Line of Sight Friend or Foe?

[Qoncussion]

It says visual line of sight. It doesn't say in sight. There is actually a difference. Notice how vague they make that law.

Actually, the difference is between VLOS and LOS. V=you *can* see it. LOS=there are zero obstacles between the RC and the AC ~at any distance.

 

[DavidGlennPDX]

First, it's the law. It's not going to change by debate here. If you don't want to do it... don't. There are hundreds (probably thousands of people that post on this forum that obviously don't follow this law.

You may not understand what the FAA means by VLOS. You can search this forum for this info as it's been discussed in detail many times. VLOS does not mean you are looking at the Mavic every second. You can take your eyes off of it to look at other things, such as the screen.


Great... but that has nothing to do with VLOS or what the FAA requires it. It's not just about where your drone is, it's about where your drone is in relationship to other things in the sky (mainly aircraft).

Senseless by who's standards? Your own? Someone might find it senseless to them that they can't drive in your neighborhood drunk all of the time. If you don't think flying within VLOS is something you need to do... then don't. You certainly won't be the only one. But don't doubt that flying within VLOS is not more safe or currently the law in the US.

Wow, a lot here.
I do understand what the term means, thank you. What I mentioned however was a differing thing. Seeing the airspace but not being able to see the craft itself due to horizon objects

Senseless by whose standards? mine, always mine. Each and every thing I do in life is by my standards. Same with everyone else.
Now, MY standards include learning and asking questions to determine the reality of a thing.
I do indeed doubt that in many situations VLOS is safer, but I am unsure, so I ask and debate, I kick the tires.
Now, gave an example flying over the river of how the screen to me seemed much better and yes safer than VLOS.
You gave me no reason to re-consider this by any logic or insight into the scenario that I mentioned or any like it, just laws.
I am rather unsure that the VLOS requirement is not met by observing and having an unobstructed view of the area your craft is in without being able to seperate the exact black dot from the background, has there been an actual ruling from a court on it? No idea, hense, questions.
Also, while I am not trying to change a law, you are incorrect that it cannot change due to debate here. People debate, they consider, contemplate and run tests and given enough people coming to a conclusions lobbying can be done to adjust laws and guidelines. That is not a goal or anything, but conserstations, debate, understanding and new learning can indeed in the end, change law.

 

[lrsn]

787steve herewith the issue. As drone operators we are given the eyeball by the local air regulator when not sticking the the law. But think about this for a second. If all the Heli pilots stuck to their height restrictions and all the drone pilots did the same.... We would have no issues would we

Height restrictions for helicopters are very misunderstood and often misquoted! I could fly at 25' AGL all day long legally in a helicopter subject to common sense and where I'd be flying. I personally would not fly very long at 25' as it would be hard to successfully autorotate from. In fact I've flown helicopters from North America to South America via Central America and crossed the United States at 300' AGL. It used to be to avoid the flow of low flying fixed wing aircraft until the introduction of hang gliders and then drones. 300' is a very comfortable height AGL from where you can autorotate from. When I fly small fixed wing aircraft I usually climb ASAP to optimum altitude and when I fly high performance jet aircraft I want as high as possible ASAP. I used to have a G4 that I'd request FL450 (45,000') which would keep me over most airliners. Please study the actual FAA Regulations before misquoting them. I've seen the regulations change continually since I started flying in the 1950s.

 

[787steve]

Well Steve, I am not sure I can agree. What your talking about is the area being outside the line of site, not so much the craft.
Today I took my 3dr over the columbia river out towards an interesting island. As it got out over the water my choices to keep the craft in line of site, meaning I can make out the dot against the background would be to keep flying higher as I got farther out or to use the screen.
Now, there is a clear line of site from me to this little island. It is not like a helicopter or small plane could sneak up on the scene without me first hearing it.
So, should I bring the drone home? Try to squint and use line of sight to guide it knowing the perspective and my judgement of it with a tiny black dot which is I am stunningly lucky I can see or do I use the screen to get as close as I dare to the Island, circle about and get the shot and then RTH, on a side note I find I love using RTH to get it at least pointed in the right direction and then take over from there. Would be a great feature if there was an orient to home option

I'm not sure where the disagreement is. Sounds to me like you were within line of sight. I don't think we are required to fly by looking at the drone. No one does that. But to be in line of sight so you can clear the skies is definitely a good idea. I see way too many videos and posts of people boasting about flying miles away at low altitudes in their drones. Bad idea. Remember, not all aircraft at low altitude are low and slow. There are places all over the country where military fighters fly low level routes at very high speeds. Hitting a drone at high speed and low altitude could be catastrophic for the fighter pilot.

