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

BVLOS why do so many do it?

Status
Not open for further replies.
UAV Forecast.
Have a look at B4YOUFLY. It's much simpler and clearer. It shows you all the considerations for a specific location and refers to the FAA regulations rather than the DJI zones. DJI doesn't always get things right and they don't address some important things.

Here's the online version.

 
I can see where I'm going through the video feed and no tall boats are on a small creek and no one is standing 10 feet high. Maybe I might hit someone who happens to be standing on a ladder along a creek for no reason.

Can you at least admit that the odds of an accident happening are almost zero?

By contrast, people wanted to turn right on red in the 70s - it was faster and saved some gas. Bike accidents went up 60% and pedestrian accidents went up 100% - people actually died, many of them. Yet, do you turn right on red? Most people consider the risk acceptable.
Refreshing, thank you!

The right questions is, "What are the odds?"

The right next question is, is the payoff worth the expected value of the loss?

I was a bit surprised that you even had to mention that you can see where you're going through the video feed. That's part of the fun of flying with the feed, seeing where you are and where your going. Just like a VFR flight in a manned aircraft.

At anything more than a couple of hundred feet away, the situational awareness you get from the video feed is superior to the situational awareness you would get from just looking at the drone. At that distance, your eyes-only depth perception is pretty much zilch. With the video feed you can get a good estimate of your distance from what's in front of you with just a bit of experience. If you want to see what's around you, just rotate the drone. If you want to see what's below you, point the camera down. If you want to look up, point the camera up.

At more than a couple of hundred feet away, the notion that there's substantial situational awareness and safety benefits from VLOS is, as Einstein would say, "A stubbornly persistent illusion."

:cool:

TCS
 
Flying behind terrain, trees, or structures for only a limited time then having a mid-air when you are technically BVLOS isn’t going to go over good IMO. Maybe in the future we will have improved autonomic safety features that will allow more chances to fly BVLOS flights.
But what are the odds of such a mid-air?

I agree with you that RID is going to greatly facilitate the expansion of legal BVLOS.

Of course, if you look at the Actual Law, a limited amount of BVLOS is legal now...

;-)

TCS
 
Have a look at B4YOUFLY. It's much simpler and clearer. It shows you all the considerations for a specific location and refers to the FAA regulations rather than the DJI zones. DJI doesn't always get things right and they don't address some important things.

Here's the online version.

I have and use b4ufly app, had it first. It doesnt list any restrictions for that airport.
 
I have and use b4ufly app, had it first. It doesnt list any restrictions for that airport.
So, as long as you stay clear of traffic and don't cause any impediment to operations there you should be ok to fly near it. Here's what the FAA says about uncontrolled airports. What's the name of the airport you're looking at?

Airports in Uncontrolled Airspace​

For flights near airports in uncontrolled airspace that remain under 400’ above the ground, prior authorization is not required. When flying in these areas, remote pilots and recreational flyers must be aware of and avoid traffic patterns and takeoff and landing areas. A drone must not interfere with operations at the airport must yield right-of-way to all other aircraft. Uncontrolled airspace and other flying restrictions can be found on our B4UFLY app.
 
Thanks.

It's generally useful to know the text of the law, even if it's only part of the Actual Law.

:cool:

TCS
 
Quick related question - do you guys have a need to routinely fly above 400 feet agl? Do you consider the height limit more important than LOS requirements?
I consider the 400' AGL limit to be much more important than the mythical benefits of VLOS. I never intentionally bust the 400' AGL limit, and when the controller tells me that I did, I reduce my altitude.

Far more annoying for me is the absolute limit above the take-off point. When I'm poking around on the ridge on the other side of the canyon, I can be 200' AGL, and 1100' above the take-off point.

That's just lame DJI Nannyism.

TCS
 
  • Like
Reactions: thispilothere
I agree with this. It's kinda like our 'rolling stops' at a stop sign here in Southern California. It's not legal; we approach the stop sign and assess the 'risk' and either roll thru it or come to a hard stop.
A perfectly reasonable risk/reward comparison and decision making process.

I lived in Redondo Beach for many years...

