@WEOTN. I love how you send me a message, tell me that I should resort to PM, but then make it so I cannot reply to you. I'm not sure what the purpose of the message was, other than to be a troll, but I'm sure other people would love to see it. Here's the message he sent me, so that everyone can see it:
"So if you're flying in a mountainous area, and take off below the summit and want to ascend above the summit, still within 400 AGL, just how else you going to do that without some hypobaric chamber shenanigans? Don't judge or make foolish assumptions, you just come off as a troll, and there's way too much of that here.
If you gotta pontificate, use private messaging, like this one. I come to the forum for information, factual, not asinine opinions, judgements, and egotistical drivel. Your post may fit into one of the above, you think about it a while."
You tried using some asinine, situation to support your "logic," also called anecdotal evidence, but you seem forget that most people are not taking off on a mountain. Furthermore, despite having internet access, you failed to look up rules regarding flight. Pilots will be flying 1000 feet AGL or greater. The cap on the DJI is 500 meters, so if you are flying your drone to the peak of the mountain from whatever point is below 500 meters, perhaps you should plan better. You will likely be in violation of VLOS if you are claiming you want to exceed the 500m limit in order to fly to the summit, and you also do not know if you are within 400 feet AGL the entire time. Unlike a 107 pilot, a 336 flyer cannot simply claim to be within 400 feet of the mountain, and you must give right-of-way to all aircrafts flying there. Even if you are within 400 feet of the point that allows you to be at 400 feet AGL, you could be at a point that is 1,000 feet AGL for a pilot and you are now interfering with pilots. You will not have proper control of the craft if it is not in VLOS (where you can control it), which STILL makes you a danger to pilots, as was my original point.
I'm not being pretentious, considering that I know people that have had to dodge drones flying at 2,000 feet+ AGL. So, do not attempt to act all high-and-mighty because you want to argue the semantics of a single situation as though it somehow justifies altering the restrictions. That would be fallacious.
PS: if you want to elevate your intellectual status by acting like a sesquipedalian commenter, can you at least not misspell "judgment?"
"So if you're flying in a mountainous area, and take off below the summit and want to ascend above the summit, still within 400 AGL, just how else you going to do that without some hypobaric chamber shenanigans? Don't judge or make foolish assumptions, you just come off as a troll, and there's way too much of that here.
If you gotta pontificate, use private messaging, like this one. I come to the forum for information, factual, not asinine opinions, judgements, and egotistical drivel. Your post may fit into one of the above, you think about it a while."
You tried using some asinine, situation to support your "logic," also called anecdotal evidence, but you seem forget that most people are not taking off on a mountain. Furthermore, despite having internet access, you failed to look up rules regarding flight. Pilots will be flying 1000 feet AGL or greater. The cap on the DJI is 500 meters, so if you are flying your drone to the peak of the mountain from whatever point is below 500 meters, perhaps you should plan better. You will likely be in violation of VLOS if you are claiming you want to exceed the 500m limit in order to fly to the summit, and you also do not know if you are within 400 feet AGL the entire time. Unlike a 107 pilot, a 336 flyer cannot simply claim to be within 400 feet of the mountain, and you must give right-of-way to all aircrafts flying there. Even if you are within 400 feet of the point that allows you to be at 400 feet AGL, you could be at a point that is 1,000 feet AGL for a pilot and you are now interfering with pilots. You will not have proper control of the craft if it is not in VLOS (where you can control it), which STILL makes you a danger to pilots, as was my original point.
I'm not being pretentious, considering that I know people that have had to dodge drones flying at 2,000 feet+ AGL. So, do not attempt to act all high-and-mighty because you want to argue the semantics of a single situation as though it somehow justifies altering the restrictions. That would be fallacious.
PS: if you want to elevate your intellectual status by acting like a sesquipedalian commenter, can you at least not misspell "judgment?"