Fly safe,
Steve

 

[ac0j]

Laws..... Rules.... So many opinions on how to interpret them. (Following not directed at anyone)
In reality if you ask ten people you will get ten different opinions.
Or more commonly you will just pick and choose which laws and rules you want to follow.
It is not my or any others right to tell you what to do or how to do it. Many feel like they need to force their interpretations on you but pay them no mind. They know not what they do.
Your decisions on how or where to fly your toy will always be at your own peril. Your mistakes, your problems.
Just keep in mind that your poor interpretations can have a negative effect on other drone operators. And if you ever really screw up, and we find out about it, we have full cause to ridicule you for all the days of your life.

 

[Luca Brazzi]

Actually, the difference is between VLOS and LOS. V=you *can* see it. LOS=there are zero obstacles between the RC and the AC ~at any distance.

Correct. I might not have been as clear in my language ilas you were but you stated my observation. Thank you

 

[Callum]

I'm not sure where the disagreement is. Sounds to me like you were within line of sight. I don't think we are required to fly by looking at the drone. No one does that. But to be in line of sight so you can clear the skies is definitely a good idea. I see way too many videos and posts of people boasting about flying miles away at low altitudes in their drones. Bad idea. Remember, not all aircraft at low altitude are low and slow. There are places all over the country where military fighters fly low level routes at very high speeds. Hitting a drone at high speed and low altitude could be catastrophic for the fighter pilot.

Fly safe,
Steve

That's a good point, a few places I would like to have flown here in the UK could be a problem and I hadn't considered it.

While hill walking I've had the **** scared out me a few times by Typhoon and Tornado jets flying below me in valleys or a few hundred ft above. You sometimes don't hear them coming until they are right on top of you.

 

[hammick]

Interesting. I figured the Black Hawk collision was fake news until I Googled it and read all the news articles. I'm guessing this prompted DJIs recent firmware and software changes.

I bet the Blackhawk repairs weren't cheap.

 

[deutschmavic]

As in aviation, line of sight is to be aware of obstacles and traffic.

The drone is small. You can still be line of sight and not be able to see it, but you need to be able to see other aircraft or obstacles and adjust your flight accordingly.

Also, if something gets between you and the drone your radio link will degrade.

 

[mnoutdoors]

So if a strobe was mounted on the mavic, ( many strobes can be seen 10 miles out) does it make it meet VLOS
Requirements ?

 

[spwalker]

Fairly new to flying and trying to sort the laws from the reality.
....
Do most of you keep your eyes moron the screen, more on the craft or even fully one or the other and does that change?
....
I am not myself a fan of following laws or regulations that are senseless and even less apt to obey one that actually makes me less safe and risks my craft.

Many people have had their say in what VLOS means and I can't add to that. To address the other bit of your query, eyes on screen or craft, whenever possible, I take someone with me to keep an eye on the craft whilst I watch what's happening on the screen. A competent observer is an excellent idea IMHO.

Steve

 

[Wipster]

Fairly new to flying and trying to sort the laws from the reality.
Law seems to be line of sight but is this reasonable or even a good idea all the time?
Do most of you keep your eyes moron the screen, more on the craft or even fully one or the other and does that change?
I find my perception of where the craft is after it gets a bit away from me is vastly different than the camera.
The camera/screen seems far better in accuracy as I can be sure I am over an object eyeballing it and then check the camera to find out I am still quite a distance from it. I get concerned that maybe objects are closer in the screen than they appear but I find even when visually I am SURE I am well beyond a point, I can look at teh screen and see it is still in front of the drone.
With the craft easily lost to the eye with hills/trees ect in the horizon as is typically here in the pacific northwest it seems to me that while an unobstructed line to the controller is needed or at least preferable most of the time that it would be safest if I visually keep a general idea of where the craft is but keep my eyes on the screen to navigate.
I find however if the craft is close to me such as me following along a trail closer to ground level direct visual sight feels more accurate than the camera.