;-)

TCS
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skywatcher2001
Straight from AC 107-2A:

5.9 VLOS Aircraft Operation. The remote PIC and person manipulating the controls must be able to see the small unmanned aircraft at all times during flight (§ 107.31). The small unmanned aircraft must be operated closely enough to ensure visibility requirements are met during small UAS operations. This requirement also applies to the VO, if used, during the aircraft operation. The person maintaining VLOS may have brief moments in which he or she is not looking directly at or cannot see the small unmanned aircraft, but still retains the capability to see the small unmanned aircraft or quickly maneuver it back to VLOS. These moments may be necessary for the remote PIC to look at the controller to determine remaining battery life or for operational awareness. Should the remote PIC or person manipulating the controls lose VLOS of the small unmanned aircraft, he or she

5-5 2/1/21

AC 107-2A

must regain VLOS as soon as practicable. Even though the remote PIC may briefly lose sight of the small unmanned aircraft, the remote PIC always has the see-and-avoid responsibilities set out in §§ 107.31 and 107.37. The circumstances that may prevent a remote PIC from fulfilling those responsibilities will vary, depending on factors such as the type of small UAS, the operational environment, and distance between the remote PIC and the small unmanned aircraft. For this reason, no specific time interval exists in which interruption of VLOS is permissible, as it would have the effect of potentially allowing a hazardous interruption of the operation. If the remote PIC cannot regain VLOS, the remote PIC or person manipulating the controls should follow pre-determined procedures for the loss of VLOS. The capabilities of the small UAS will govern the remote PIC’s determination as to the appropriate course of action. For example, the remote PIC may need to land the small unmanned aircraft immediately, enter hover mode, or employ a return-to-home sequence. The VLOS requirement does not prohibit actions such as scanning the airspace or briefly looking down at the small unmanned aircraft CS.

5.9.1 Unaided Vision. VLOS must be accomplished and maintained by unaided vision, except vision that is corrected by the use of eyeglasses (spectacles) or contact lenses. Vision aids, such as binoculars, may be used only momentarily to enhance situational awareness. For example, the remote PIC, person manipulating the controls, or VO may use vision aids to avoid inadvertently flying over persons or conflicting with other aircraft. First person view devices may be used during operations, but do not satisfy the VLOS requirement.

5.9.2 VO. The use of a VO is optional. The remote PIC may choose to use a VO to supplement situational awareness and VLOS. Although the remote PIC and person manipulating the controls must maintain the capability to see the small unmanned aircraft, using one or more VOs allows the remote PIC and person manipulating the controls to conduct other mission-critical duties (such as checking displays) while still ensuring situational awareness of the small unmanned aircraft. The VO must be able to communicate effectively with regard to the following:

• The small unmanned aircraft location, attitude, altitude, and direction of flight;

• The position of other aircraft or hazards in the airspace; and

• The determination that the small unmanned aircraft does not endanger the life or property of another (§ 107.33).

5.9.2.1 To ensure the VO can carry out his or her duties, the remote PIC must ensure the VO is positioned in a location where the VO is able to see the small unmanned aircraft sufficiently to maintain VLOS. The remote PIC can do this by specifying the location of the VO. The FAA also requires the remote PIC and VO coordinate to (1) scan the airspace where the small unmanned aircraft is operating for any potential collision hazard, and (2) maintain awareness of the position of the small unmanned aircraft through direct visual observation (§ 107.33). The remote PIC and VO would accomplish this by the VO communicating to the remote PIC and person manipulating the controls the

5-6 2/1/21

AC 107-2A

flight status of the small unmanned aircraft and any collision hazards which may enter the area of operation, so that the remote PIC or person manipulating the controls can take appropriate action. The VO’s visual observation of the small unmanned aircraft and surrounding airspace would enable the VO to inform the remote PIC of the status.

5.9.2.2 To make this communication possible, the remote PIC, person manipulating the controls, and VO must work out a method of effective communication that does not create a distraction. Such a means of communication entails the constant ability to understand one another. The communication method must be determined prior to operation. Effective communication would permit the use of communication-assisting devices, such as a handheld radio, to facilitate communication from a distance.

5.9.3 VLOS at Night. Prior to a small UAS operation at night, the remote PIC should ensure he or she will be able to keep the small unmanned aircraft within the intended area of operation and within VLOS for the duration of the operation. In almost all cases involving operations at night, the remote PIC may need to restrict the operational area of the small unmanned aircraft. Reduced lighting and contrast at night may make it difficult for remote pilots to fulfill the requirements of § 107.31(a), requiring remote pilots to maintain the capability of visually discerning the location, attitude, altitude, and direction of the flight of the aircraft. A remote pilot cannot solely rely on the small unmanned aircraft’s anti-collision lighting, Ground Control Station (GCS) telemetry data displays, or a combination of the two for compliance with § 107.31.
An excellent summary of the text *portion* of the Actual Law.

