Goggles Vs Line of Sight

[Rogerlin]

Hi,

I am really keen to buy a set of RE Goggles but, how does using these sit with the rule that you must always keep your aircraft in sight, obviously wearing goggles means you cant see your craft.

 

[msinger]

how does using these sit with the rule that you must always keep your aircraft in sight

I don't know the rules in your country, but it's not legal in the US for hobbyists. It looks like the FAA will soon be making some changes to allow an observer to assist though.

 

[Gooseman]

the thing with goggles is you can't see the AC in relation to its surrounding, and therefore cannot see what's going on all around you (like when the Apache Helicopter comes up behind you at 200knots!). Over here in the UK we have the Observer rule. Someone HAS to be in VLOS and has to be in a position to advise you that there is an incursion/danger etc. Ergo, while goggles might seem like a good idea, you can't do anything more with them than you could without them, even if you have them and an Observer at your side (except with multiple observers in radio contact with you).

 

[Jackcutrone]

At least in the US it’s legal to fly with goggles
Only if you have another person who acts as spotter, who keeps the aircraft in sight without the use any vision aid other than glasses and that person must be physically close enough that the operator and spotter can maintain communications. Even if you aren’t in the US these are good operating procedures.

 

[msinger]

At least in the US it’s legal to fly with goggles
Only if you have another person who acts as spotter

For hobbyists, the current law states the drone operator must maintain VLOS. See more details here.

 

[Steve Murray]

the thing with goggles is you can't see the AC in relation to its surrounding, and therefore cannot see what's going on all around you (like when the Apache Helicopter comes up behind you at 200knots!). Over here in the UK we have the Observer rule. Someone HAS to be in VLOS and has to be in a position to advise you that there is an incursion/danger etc. Ergo, while goggles might seem like a good idea, you can't do anything more with them than you could without them, even if you have them and an Observer at your side (except with multiple observers in radio contact with you).

But goggles are so much more immersive. You feel you are actually up in the air with the "drone". Try once, and you'll be hooked! (with an observer, of course!)

 

[Jackcutrone]

For hobbyists, the current law states the drone operator must maintain VLOS. See more details here.

That is incorrect. What I said before is accurate in the US, line of sight of the operator or someone in direct contact with the opeorator: Here is the relevant section of the FFA reauthoratization act for recreational flights:

SEC. 349. EXCEPTION FOR LIMITED RECREATIONAL OPERATIONS OF UNMANNED

AIRCRAFT.

(a) In General.--Chapter 448 of title 49, United States Code, as

added by this Act, is further amended by adding at the end the

following:

``Sec. 44809. Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned

aircraft

``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (e), and

notwithstanding chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code, a person

may operate a small unmanned aircraft without specific certification or

operating authority from the Federal Aviation Administration if the

operation adheres to all of the following limitations:

``(1) The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes.

``(2) The aircraft is operated in accordance with or within the

programming of a community-based organization's set of safety

guidelines that are developed in coordination with the Federal

Aviation Administration.

``(3) The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of

the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co-located

and in direct communication with the operator.

 

[CaveDrone]

At least in the US it’s legal to fly with goggles
Only if you have another person who acts as spotter, who keeps the aircraft in sight without the use any vision aid other than glasses and that person must be physically close enough that the operator and spotter can maintain communications. Even if you aren’t in the US these are good operating procedures.

Only if you have an observer and a member of AMA...an community organization

 

[Jackcutrone]

Only if you have an observer and a member of AMA...an community organization

Member of AMA? That is not in the statute

 

[CaveDrone]

Member of AMA? That is not in the statute

Recreational Fliers & Modeler Community-Based Organizations. Very fuzzy on FAA side of things, but AMA rules for FPV are in their rules.

 

[msinger]

That is incorrect. What I said before is accurate in the US, line of sight of the operator or someone in direct contact with the opeorator

Right -- new rules are coming per post #2 above. The FAA makes the rules now, so you'll need to follow them. See more details here.