I am not myself a fan of following laws or regulations that are senseless and even less apt to obey one that actually makes me less safe and risks my craft.

Unfortunately it is the last thing I think about. The most important thing to me are flying conditions. Over water I use a gettrback and over land I use a Marco Polo. I make sure no manned vehicles are in the air and that rth altitude is set for my environment but other than that my concern is a nice scenic area.

 

[raymo]

FAA Rules on UAVs

• Visual line-of-sight (VLOS) only; the unmanned aircraft must remain within VLOS of the remote pilot in command and the
  person manipulating the flight controls of the small UAS. Alternatively, the unmanned aircraft must remain within VLOS of the visual observer.

• At all times the small unmanned aircraft must remain close enough to the remote pilot in command and the person manipulating the flight controls of the small UAS for those people to be capable of seeing the aircraft with vision unaided by any device other than corrective lenses. https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Part_107_Summary.pdf
  

This is how the FAA defines VLOS and this is what would be tested in a court of law, not your opinion on whether you can see the airspace that your drone MIGHT occupy or whether anarchistic ideas will be defendable.

The FAA rules are pretty clear. You must be capable of "seeing the aircraft". Period. No binoculars, no theodolite, etc. (My Celestron CPC 1100 telescope would be good for about 10 miles, but that doesn't count.) Canadian (Transport Canada) regs actually give a distance restriction of 500 meters. At that distance, I can still see my MP as a speck and can still control it by observing its actions given stick control. (I'm an old RCer, 1970s, who has had to recover flyaways with fixed-wing models at well over 1 mile - nothing but a speck, not even a fly-speck.)

Helicopters routinely defy the air regs for themselves regarding minimums. It may be part of the double standard used with UAVs. We are under very close scrutiny, no if, ands or buts. In a recent trip to Israel and the Dead Sea, helicopters were flying very low, and military F-16s were at or under the 50 meter restrictions on UAVs in that area. Incidentally (I have mentioned this in a previous post) we used to fly alongside helicopters in a helicopter training area that was SHARED by a MAAC sanctioned field. Same field. Never one incident - it can be done.

I would add that the new UAVs are so more capable of controlled independent flight that going beyond VLOS as far as is technically possible is very easy to do. Regulators have a lot of catching up to do. Incorporation of smart phones, tablets and such are an indication that drone manufacturers are very well aware of the advantage that video feed gives to the control and situational awareness of the operator. There is no question about that. Good reason that military drone operators are NOT controlled generally by full scale pilots, but are trained experts using video gaming controllers. Their situational awareness is measurably greater than full scale pilots who generally are "what's in front" pilots. The combination of visual awareness and non-visual awareness is what makes a good Predator pilot. Once we get into commercial drone deliveries, Part 107 will look pretty tame by comparison. What will the neighbours think when a pizza delivery shows up at some home in the community? Will they come after you thinking that you flew that drone because that's all they know? The rules are all going to change, and I think soon. Not sure if any of us are prepared. These applications are neither VLOS or even LOS by the way.

Much, much more to say but so little time. Sorry for a bit of a rant.

 

[DavidGlennPDX]

Laws..... Rules.... So many opinions on how to interpret them. (Following not directed at anyone)
In reality if you ask ten people you will get ten different opinions.
Or more commonly you will just pick and choose which laws and rules you want to follow.
It is not my or any others right to tell you what to do or how to do it. Many feel like they need to force their interpretations on you but pay them no mind. They know not what they do.
Your decisions on how or where to fly your toy will always be at your own peril. Your mistakes, your problems.
Just keep in mind that your poor interpretations can have a negative effect on other drone operators. And if you ever really screw up, and we find out about it, we have full cause to ridicule you for all the days of your life.

And that is exactly why I ask. What I was seeking, and I think it got answered here pretty well was what was the best way to fly as far as safety and accuracy of position regardless of other factors such as regulations. I feel like the answer seems to be keep the area in VLOS and use a combination of VLOS when you can pick out the craft and the screen to maneuver. I have learned when in doubt, trust teh screen, not your eyes. My depth perception visually is far less accurate than the screen.
I want to fly the safest for my craft, for the people in the area, ect.
Having a spotter is awesome when I can

 

[HighlandsVideo]

I feel I should point out that US Federal Aviation Administration Regulations are NOT laws and the sanctions for not adhering to them are vague at best and the "enforcement" of most of them, especially the VLOS is all but impossible without an accident or complaint to trigger a costly investigation..

