Flying Over 400ft

[RemoteFlyte]

Sorry for Ken ! Sure he can fly 400 feet over or 400 in the radius of the tower. Ken also was not keeping visual line of sight VLOS . And then other hand , yes it also applies to recreational pilots who flying in uncontrolled NAS . 107 Comercial Pilots who fly in Controlled Airspace must ask for LAANC ( Low Altitud Autorization Notification Capabilities) . Flying in Controlled Airspace does not permit flying above 400' AGL . Plan your flights and ask for LAANC Autorization .

Ken had a Visual Observer, so he was following FAA guidelines.

 

[jencarta]

I didn’t watch the video but wanted to point out the Part 107.31 rule which states that the pilot “must be able to see the aircraft throughout the entire flight” even if there is a visual observer. At least one of them must be exercising this ability at all times.

 

[Torque]

I didn’t watch the video but wanted to point out the Part 107.31 rule which states that the pilot “must be able to see the aircraft throughout the entire flight” even if there is a visual observer. At least one of them must be exercising this ability at all times.
View attachment 165340

Paragraph B clarifies that it is EITHER the PIC or the VO.
This would make all FPV flights illegal. I legally fly FPV because I use a visual observer.

 

[jencarta]

Paragraph B clarifies that it is EITHER the PIC or the VO.
This would make all FPV flights illegal. I legally fly FPV because I use a visual observer.

Yes, paragraph B specifies that either the PIC or VO must have the aircraft in sight at all times. But paragraph A says the PIC and VO must be able to see the aircraft at all times - this means that the aircraft must be kept in line of sight of both the PIC and VO even if they aren’t both looking at it. In other words, if the pilot of the aircraft needs to look up at the aircraft, they will be able to see it. But the PIC doesn’t need to actively be looking at it if they have a VO near them looking at it at during flight.

So, not all FPV flights are illegal. An example of what I interpret to be illegal: the FPV pilot takes off their goggles and cannot see the aircraft because it has gone down in a canyon (blocked from pilot’s view by canyon wall) - even if their VO is nearby and at the edge of the canyon with eyes on the aircraft.

 

[Torque]

Yes, paragraph B specifies that either the PIC or VO must have the aircraft in sight at all times. But paragraph A says the PIC and VO must be able to see the aircraft at all times - this means that the aircraft must be kept in line of sight of both the PIC and VO even if they aren’t both looking at it. In other words, if the pilot of the aircraft needs to look up at the aircraft, they will be able to see it. But the PIC doesn’t need to actively be looking at it if they have a VO near them looking at it at during flight.

So, not all FPV flights are illegal. An example of what I interpret to be illegal: the FPV pilot takes off their goggles and cannot see the aircraft because it has gone down in a canyon (blocked from pilot’s view by canyon wall) - even if their VO is nearby and at the edge of the canyon with eyes on the aircraft.

You do realize that it is absolutely impossible to see the drone while wearing goggles, right? How often am I to remove my goggles, locate my drone's position, put goggles back on, and? How often do I repeat this to be legal?

 

[Torque]

DJI FPV drone laws: where and how can you actually fly DJI's new drone?

The FPV drone laws explained

www.techradar.com

"When flying any drone, it’s a legal requirement in most regions that you fly no higher than 120m/400ft or a distance of 500m/1640ft, and that the aircraft must remain within unaided visual line of sight (VLOS). This means that you must be able to see your drone in the sky at all times within these parameters, without the use of binoculars or any other visual device.

This presents an immediate problem for FPV drones and their goggles, because the drone pilot is viewing the live camera feed and therefore cannot maintain VLOS. The use of FPV drones and goggles is legal in both the United Kingdom and the United States, but to fly an FPV drone you’ll need an observer who can maintain visual line of sight with the aircraft and communicate this with the pilot.

 

[jencarta]

You do realize that it is absolutely impossible to see the drone while wearing goggles, right? How often am I to remove my goggles, locate my drone's position, put goggles back on, and? How often do I repeat this to be legal?

You do not have to do it at all to be legal. You just have to be able to do it if needed. Your VO should be helping you keep it within your line of sight in case for some reason you need to spot the aircraft yourself.

 

[Torque]

So, not all FPV flights are illegal. An example of what I interpret to be illegal: the FPV pilot takes off their goggles and cannot see the aircraft because it has gone down in a canyon (blocked from pilot’s view by canyon wall) - even if their VO is nearby and at the edge of the canyon with eyes on the aircraft.

As soon as the VO stepped away from the PIC's side, the flight you describe became illegal. FAA regulations state that the VO has to be at the PIC's side and cannot be positioned remotely, use walkie talkies, binoculars, etc.
It is the VO's responsibility to alert the PIC that he needs to pull up to prevent the drone from going BVLOS.

 

[jencarta]

DJI FPV drone laws: where and how can you actually fly DJI's new drone?

The FPV drone laws explained

www.techradar.com

"When flying any drone, it’s a legal requirement in most regions that you fly no higher than 120m/400ft or a distance of 500m/1640ft, and that the aircraft must remain within unaided visual line of sight (VLOS). This means that you must be able to see your drone in the sky at all times within these parameters, without the use of binoculars or any other visual device.

This presents an immediate problem for FPV drones and their goggles, because the drone pilot is viewing the live camera feed and therefore cannot maintain VLOS. The use of FPV drones and goggles is legal in both the United Kingdom and the United States, but to fly an FPV drone you’ll need an observer who can maintain visual line of sight with the aircraft and communicate this with the pilot.

