS. I want to keep my drones, so I follow the rules. Maybe that is why I have been flying drones since 2015 and never lost a drone.
Yaros
Well-Known Member
I see BVLOS threads getting the most attention of all, which is normal, but interesting to see.
I actually do fly BVLOS, but not in the way you would expect, I don't go 10km away or something crazy like that (I need to mention that I used to do that when I just got my drone) but instead fly close to me (1km away or less) but just don't look at the drone often. I do it for two reasons:
Note: I don't say you should fly BVLOS, because in fact it's illegal, everyone decides for himself.
I actually do fly BVLOS, but not in the way you would expect, I don't go 10km away or something crazy like that (I need to mention that I used to do that when I just got my drone) but instead fly close to me (1km away or less) but just don't look at the drone often. I do it for two reasons:
- I fly relatively high (50 to 120 meters) above all buildings, I will not hit anything when going sideways
- There aren't any airports nearby my area so I don't need to worry about low flying helicopters, which do pass in my area too, but they fly on about 600ft (250 meters) or higher.
- I can't look at my screen and drone at the same time, and just looking at the drone makes me mess up the video
Note: I don't say you should fly BVLOS, because in fact it's illegal, everyone decides for himself.
I do fly over 400 ft (in Class G airspace), under an FAA waiver, for research data collection within a few miles of a local airport. I mount one strobe on the bottom for my own benefit to assist VLOS, and a second one on top for the benefit of manned aircraft who should be flying in Class E airspace above me.
For hobbyist / photography purposes I see little reason to fly over 400 ft. Most drone cameras are very wide angle, and even at 400 feet capture sweeping panoramic views. Because of the short focal lenght, increasing that by 50-100% barely changes the perspective. Besides, reveal shots and other dramatic videographic techniques are most effecive at lower altitudes and shorter ranges.
dronerdave
Well-Known Member
I like flying too and hope by following the rules it will keep more regulations from being made that hinder me more.
I was conducting a manned VFR flight at 3,000 feet AGL in my Piper Arrow from Friday Harbor in the San Juan Islands down to Olympia, Washington years ago, when I literally saw a human body falling through the air, less than 50 yards directly in front of me. I was traveling at 140 knots at the time, and the body was traveling near terminal velocity. I had an epiphany. There was no way I would’ve been able to do anything at all to avoid a midair collision at those relative speeds. Nothing. In an instant, we nearly had a mid-air collision, the next we were 1,000 feet apart. To be clear, the chances of a pilot seeing a small tiny drone is effectively zero. Even with strobe lights. And being able to react to seeing it, again, almost zero. This effectively places the onerous on the drone pilot to keep their aircraft clear of manned flights 100% of the time. Always. And I don’t know how you’d do that if you can’t even see your drone. Oh yeah, that falling body. It was a skydiver who jumped in the wrong area, AND without declaring the jump over the radio. If I were flying only a knot or two faster, I’m sure you wouldn’t be reading my words. Safe flying y’all!
Last edited by a moderator:
MARK (LI)
Well-Known Member
That is an excellent point that too many just do not take into consideration
Another point to add to that is we cannot legally self announce our flight on UNICOM or MULTICOM to let manned flights know we are in an area and our planned altitude.That is an excellent point that too many just do not take into consideration
The pilot of the “jump plane” really messed up because they had that capability and if the radio was out the jump should have been scrubbed.
I mostly fly VLOS, but only because BVLOS isn't yet legal except under very limited circumstances.
You can draw an imprecise distinction between drone pilots who come to droning from being manned aircraft pilots, and those who come to droning from photography. I come from the "pilot" heritage.
For me, flying is all about going places. Just flying around the pattern (VLOS analog for this example) gets boring pretty quickly. Don't get me wrong, the video on my Mini-2s runs non-stop from engine start to landing. But the flying is the real reason for doing it. By watching where you're going on the screen, you can get a sense that you are riding the drone. The ultimate extension of that is FPV, which I haven't yet had the chance to experience.
I'm blessed by having a wide range of cool places to fly within VLOS of my house (I live on one side of a canyon), but I'd love to go farther up and down the canyon than I do, and peek over the edges of the ridges to see what's on the other side.
The key difference, perhaps, is between *watching* the drone, and *riding* the drone.
Farther out than a couple of hundred feet (if even that), I think the situational awareness and collision avoidance benefits...the actual safety benefits...from always maintaining VLOS are mostly trivial, and vastly overrated from a statistical perspective. To understand that, it's essential to focus on *probability*, rather than *possibility*. The fact that some Bad Thing is theoretically *possible* is largely irrelevant for making rational risk mitigation decisions. The right question is, "What are the odds?"
I realized a bit ago that part of my perspective is framed by the fact that I learned to fly in the Los Angeles basin, which is a virtual beehive of manned aircraft of all sizes buzzing around. Some manned aircraft pilots who learned to fly in relatively rural areas, just won't go to places that busy. On the other hand, one time when I went on vacation in Hawaii and rented a plane there, flying in and out of Honolulu international was a piece of cake for me.