 

[CaveDrone]

This is where the confusion comes in, (from your link)
" Follow community-based safety guidelines and fly within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization" there's is FPV rules in there and FAA says no sorta. IMO. Crazy. I guess we all have to see how it all shakes out.

 

[msinger]

Keep in mind that the FAA's rules should always be followed over community-based safety guidelines. For example, hobbyists will soon not be allowed to fly over 400 feet AGL. If your community-based organization of choice states you can fly up to 5,000 feet AGL, you won't be allowed to do it legally.

 

[Jackcutrone]

Keep in mind that the FAA's rules should always be followed over community-based safety guidelines. .

+1

I won't get into the rules for statutory construction but suffice it to say that subsection 3 will indeed override an AMA rule to the extent they are different.

 

[Gooseman]

But goggles are so much more immersive. You feel you are actually up in the air with the "drone". Try once, and you'll be hooked! (with an observer, of course!)

I don't doubt this one iota! But I prefer to keep such addictions at arms length!

 

[SpyderSkeets]

Right -- new rules are coming per post #2 above. The FAA makes the rules now, so you'll need to follow them. See more details here.

Im not sure if you are in disagreement as to whether or not the pilot can fly beyond visual LOS, with a visual observer, but your link only has the basics. If you read the actual bill FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 , it specifically states

‘‘§44809. Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subsection (e), and notwithstanding chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code, a person may operate a small unmanned aircraft without specific certification or operating authority from the Federal Aviation Administration if the operation adheres to all of the following limitations: ‘‘(1) The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes. ‘‘(2) The aircraft is operated in accordance with or within the programming of a community-based organization’s set of safety guidelines that are developed in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration. ‘‘(3) The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co- located and in direct communication with the operator. ‘‘(4) The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft. ‘‘(5) In Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace or within the lateral boundaries of the surface area of Class E airspace designated for an airport, the operator obtains prior authorization from the Administrator or designee before operating and complies with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions. ‘‘(6) In Class G airspace, the aircraft is flown from the surface to not more than 400 feet above ground level and complies with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions. ‘‘(7) The operator has passed an aeronautical knowledge and safety test described in subsection (g) and maintains proof of test passage to be made available to the Administrator or law enforcement upon request. ‘‘(8) The aircraft is registered and marked in accordance with chapter 441 of this title and proof of registration is made available to the Administrator or a desi

 

[msinger]

Im not sure if you are in disagreement as to whether or not the pilot can fly beyond visual LOS, with a visual observer, but your link only has the basics

See this link. The key part:

"The Reauthorization Act cannot be fully implemented immediately, please continue to follow all current policies and guidance with respect to recreational use of drones "

 

[DanMan32]

Follow previous rules for items requiring policy changes to implement. But for those rules that don't require policy change, new rules apply.
It used to be that FAA had little control over hobbyists. Now they have law.
So flying under 400ft used to be a guideline, now it is law. It doesn't require policy change like the required test does.

 

[msinger]

Follow previous rules for items requiring policy changes to implement. But for those rules that don't require policy change, new rules apply.

Right -- this seems to be what the FAA is asking people to do.

 

[SpyderSkeets]

See this link. The key part:

"The Reauthorization Act cannot be fully implemented immediately, please continue to follow all current policies and guidance with respect to recreational use of drones "

Current policy is to follow a community based organization's (i.e AMA). Their current policy states:

"Effective January 1, 2018[...]
A model aircraft is a non-human-carrying device capable of sustained flight within visual line of
sight of the pilot or spotter(s)."

AMA's FPV [ex. goggles] policy states

"d) All FPV flights require an AMA FPV pilot to have an AMA FPV spotter next
to him or her maintaining VLOS with the FPV sUAS throughout its flight"

So, either now, with current rules, or when the Reauthorization Act of 2018
is implemented, you can (will be able to) fly FPV, as long as you have a spotter. Barring any unforeseen changes.