Flying out of line of sight

[MavPro75]

I fly mine out of sight all the time, I just keep it high enough to clear obstacles. The whole line of sight reference is worded badly. I can see the moon, so I use that as line of sight.

Stupid is as stupid does!

 

[rickray]

I don't know about you, but a Mavic disappears against any dark background at about 50 yards, at least for my tired eyes. The Phantoms were much easier to spot. I'm not going to let that stop me. I often halt my flight and look around just to be sure I am not too close to anything if depth of perception is lost with a dark object against a dark background.

 

[JustinVV]

Guess you are not familiar with med helos, crop dusters, military and student training, etc

OK, lets petition DJI to make the ceiling 3 meters.. Really?

Wont get that 2 minutes of my life back..

 

[MavPro75]

OK, lets petition DJI to make the ceiling 3 meters.. Really?

Wont get that 2 minutes of my life back..

Sad. You don't even know who regulates drones

 

[JustinVV]

Sad. You don't even know who regulates drones

huh?? another 30 seconds gone. ****

 

[Mavic22704]

You use

I use the fat shark hd2 goggles. They have a large field of view. I read they have a larger view than the new hd3 goggles. I will be using the dji goggles as soon as they get here. I preordered on release day. Should be far better than the fat shark goggles. The fat sharks are not cheap at 500 dollars and to use them with mavic you would need a tablet with hdmi out such as the Nvidia Shield. My first goggles were the base fat sharks that did not have a receiver built in but they had a large field of view. I used them on the gaui 330x back in about 2010. The larger the screen the better in my opinion. Flying the mavic using a phone or ipad I stay up high because a crash is far more likely because of the smaller screen, light glare and the flat look. With goggles its like you are in a dark room with a large screen that looks 3d. I cant judge distance very well using ipads or phones but with goggles I have no problem.

 

[RC5728]

I think you're conflating laws and rules or "guidelines" as the FAA calls them. There are no drone laws in the US, only rules or "guidelines" from the FAA (which are being challenged in court from a few different groups). The FAA cannot make law, that simple.

Yes, people do dumb **** with drones or anything else they get their hands on. People drink and drive but you can't ban cars or alcohol. Most people's negative perception of drones are privacy related, not that it could fall out of the sky and hurt someone.

It's laughable that all the drone police around here regurgitate the FAA "guidelines" ad nauseam but aren't all concerned with a plane or helicopter falling out of the sky. Which do you think would do more damage, a falling helicopter or my 2 pound Mavic?

Drones pose very little danger to anyone or anything. Period. Where are all the horrible drone accidents and fatalities? Out of the millions of drones out there, where are all these horrible doomsday drone events?!

It's all blown far out of porpotion with the drone police making the most noise with their incessant whining about their "hobby". They constantly preach to everyone how they always follow those FAA "guidelines" ( which is complete BS and these hippocrates know it ) and how everyone else are idiots ruining their "hobby".

I'm sure Congess has much better things to worry about than drone regulations.

What he said.

 

[Chris.K]

Stupid is as stupid does!

Really obnoxious and adds nothing to the conversation.

 

[nwyeti]

Guess you are not familiar with med helos, crop dusters, military and student training, etc

We have major powerlines that run through our back pastures/ fields and the power company's helicopters frequently check the lines and they fly at around 300 to 350 feet AGL.

 

[MavPro75]

Really obnoxious and adds nothing to the conversation.

So brilliant!

 

[geigy]

The FAA is a regulatory and not a law enforcement body. It is designed to help pilots and crew to work within a safe framework. I think it behooves us to accept that guidance, rather than shirk it off as something we can ignore because it's just advisory and not "law". Ignoring the rules is dangerous, and in the case of a drone, it is mainly dangerous to others, not yourself. If a manned aircraft has a problem, and your drone was nearby, you will be the one to survive and tell the tale, and take the punishment for whatever happened, which in a way is even more reason to be careful.

 

[RC5728]

The FAA is a regulatory and not a law enforcement body. It is designed to help pilots and crew to work within a safe framework. I think it behooves us to accept that guidance, rather than shirk it off as something we can ignore because it's just advisory and not "law". Ignoring the rules is dangerous, and in the case of a drone, it is mainly dangerous to others, not yourself. If a manned aircraft has a problem, and your drone was nearby, you will be the one to survive and tell the tale, and take the punishment for whatever happened, which in a way is even more reason to be careful.

