Is It Illegal?

[Dizzy1971]

I've mentioned this before elsewhere that in Canada at least it's illegal to modify a commercial drone with anything . . even add a 3 gram strobe light or FLOATs or whatever . . because Canadian Air Regs (UAV rule) CARs 901.70

Operation of a Modified Remotely Piloted Aircraft System​

901.70 If a declaration has been made under section 901.76 in respect of a model of remotely piloted aircraft system for any operation referred to in subsection 901.69(1), no pilot shall conduct any of those operations using a system of that model if the system has been modified in any way, unless

• (a) the pilot is able to demonstrate to the Minister that, despite the modification, the system continues to meet the technical requirements set out in Standard 922 — RPAS Safety Assurance applicable to the operations referred to in subsection 901.69(1) for which the declaration was made; and
• (b) if applicable, the modification was performed according to the instructions of the manufacturer of the part or equipment used to modify the system.

That means the manufacturer must declare the UAV meets Canadian Safety Standards and if anyone else modify's it then they, (the whoever made did or made the MOD) must seek the manufacturer's concurrence that whatever they added or changed on the system still meets the manufacturer's declaration of safety. . or read the summary Here.

Interesting. ?? I always fly my mp with a radio tracker. I never thought that would be considered a “modification“ more like a payload. I wonder if this section also means that my leg extensions are illegal too. ??

 

[Cookedinlh]

Interesting. ?? I always fly my mp with a radio tracker. I never thought that would be considered a “modification“ more like a payload. I wonder if this section also means that my leg extensions are illegal too. ??

Also note: 901.70 Applies to ADVANCED OPS . . so I suppose you could argue that if you are flying under GENERAL DIV III and DIV IV BASIC rules 901.53 - .49 that this 901.70 restriction does not apply. . so its . . . complicated

 

[Rich QR]

Good point on speed. I am newer but why would you need altitude modifications?? Does the drone not climb to the legal limits out of the box?

DJI measures altitude relative to takeoff point, and all limits in the software use that same altitude relative to the takeoff point.

The rules never use the takeoff point altitude as a reference. They mostly use altitude AGL, that is Above Ground Level, which is the height above the ground you are currently flying over. If you are flying over ground that is higher or lower than your takeoff point, the DJI-enforced limits don't match the legal limits, if for no other reason than they're not measuring altitude the same way.

There is also a rule in Part 107 that allows a Part 107 certificate holder to go up to 400 feet above the highest point on a structure within a 400 ft radius. If you take off from the base of a 2000' tower, you can legally ascend up to 2400 feet, assuming you have a license and any required airspace clearance. DJI has no way of knowing the height of structures within 400' or your drone.

 

[Emanáku]

Just for everybody wondering why you would like to remove the altitude limit of 500 meter (1640 feet):
I live in the Peruvian Andes in a narrow valley. One side is about 300 meter high (984 feet), the other side 480 meters (1574 feet). I really would like to fly up the higher side!
An altitude limit of 1000 meters (3280 feet) is still very restrictive in this kind of environment
There is a video on youtube about using a drone on K2 to support mountaineers - they fly at least about 1500 meters (4920 feet) high from the basecamp with a modified DJI drone....

 

[DC-RC]

No Limit Drones Mod? They perform an actual hardware modification allowing you to change almost any modifiable firmware value. The hardware mod even lets you to continue updating firmware on the Mav 2 Pro and Zoom, while still allowing you to change any firmware values you like. The speed would change, but just to the limit of the drone's capabilities. Check there website for more info if that's what your interested in.

No limit dronez is not Worth it, you can do speed hacks for free......mine comes down at 21 mph and can fly over 50mph (depending on wind)without using NLD, only using DJIs program as matter of fact.... NLD offers almost nothing someone with knowledge can't do on their own. That board your talking about is a waste of money.

 

[Lasidora]

DJI measures altitude relative to takeoff point, and all limits in the software use that same altitude relative to the takeoff point.

The rules never use the takeoff point altitude as a reference. They mostly use altitude AGL, that is Above Ground Level, which is the height above the ground you are currently flying over. If you are flying over ground that is higher or lower than your takeoff point, the DJI-enforced limits don't match the legal limits, if for no other reason than they're not measuring altitude the same way.