As soon as the VO stepped away from the PIC's side, the flight you describe became illegal. FAA regulations state that the VO has to be at the PIC's side and cannot be positioned remotely, use walkie talkies, binoculars, etc.
It is the VO's responsibility to alert the PIC that he needs to pull up to prevent the drone from going BVLOS.

Not necessarily. As long as you can still communicate with your VO without radios or other aids, they do not need to be right by your side.

 

[Skydreamer]

what is considered “line of sight”?…a dot in the sky,is that considered line of sight too(thats how i fly8

 

[Torque]

You do not have to do it at all to be legal. You just have to be able to do it if needed. Your VO should be helping you keep it within your line of sight in case for some reason you need to spot the aircraft yourself.

Exactly! I do not have to remove my goggles. The VO is my eyes. If the drone is within VLOS of the Visual Observer, then it would also be visible to the PIC once they remove their goggles.
So back to my original post: It has to be VLOS to EITHER the PIC or the VO. "This observer must keep the drone within unaided visual line of sight (VLOS) at all times and must be standing next to the drone pilot."

So you cannot position the VO any distance away from you. He has to be in a position next to you where we would be able "Share" the same view unaided. Only one of us (the VO) has to maintain VLOS. Not both of us.

 

[Torque]

Not necessarily. As long as you can still communicate with your VO without radios or other aids, they do not need to be right by your side.

Can you show me the FAA regulation that states the VO does not have to be at your side please?

Off topic, but kinda funny - I'm eating toast with Honeyville Honey on it as I type this...lol. My nephew worked at Fuzziwigs Candy Factory for years.

 

[MS Coast]

"When flying any drone, it’s a legal requirement in most regions that you fly no higher than 120m/400ft or a distance of 500m/1640ft, and that the aircraft must remain within unaided visual line of sight (VLOS). This means that you must be able to see your drone in the sky at all times within these parameters, without the use of binoculars or any other visual device.

What is the source of the 500m maximum distance regulation?

 

[Torque]

What is the source of the 500m maximum distance regulation?

The link to the source is immediately above the quote.
Not sure which region (country) has the 500M distance rule.

 

[MS Coast]

The link to the source is immediately above the quote.
Not sure which region (country) has the 500M distance rule.

That's just an article on techradar.com. I don't fly FPVs but I'm not familiar with any FAA regulation mandating a maximum distance. The article does list the 500m distance under the rule summary for the UK, but not the summary for the US.

Maybe someone from the UK knows whether that's an official regulation.

 

[Torque]

That's just an article on techradar.com. I don't fly FPVs but I'm not familiar with any FAA regulation mandating a maximum distance. The article does list the 500m distance under the rule summary for the UK, but not the summary for the US.

Maybe someone from the UK knows whether that's an official regulation.

There isn't a distance limit in the US. As long as it is within VLOS, as we both know, is our FAA distance. The point techradar was making was the requirement of a visual spotter for FPV flights, which is the same here and in most regions. However some regions apparenlty have a distance limit when flying FPV? A distance limit for FPV flights seems reasonable IMO.

 

[RemoteFlyte]

"I didn’t watch the video but wanted to point out the Part 107.31 rule which states that the pilot “must be able to see the aircraft throughout the entire flight” even if there is a visual observer. At least one of them must be exercising this ability at all times."

Sorry, but you are wrong! Read the entire section as a whole. You don't have time to watch the video, but you have time to comment on it, even though you don't fully understand the law. Paragraph a is talking about not using a device, like binoculars. Paragraph b is clarifying that the PIC, the person using the controls, OR, the visual observer has to maintain sight of the aircraft at all times!!! IF you have your Part 107, you should know this. You could never fly FPV if the PIC or person using the controller had to always maintain sight. That is the main purpose of using a visual observer.

 

[mobilehomer]

To work for UPS, you must have the ABILITY to lift fifty pounds. But, you don't keep fifty pounds lifted for your whole shift. The FAA interpretation Advisory Circular 107-2A
5.9 VLOS Aircraft Operation. The remote PIC and person manipulating the controls mustbe able to see the small unmanned aircraft at all times during flight (§ 107.31). The smallunmanned aircraft must be operated closely enough to ensure visibility requirements aremet 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 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.

 

[Torque]

To work for UPS, you must have the ABILITY to lift fifty pounds. But, you don't keep fifty pounds lifted for your whole shift. The FAA interpretation Advisory Circular 107-2A
5.9 VLOS Aircraft Operation. The remote PIC and person manipulating the controls mustbe able to see the small unmanned aircraft at all times during flight (§ 107.31). The smallunmanned aircraft must be operated closely enough to ensure visibility requirements aremet 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 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.

Part 107.33 is the section dealing with FPV and Visual Observers.

 

[mavic3usa]

Exactly why I don't agree with law enforcement to enforce drone laws setup by the FAA. Anyone flying FPV can be cited because the regulations are easily misinterpreted. It doesn't matter what it really says or really means, all that matter is when it comes time to detain and cite you and then when it comes time to convict you. It's totally out of your hands when it comes to local law enforcement and you may stand a fighting chance if this is administrative action under FAA (federal) jurisdiction. Any officer for any reason can simply walk up to you, ask you to land your FPV and take off the goggles, then write you a citation for the dangerous operation of a UAV re: failure to maintain VLOS and walk away with your drone and there's nothing you can do about it [for now]....