I want to fly BVLOS because I want to *ride* the drone to a larger number of interesting places, farther away, and see what I can see. The only reason I don't do that routinely, is because it's not yet legal.
Your original question was about why people might want to fly BLVOS. Hopefully this provides some insight into the answer to that question.
The key is to fly *safely*, and safety and legality are very distinct things, which sometimes overlap.
Fly safe!
TCS
MARK (LI)
Well-Known Member
A reasonable, but not universally shared, interpretation of the VLOS rule is that you can look at your screen all you want, as long as you are able to see the drone at any given moment during the flight. Flying behind an obstacle would violate the VLOS rule. Flying mostly by reference to the screen, as long as you always have unobstructed VLOS available between you and the drone, does not.
If you're going to fly primarily by reference to the screen, you need to commit to doing that safely, which includes always knowing where you are just by reference to the screen.
A dangerous condition in manned aircraft flight is "continued VFR flight into IFR conditions", or another one, "Mixed VFR/IFR". Both of those are Bad. You need to pick a set of flight rules to follow, and follow them. If you're flying VFR it's allowed...almost mandatory...to look at the instruments sometimes. If you're flying IFR, it's acceptable, but not required, to look outside.
If you fly any non-trivial distance away (1000+ ft) primarily by reference to the screen, you need to stay aware of where you are, primarily by reference to the screen.
Thx,
TCS
Drone pilots come from a lot more backgrounds than just the Photography or the GA world. I know a few here that like me, came from a long background of remote piloting of almost 45 years. That elation you feel as you pilot your aircraft BVLOS is real, and I remember that rush too, though it came to some of us in a much different way, it was no less magical. The thrill of flight.I mostly fly VLOS, but only because BVLOS isn't yet legal except under very limited circumstances.
You can draw an imprecise distinction between drone pilots who come to droning from being manned aircraft pilots, and those who come to droning from photography. I come from the "pilot" heritage.
For me, flying is all about going places. Just flying around the pattern (VLOS analog for this example) gets boring pretty quickly. Don't get me wrong, the video on my Mini-2s runs non-stop from engine start to landing. But the flying is the real reason for doing it. By watching where you're going on the screen, you can get a sense that you are riding the drone. The ultimate extension of that is FPV, which I haven't yet had the chance to experience.
Fly safe!
TCS
What I can promise you is; eventually you will no longer get that rush just doing the same thing over and over. Right now you fly across a desolate landscape and explore beyond your vision. So what after that? I've seen your next step also, many after a few years, never expand their 'horizons' within the hobby. They will eventually move on and find a new shiny object or; find a new purpose or challenge within the hobby.
I've held waivers for over 55 pounds and turbine powered jet flight, flown remotely well above 200 MPH and piloted remote aircraft worth more than some folk's car. Flying BVLOS to look at a canyon or other landscape in a modern drone is boring to me, as it takes no real skill, nor does flying VLOS above my backyard for that matter.
I do real estate photography for my wife's business - boring, but it adds to her bottom line. Happy wife happy life. In the end, I am still flying remotely because it has brought me full circle to another love I have - video. To me, my current challenge is to expand my video chops. The drone has become another tool in my photography/videography toolbox - an airborne tripod/dolly/crane/whatever
My point is this - I've enjoyed this hobby for 45 years, I have seen it change and morph and expand with the emergence of drones. I know that it is important that those of us who are in it today have a responsibility to be stewards of it so in another 15 years it is still here for the next batch of pilot's. The regulations that are in place, are here for a reason. Regardless of what draws us into this hobby, I don't think it's too much to ask that we help preserve it for the next guy by doing our best to follow and promote the regulations.
I must respectfully partially disagree. For your own risk mitigation decisions, you always assess relative risks. Those include physical risks, like hitting something or being hit by something, and FAA enforcement risks.
As I've mentioned previously:
The Actual Law = ((The Text of the Law) +/- (Case Law)) X Enforcement Decisions.
I know this may not be helpful for people who aren't mathematically inclined, and I apologize for that. But it's just the way I think about things.
In English, one of the things this says is that if the enforcement decision is to not enforce at all in some set of cases, there is no actual law in those cases (Enforcement Decision = 0, in the above example).
From everything I've seen both here and elsewhere, the FAA is basing their enforcement decisions on relative risk, and quite sensibly so. Given that, it's reasonable for pilots, manned or unmanned, to do that same.
I understand that this point of view isn't universally shared, but it's a reasonable point of view. And reasonable people can and do have different views.
Thx,
TCS
- Status
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
New Threads
-
DJI Air 2S Fly More Combo (w/ 4th Battery) FOR SALE $650- Started by Dan AISCF
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
Forum statistics