There is also a rule in Part 107 that allows a Part 107 certificate holder to go up to 400 feet above the highest point on a structure within a 400 ft radius. If you take off from the base of a 2000' tower, you can legally ascend up to 2400 feet, assuming you have a license and any required airspace clearance. DJI has no way of knowing the height of structures within 400' or your drone.

This is very true, my Mavic 2 Pro took off from the home point & climbed up a very steep rise so that it was above 500ft ( from take off reference point ) when it was actually only 250ft above ground level at top of hill, on Return to Home the drone stopped dead in its tracks & would not go any further due to it being on the end point of a altitude Geo zone max of 500ft, according to the drone I was over 750ft AGL ( from take off point ) so it was almost lost due to this.

 

[BillyDrone]

Mavic Pro

 

[SkiProiii]

In Canada, we are legally limited to 400 ft AGL and then 100 ft above structures within 200ft. I’ve not tried to test these limits but can see the practical application too.

I am not aware of any Canadian regulations (CARs) that specifically prohibit modification to a drone that is used for Basic Operations. I am certainly open to hearing from anybody on the matter also if there are.

A practical example is night flights that regulations require the drone to have a strobe on it. A common modification and the CARs do not specifically state the strobe must be original equipment on the drone, for Basic Operations, but do specify the light intensity/visibility range required.

I agree this is not the case for Advanced Operations as @Cookedinlh noted. It is undoubtedly more complicated than most countries. Advanced Operations are essentially in restricted airspace and closer than 100 ft to people not involved in the flight (concerts and events), and requires a manufacturer’s certified drone.

For non-Canadians, we have different pilot licensing in Canada, based on the complexity of the flight - Basic Operations and Advanced Operations.

Basic Operations require all drone pilots operating over 249g drones to have a Basic Pilot’s license (pass a written test) whereas Advanced Operations flights requires an Advanced Pilots licence (pass written and flight test) AND requires the drone to have the manufacturer certify the drone for the intended use (say certified for cold, night flights and flights over people). Certain drones meet these criteria “out if the box” so modifications need to be manufacturer approved/certified, such as night or thermal vision cameras, extra batteries, etc.

 

[smashse]

Only for Part 107 pilots. No such limitation for recreational pilots.

That is completely incorrect. Rec pilots have the same limitations, just like 400' AGL, VLOS, requiring a VO to use FPV, etc. Just because it isn't commercial doesn't mean you get carte blanche ability to do whatever you want and fly into LAX airspace at 1500' and 150 MPH. Part 107 allows pilots to operate commercially, AND to apply for waivers to get operate differently than the published rules by showing that it can be done safely.

Other notes, I was also questioning in another thread if you have a 1700' tower, and needed to inspect the top, you could legally in the US climb to 2100'. Mavics are limited to 1640'. The best solution I figured... don't use a mavic Not all drones have the same limits, and you as the RPIC are 100% responsible for flying legally, regardless of what the drone is capable of.

 

[neggy]

If you don't push outside legal altitudes then doing the mod is perfectly legal.

Obviously it's only illegal when you use that mod to push past legal flight regulations in your country, or other countries you wish to fly in.
Of course some peoples comfort zones on regs are flexible, and to many risk assessment plays a part in going outside blanket rules, still illegal of course and it comes down to having an incident free flight and / or not getting caught.

Speed has nothing to do with any drone rules as far as I'm aware, not sure what other parameters might be adaptable. Changing things like speed in descent might make flight unstable.

the max legal speed is 100 mph or 87 kts, and that is in the FAR's

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

the max legal speed is 100 mph or 87 kts, and that is in the FAR's

..
I didn't even consider that as we are talking M1P . . . are they capable of flying that fast even if that parameter is unlocked ?

I'd have thought not, as they only do approx 40mph in sports mode, and that's with a 45 degree pitch.

 

[DC-RC]

..
I didn't even consider that as we are talking M1P . . . are they capable of flying that fast even if that parameter is unlocked ?

I'd have thought not, as they only do approx 40mph in sports mode, and that's with a 45 degree pitch.

If you attach model rocket engines maybe. I have toyed with the idea with my m2p (please don't remind me that it may be not exactly " legal"). I'm just saying it may be possible...

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

If you attach model rocket engines maybe. I have toyed with the idea with my m2p (please don't remind me that it may be not exactly " legal"). I'm just saying it may be possible...