And, of course, the actual law is what matters.

Thx!

:cool:

TCS
 
Isn’t that the yellow inverted triangle with the word ‘YIELD’?😉
Absolutely.

And at non-busy intersections, those "Yield" signs frequently masquerade as "Stop" signs.

Fortunately, an experienced driver who's paying attention can usually discern their true identity...

:cool:

TCS
 
There's a common misconception that manned airplanes are required to fly above 500' AGL. That is false.

(Just trying to quash a common bit of misinformation.)

The general rule for flight minimum altitudes. 500' is a suggestion for most open field agricultural cases. The thing is, if there is a building or person, it is a 500' minimum.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MARK (LI)
Thanks.

It's generally useful to know the text of the law, even if it's only part of the Actual Law.

:cool:

TCS
Please link an official definition of this distinction between the written law and the actual law that you are talking about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MARK (LI)
The general rule for flight minimum altitudes. 500' is a suggestion for most open field agricultural cases. The thing is, if there is a building or person, it is a 500' minimum.

Here's the full text. (bold italics added)

(c) Over other than congested areas – An altitude of 500 feet above the surface except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In that case, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

Flying a manned aircraft below 500' is allowed in sparsely populated areas and over water. Yes, there is a 500' separation from persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures even there. And In congested areas there is a minimum altitude requirement of 1000' above the highest obstacle within 2000' horizontally.

I'm just trying to counter the false idea that drones never need to be concerned about manned aircraft because there's a built-in 100' altitude buffer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eEridani
An excellent summary of the text *portion* of the Actual Law.

And, of course, the actual law is what matters.

Thx!

:cool:

TCS
Would you care to educate me on the “actual law” as I seem to be lost. A pilot of your experience may be able to guide me in the right direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MARK (LI)
An excellent summary of the text *portion* of the Actual Law.

And, of course, the actual law is what matters.

Thx!

:cool:

TCS
Doom's quote is from an advisory circular dated 2-1-21. This is the CURRENT law as copied from the National Archives Code of Federal Regulations site. Which is it?

§ 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.
 
Doom's quote is from an advisory circular dated 2-1-21. This is the CURRENT law as copied from the National Archives Code of Federal Regulations site. Which is it?

§ 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.
It is both. The Advisory Circulars are used to amend, provide interim information, or clarify parts of the regulations.

A really good example of that is 49 USC 44809 and AC 91-57B for Recreational pilots.
 
An aspect of VLOS that has always bothered me is altitude. I can't tell the height of a tree I am standing next to; so determining the altitude of my drone while flying is impossible. So in a literal sense I violate this regulation every time I fly. But I do depend on the electronics to let me know when I am at boundary conditions - so at least I try to fly within the regs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MARK (LI)
An aspect of VLOS that has always bothered me is altitude. I can't tell the height of a tree I am standing next to; so determining the altitude of my drone while flying is impossible. So in a literal sense I violate this regulation every time I fly. But I do depend on the electronics to let me know when I am at boundary conditions - so at least I try to fly within the regs.

I'm unaware of any regulation that requires a pilot to be able to determine or even estimate the altitude of the drone. Where is the literal violation you commit?

Estimating the altitude is difficult to do with precision, but entirely possible to do with reasonable accuracy, +/-50' certainly.
 
An aspect of VLOS that has always bothered me is altitude. I can't tell the height of a tree I am standing next to; so determining the altitude of my drone while flying is impossible. So in a literal sense I violate this regulation every time I fly. But I do depend on the electronics to let me know when I am at boundary conditions - so at least I try to fly within the regs.
That takes a lot of practice with your aircraft to get used to apparent size at different distances and altitudes.

Change the size and form factor of the aircraft and you are right back to practicing to train the eye-brain connection.

That is all part of the reason for including an instrument scan and part of the reason for AC 107-2A.

I believe we are in agreement.
 
I'm unaware of any regulation that requires a pilot to be able to determine or even estimate the altitude of the drone. Where is the literal violation you commit?

Estimating the altitude is difficult to do with precision, but entirely possible to do with reasonable accuracy, +/-50' certainly.
I believe he is referring to a literal reading of 107.31a(2).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
131,618
Messages
1,564,589
Members
160,496
Latest member
ad60