"Line of sight" does not mean to me that I must be able to 'see' my aircraft at all times, although I doubt the FAA minds very much if you misinterpret their rule.

So long as I know the general location of my AC (which is best determined by the camera shot and not by the naked eye beyond a few hundred feet) and I am able to monitor the area for other traffic, I contend that I am in compliance. I think the rule is primarily intended to prevent loss of that invisible control signal which does depend on a direct and unobstructed 'view".

If I kept my drone always within my sight, flying it would be of no use whatever. This regulation will not stand the test of time for it constitutes an obstruction to the intended use of the UAV.

The collision with the heli was no doubt caused by ignoring a no-fly zone situation and not by any loss of sight of the drone. It could just as easily have happened as the pilot watched.

 

[hammick]

So if a strobe was mounted on the mavic, ( many strobes can be seen 10 miles out) does it make it meet VLOS
Requirements ?

I live in the Suburbs. There are no flight restrictions within a three mile radius of my home. I prefer to fly at night. Even without my Strobon cree light I can see the drone much farther out at night than I can during the day. I can also detect helicopters much quicker at night than I can during the day.

I only fly at night now with the Strobon cree. I never lose sight of the MP and on the rare occasion that a helicopter appears very good chance they will see it also.

 

[Turn11]

Isn't that what the 'home lock' option on smart flight modes does?

Regarding VLOS

I have had scary incidents over beach, flying 200-300m out still technically within VLOS, where fixed wing aircraft suddenly appear along the beach @150-200m altitude, and even though I am aware where mavic is, based on video feed, map, still not 100% sure in relation to newly appeared aircraft. Have had paragliders over beach at 5-10m altitude!

So since I never know who else is around, I very rarely stray out of VLOS now, unless heading out over open ocean where risk of sightseeing aircraft at low altitude is minimal.

I am a long time kite flier and the beach (anywhere) is a love hate relationship. If I am flying alone I ALWAYS notify the local control tower(s) of my exact location and the height I am flying and the number of kites I have in the air. I am bound by the flight altitude of 500' and proximity to airfields, strips or pads. I use the B4UFly app. What gets me is the sight seeing pilots that come in below my kites. NOT quite what the FAA had in mind but sometimes reality sucks.

With my drone I will be doing a lot of flying near where I live in Bullhead City, Arizona. I see all too many airplane pilots and helo pilots not maintaining altitude. Line of sight at least lets me be evasive.

 

[Jayfdee]

That's a good point, a few places I would like to have flown here in the UK could be a problem and I hadn't considered it.

While hill walking I've had the **** scared out me a few times by Typhoon and Tornado jets flying below me in valleys or a few hundred ft above. You sometimes don't hear them coming until they are right on top of you.

I spend a lot of time on the Lake district fells and regularly see them fly past below me, and close enough to see the pilot, this is why I do not fly here. I love to see them training.
Good place to see them, Steel fell above Dumail they scream up the valley low and close, and below you, as you say they are on you almost before you hear them.

 

[FatherXmas]

Many people have had their say in what VLOS means and I can't add to that. To address the other bit of your query, eyes on screen or craft, whenever possible, I take someone with me to keep an eye on the craft whilst I watch what's happening on the screen. A competent observer is an excellent idea IMHO.

Steve

Someone, usually my wife, is always with me when I fly. Between me and that person, eyes are always on the AC.

 

[Chip]

...I would add that the new UAVs are so more capable of controlled independent flight that going beyond VLOS as far as is technically possible is very easy to do. Regulators have a lot of catching up to do....Once we get into commercial drone deliveries, Part 107 will look pretty tame by comparison...

Yes, I am curious to see how autonomous UAS flight will be regulated and who, if anyone, will be held liable if UAS crashes. My hunch is the rule will be if you are hobbyist and crash drone into person or property you get charged and maybe even go to jail. But, if youre a company like Amazon, then it will be oh well thats why we have insurance.