FAA Regulations on FPV?

[TMB Aerial]

I've recently thrown my hat so to speak in the FPVish ring. I had pre-ordered a pair of DJI goggles then realized that per the FAA anyone flying a UAS for fun or work must maintain the aircraft in thier visual line of sight. So now I have ordered a pair of the Epson Moverio BT-300 "augmented" reality glasses. With these I can maintain VLOS and fly without risk of incrimination. I've read many posts in the last 2 days with people reccomending the DJI goggles over the BT-300's. My question is this, is flying against FAA regulations not a concern?

I will probably still keep a pair of the DJI goggles but only to hand to a client or someone that is NOT flying the drone so they can observe OR I guess if you have a spotter that would make them legal? Yes?

The legalities are all pretty much in thier infancy as far as commercial UAS piloting is concerned, which is how I make a living so adhereing to FAA regulations is a must for me. I'm curious what everyone else thinks.

TMB Aerial - Dave

 

[Aaron]

If you are going to fly with the goggles on your supposed to have a spotter with you to keep an eye on the Drone this maintains the visual line-of-sight rule

 

[Aaron]

Oh yeah and here's this too, if you're the only one flying and you're wearing them somebody could come up and kick you in the groin and you wont see it coming haha.

 

[TMB Aerial]

Oh yeah and here's this too, if you're the only one flying and you're wearing them somebody could come up and kick you in the groin and you wont see it coming haha.

That would suck.

 

[Jim_bo]

If you are going to fly with the goggles on your supposed to have a spotter with you to keep an eye on the Drone this maintains the visual line-of-sight rule

Is this correct? Didn't the courts recently pull the reigns on FAA saying they were not allowed to further regulate hobby pilots? I know we don't have to register any more, but doesn't this go in the same category?

I haven't been following this stuff too closely, so I may be wrong.

 

[TMB Aerial]

Is this correct? Didn't the courts recently pull the reigns on FAA saying they were not allowed to further regulate hobby pilots? I know we don't have to register any more, but doesn't this go in the same category?

I haven't been following this stuff too closely, so I may be wrong.

You can find the courts decision on the FAA's website here Unmanned Aircraft Systems

The courts decision only pertains to registration, not safety.

 

[rstekeur]

Oh yeah and here's this too, if you're the only one flying and you're wearing them somebody could come up and kick you in the groin and you wont see it coming haha.

I've had people sneak up on me in a car and blow the horn

 

[Turbomon1]

I think that you don't have to register but you still can be fined if you don't follow FAA guidelines for safety of aviation safety. Remember what the pilot who landed in the Hudson River because of birds. Imagine what a drone can do if it was swallowed by the jet engines of a passenger airliner instead of birds. With no River close by you would be considered as a terriost just like Isis. Think before you fly.

 

[150pilot]

Remember what the pilot who landed in the Hudson River because of birds. Imagine what a drone can do if it was swallowed by the jet engines of a passenger airliner instead of birds. With no River close by you would be considered as a terriost just like Isis. Think before you fly.

That flock of birds took out "BOTH" engines at the same time. A quadcopter could at most take out a single engine. That would leave at least one other working engine. If I had a choice, I'd rather be in a plane hit by a quadcopter than one up against a flock of birds any day. If the FAA could, I'm sure they would ground ALL birds.

 

[Will.i.am]

The FAA accepts requests for waivers of the requirements for the sUAS rules, including VLOS and Visual Observer. Has anyone gotten those waivers.

 

[Buzz In California]

That flock of birds took out "BOTH" engines at the same time. A quadcopter could at most take out a single engine.

Well reading this makes me feel a lot better about flying my drone directly into an engine.

 

[SteelFlyer]

I know everyone will groan but technically the FAA maintains that the drone operator has to maintain VLOS. You can use a spotter to assist in the event you are in challenging circumstances or have to look down and don't want to lose sight, but the pilot itself still needs to be able to visually see the bird.

 

[skyeboysteve]

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.
--------------------------------------------------

I would think this means that under 107; a visual observer suffices for VLOS.

In any case, I've just returned my DJI Goggles. Very disappointed with them.

 

[Buzz In California]

I know everyone will groan but technically the FAA maintains that the drone operator has to maintain VLOS. You can use a spotter to assist in the event you are in challenging circumstances or have to look down and don't want to lose sight, but the pilot itself still needs to be able to visually see the bird.

Here's my groan.....

 

[TMB Aerial]

I know everyone will groan but technically the FAA maintains that the drone operator has to maintain VLOS. You can use a spotter to assist in the event you are in challenging circumstances or have to look down and don't want to lose sight, but the pilot itself still needs to be able to visually see the bird.

I'm not groaning because I am a STRONG advocate for following the rules. They are in place for everyones safety and not following the rules just screws everyone over BUT I don't agree with your interpretation on VLOS. I fly commercially and from that perspective the ONLY reason you fly is to capture video footage and in many instances say for example working on a film the pilot must pay close attention to the frame and composition, I believe the FAA understands this and is why they allow the pilot to control the aircraft via a monitor/goggles while a visual observer maintains VLOS. I've taken and passed part #107 and this is my interpretation on VLOS and is how I have flown many missions without incident.

 

[Buzz In California]

TMB, what you're saying is follow the rules and don't grone about it; I follow the rules, now that I am aware of them, but I feel that I can grone about not being allowed to wear goggles during flight

 

[TMB Aerial]

TMB, what you're saying is follow the rules and don't grone about it; I follow the rules, now that I am aware of them, but I feel that I can grone about not being allowed to wear goggles during flight

I didn't mean it to come across that way. You of course can groan about anything you wish to. I was just sharing my perspective and why I feel that way. Groan on brother, groan on. Also I was responding to SteelFlyer's post, not you directly

 

[SteelFlyer]

I'm not groaning because I am a STRONG advocate for following the rules. They are in place for everyones safety and not following the rules just screws everyone over BUT I don't agree with your interpretation on VLOS. I fly commercially and from that perspective the ONLY reason you fly is to capture video footage and in many instances say for example working on a film the pilot must pay close attention to the frame and composition, I believe the FAA understands this and is why they allow the pilot to control the aircraft via a monitor/goggles while a visual observer maintains VLOS. I've taken and passed part #107 and this is my interpretation on VLOS and is how I have flown many missions without incident.

I hear what you are saying and don't have the reference right at hand, but I recall one of the FAA documents backing up my contention here. I also saw an online webinar from FAA (if I can find the link, I'll post it) where they discuss a particular mission flying around a building to capture it from all sides. They discuss the "proper" way to perform the mission and they say that you would need least 2 if not 4 "operators" who could hand-off control of the drone as the drone leaves one operator's field of view and enters the next. In that, they suggest that just having observers in communication with the operator would not be sufficient but that the operator him/herself has to be able to see the aircraft at all time and that an observer can only help.

 

[geigy]

Oh yeah and here's this too, if you're the only one flying and you're wearing them somebody could come up and kick you in the groin and you wont see it coming haha.

Nah - just protect your groin while FPV'ing is all. A lot of things are that way.