It's possibly ok if you don't go over 100mph

So basically it's not really possible to simply tweak speed parameters and go that fast with a regular DJI consumer drone.

 

[smashse]

It's possibly ok if you don't go over 100mph

So basically it's not really possible to simply tweak speed parameters and go that fast with a regular DJI consumer drone.

I doubt a consumer drone could do that, the speed limits I believe are more for fixed wing drones.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

I doubt a consumer drone could do that, the speed limits I believe are more for fixed wing drones.

. . . and for sure many slightly above average consumer FPV drones, through to racing FPV drones . . .

 

[okw]

That is completely incorrect. Rec pilots have the same limitations, just like 400' AGL, VLOS, requiring a VO to use FPV, etc. Just because it isn't commercial doesn't mean you get carte blanche ability to do whatever you want and fly into LAX airspace at 1500' and 150 MPH.

I've searched through 49 USC 44809 and I can't find any mention of a speed limit for recreational pilots. It does, however, mention 400' AGL, VLOS, etc. So yes, those apply to recreational pilots. Could you please link to the recreational speed limit so I can read it?

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title49-section44809&num=0&edition=prelim

 

[DoomMeister]

I've searched through 49 USC 44809 and I can't find any mention of a speed limit for recreational pilots. It does, however, mention 400' AGL, VLOS, etc. So yes, those apply to recreational pilots. Could you please link to the recreational speed limit so I can read it?

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title49-section44809&num=0&edition=prelim

Recreational pilots still have to follow rules set forth in 14 CFR Part 107. The speed limit for sUAS is found in 14 CFR 107.51a.


§ 107.51 Operating limitations for small unmanned aircraft.
A remote pilot in commandand the person manipulating the flight controls of the small unmanned aircraft system must comply with all of the following operating limitations when operating a small unmanned aircraft system:

(a) The groundspeed of the small unmanned aircraft may not exceed 87 knots (100 miles per hour).

 

[Rich QR]

Recreational pilots still have to follow rules set forth in 14 CFR Part 107.

That's an interesting assertion. It certainly seems reasonable, but I can't convince myself it's true based on the text of Part 107 or section 44809.

In fact, 107.1 (b) says that Part 107 does not apply to the following:
...
(2) Any aircraft subject to the provisions of 49 U.S.C 44809

That would seem to argue that if you're flying under 44809, you're not generally subject to the limitations in Part 107.

I might be wrong on that, but if so, 44809 flyers would be prohibited from flying at night (107.29) unless they followed the procedures available for Part 107 pilots to gain night currency. 44809 flyers would also be prohibited from flying without at least 3 statute miles visibility (107.51(c)). I know I've seen claims that recreational flyers aren't subject to these limitations. I'm not certain those claims were true, though.

 

[Cookedinlh]

That is completely incorrect. Rec pilots have the same limitations, just like 400' AGL, VLOS, requiring a VO to use FPV, etc. Just because it isn't commercial doesn't mean you get carte blanche ability to do whatever you want and fly into LAX airspace at 1500' and 150 MPH. Part 107 allows pilots to operate commercially, AND to apply for waivers to get operate differently than the published rules by showing that it can be done safely.

Other notes, I was also questioning in another thread if you have a 1700' tower, and needed to inspect the top, you could legally in the US climb to 2100'. Mavics are limited to 1640'. The best solution I figured... don't use a mavic Not all drones have the same limits, and you as the RPIC are 100% responsible for flying legally, regardless of what the drone is capable of.

Why are mavic limited to 1640 . . what's that about?

 

[Rich QR]

Why are mavic limited to 1640 . . what's that about?

1640 ft (500m) above the takeoff point is only a DJI software limit.

I'm not sure exactly why DJI chose that value. It is not a legal limit. Legal limits in most countries are expressed in height above the underlying ground, not height above takeoff point.

Perhaps DJI thought 500m was high enough to allow you to ascend most hills that could practically be climbed, but low enough to prevent the most reckless altitude violations that some idiots might try. I don't know.

Any fixed limit on the height above takeoff has the effect of making some legal flights impossible, and/or making some illegal flights possible. So the limit will always seem stupid to some. But height above takeoff is the only thing readily measurable by the drone.