Yawn.

Give me a break.

Drones are not dangerous to others.

 

[geigy]

Enrique Iglesias's fingers SLICED by drone during Mexico concert | Daily Mail Online
Pitcher Exits Playoff Game with Bloody Finger, Shows the Danger of Drones
Here's what can happen when a drone propeller hits a slab of meat

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

Rogue Drone Cuts Ladies Arm - RC Groups

 

[RC5728]

More people have been hurt by selfies.

Just stop.

 

[dirkclod]

Guys 114 post and this isn't going nowhere .
Please be civil and Think.....


Thank You

 

[Lelantos]

Drones are not dangerous to others.

True, right up until they hit someone.

 

[Soundtekk]

Right here: http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/1226.pdf

Good luck seeing a Mavic 1000 feet up. Kinda pointless I think.

 

[Cookedinlh]

My first flight was LOS. Every subsequent flight was outside line of sight. Do what your comfortable doing while maintaining a sensible attitude to where you fly it considering the safety of other people.

The LOS wording is about limiting liability. Why would they build an RC with a huge range and then say maintain line of sight ? Maybe I'm just old but I can't see the thing from a km away even when there isn't a single obstacle in my path.

I fly it over the bush, around lakes and rivers, down cliff faces and around the sea. Pretty much everywhere I fly it I can only see it for the first couple of hundred meters. If I lose it, I lose it. That's life, I'm ok with taking that risk. If you're afraid of not being able to recover it, I can totally understand that as well. It's not a cheap toy.

Totally agree Chris . . I never intentionally go beyond VLOS especially behind structures , but have no problem with distance or wind, over water or near airports . . I can follow it out to about 1400feet usually depending on sky conditions. I use STROBON, but once you look away beyond that distance it's hard to reacquire.

I just plan and fly within the rules and take whatever precautions I can. . . if it's gone . . it's gone. At least I'm not in it at the crash site!

 

[Grey Wolf]

Totally agree Chris . . I never intentionally go beyond VLOS especially behind structures , but have no problem with distance or wind, over water or near airports . . I can follow it out to about 1400feet usually depending on sky conditions. I use STROBON, but once you look away beyond that distance it's hard to reacquire.

I just plan and fly within the rules and take whatever precautions I can. . . if it's gone . . it's gone. At least I'm not in it at the crash site!

You have no problem flying near airports? Really?
Please explain yourself!

 

[rydfree]

My first flight was LOS. Every subsequent flight was outside line of sight. Do what your comfortable doing while maintaining a sensible attitude to where you fly it considering the safety of other people.

The LOS wording is about limiting liability. Why would they build an RC with a huge range and then say maintain line of sight ? Maybe I'm just old but I can't see the thing from a km away even when there isn't a single obstacle in my path.

I fly it over the bush, around lakes and rivers, down cliff faces and around the sea. Pretty much everywhere I fly it I can only see it for the first couple of hundred meters. If I lose it, I lose it. That's life, I'm ok with taking that risk. If you're afraid of not being able to recover it, I can totally understand that as well. It's not a cheap toy.

First off , I agree with you . Fly safely and be responsible and BVLOS should be fine . I must also say , just in case a prosecuting attorney ever tries to find something I've said online to use against me , that I NEVER fly BVLOS .

It's the idiots that fly near crowds of people , cars , buildings etc and have no clue how to react or fly the thing out of trouble if there is an issue .

With that being said , your statement about the Mavics range ,"Why would they build an RC with a huge range and then say maintain line of sight ?" , is the silliest argument that BLOS flyers can ever utter . My car can go 160mph but they don't expect you to drive that fast outside of a track do they ? The T.V. advertisements would lead you to believe otherwise though if you didn't read the fine print ,lol . It is nice to have the extra power when you need it though just as it's nice Dji built more range in than you really need for VLOS around trees and interference in some areas .

Some would say that God even gave me this built in desire to have sex with every beautiful girl I crossed paths with yet said I can only pick one for the rest of my life . The struggle continues.