Line of Sight - Really?

[Cyclonetog]

Bear in mind some of the range tests being done are in their own country which will have different flying rules to where you are.

Watched yesterday a tiny Mavic Mini fly @4.5km away and return (just). Add the grey colour to spot on a cloudy day = challenges.

Was that Dustin Dunill (I think)? Landed/crashed in the grass just the wrong side of the wall. I like that one

 

[theDRONEranger]

I have been doing some more thinking about the VLOS issues and safety concerns. Does keeping a drone within VLOS really ensure safe operation of a drone? In order to drive a car, most countries require a drivers license yet this does not ensure a safe driver. I believe reasonable laws should be in place for pilots and manufacturers; however, we pilots need to reprimand those who post obvious violations. As long as we watch and encourage such behaviors, it will encourage violators.

Understandably, UAS pilots should fly safely and promote safe flying. Not always the case! Also, not every country has the same rules as another. Rules WILL vary from country to country. Prudence in one’s abilities should take a priority, as well as consideration for the safety of others! Ford just signed a teenage female to the promotional driving team. Obviously, her skills out shined others’ who may have been driving longer then she’s been alive.

The safe operation of a DRONE is just as focused as the safe driving of a car. It is imperative the operator be knowledgable of their abilities and the presence of others.
SAFETY is paramount!

 

[Paul Schulze]

Do we need threads like “Official Mavic Mini Range Leaderboard!“ while at same time discussing keeping the rules? Seems to be hypocritical to me! Just saying....

 

[Paul Schulze]

Understandably, UAS pilots should fly safely and promote safe flying. Not always the case! Also, not every country has the same rules as another. Rules WILL vary from country to country. Prudence in one’s abilities should take a priority, as well as consideration for the safety of others! Ford just signed a teenage female to the promotional driving team. Obviously, her skills out shined others’ who may have been driving longer then she’s been alive.

The safe operation of a DRONE is just as focused as the safe driving of a car. It is imperative the operator be knowledgable of their abilities and the presence of others.
SAFETY is paramount!

I agree with you very much- well said.

Do you think VLOS rules for the present technological state of the M2 drone is of primary importance or really just a good sense suggestion like yellow road signs for drivers?

 

[Deleted member 93449]

I doubt if I've flown my MP further than 800 feet for the reason you stated. At that distance if you look away it becomes a challenge to reacquire it. I've added a Lume Cube which helps. While I have some confidence in the technology (autonomous flight, RTH, etc.) I get uncomfortable if I can't see the drone.

 

[WithTheBirds]

The FAA’s main concern is uncontrolled flying that puts lives and vital infrastructure in danger. The agency must be assured that drones sharing the sky with airplanes will not result in midair collisions and that the risk of damage to people and property on the ground is mitigated.

The FAA’s main concern is uncontrolled flying that puts lives and vital infrastructure in danger. The agency must be assured that drones sharing the sky with airplanes will not result in midair collisions and that the risk of damage to people and property on the ground is mitigated.

No question about the FAA responsibilities and objectives- you might note that wasn't what I asked.

 

[Paul Schulze]

I doubt if I've flown my MP further than 800 feet for the reason you stated. At that distance if you look away it becomes a challenge to reacquire it. I've added a Lume Cube which helps. While I have some confidence in the technology (autonomous flight, RTH, etc.) I get uncomfortable if I can't see the drone.

I am with you on this. Yesterday I was flying my M2Z and took off, rose straight up to 380ft, looked up and couldn’t acquire the bird until I moved it around a bit. I know my eyes are not the eyes they used to be, but.... unaided 1/2 mile, one , two?

 

[deleted member 877]

OK, two things:-

Just because someone believes that the VLOS regulation is outdated due to technical advancements doesn't in any way justify ignoring that regulation. Indeed using that argument only exhibits one's ignorance of exactly why the VLOS regulation exists in first place.

So that we all know, does any one have a list of jurisdictions where there are no VLOS related regulations? It's annoying when someone suggests that we shouldn't call out obvious BVLOS flights because it might be OK to fly BVLOS at the associated location.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

using that argument only exhibits one's ignorance of exactly why the VLOS regulation exists in first place.

Hopefully most would know this 'why' question, but they would only know by a common sense guess, as most (if not all) air authorities just say 'you must fly within VLOS at all times' or words to that effect.

They themselves don't generally state 'why' it's important.

I have my own thoughts on this, but would be interested to hear your thoughts Pete, and from others as to what they consider to be the main VLOS reasoning.

 

[GadgetGuy]

TheDRONEranger above has posted some very interesting and sensible comments.

VLOS is very nebulous in that it is so unspecific as to be almost ridiculous. If the VLOS rule was really of public safety concerns, a specific distance would be (should be) specified and mandated to drone manufacturers. It is possible to scientifically determine the average maximum distance for human VLOS and put that into law for pilots and manufacturers.

It has been my belief all along that the primary reason for mandating VLOS is not safety, but to make locating the pilot easier. Instead of a 5 mile radius search area for the pilot, it limits the search area to just the radius of whatever VLOS is! The FAA has said as much, emphasizing that the greatest difficulty with drone enforcement was locating the pilot, and the mandated drone pilot registration would not help with that. Shortly thereafter, VLOS was mandated, too. Go figure!

 

[deleted member 877]

Hopefully most would know this 'why' question, but they would only know by a common sense guess, as most (if not all) air authorities just say 'you must fly within VLOS at all times' or words to that effect.

They themselves don't generally state 'why' it's important.

I have my own thoughts on this, but would be interested to hear your thoughts Pete, and from others as to what they consider to be the main VLOS reasoning.

Screen video only gives one angle (in front) and it's difficult to get any real perception of depth. So the requirement for maintaining VLOS is essentially whatever distance which you still have full visibility of the craft and any objects around it. It's a matter of safety.

 

[dbyantis]

Maybe this has already be presented, but just in case, here it is:

My Mavic 2Z has a body roughly 0.25 ft wide. This is the most visible part when flying away or toward the pilot. Now the accepted angular resolution of the human eye is about 1/60 degree or 0.000291 radian.
Calculations:
Distance X Angle (in radians) = Arc length
Distance X 0.000921 = 0.25 ft whence distance = 859 ft or 0.16 mile.

Now even if we up the angular resolution of your eye by a factor of 4, we get about .064 mile straight line.

Note: if the drone is at h=300 ft, the horizontal distance is 804 ft.

I challenge anyone to let someone fly your drone out somewhere randomly to a distance of, say 0.64 mile, while you keep your back turned and then you turn around and see the drone.

Who flies their Mavic 2 drone no farther than 1000 feet? As for myself, I have trouble seeing it four or five hundred feet away.

I fly it as far as I can see it and the surrounding airspace. I spent too much to risk otherwise.Out of sight makes me nervous. that's not fun for me.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

Screen video only gives one angle (in front) and it's difficult to get any real perception of depth. So the requirement for maintaining VLOS is essentially whatever distance which you still have full visibility of the craft and any objects around it. It's a matter of safety.

I agree in that partial explanation.

Think what you are saying in simple terms is . . .

A drone pilot must have situational awareness of where his aircraft is in relation to any other possible manned aircraft in the same airspace.

For a while now I've thought carefully about VLOS, and ways people (myself included) have used strobes to maintain better VLOS at distances, sometimes many KM's or MILES from comments in threads I have read.

This may well be true / possible, but how much real situational awareness does one have when say more than 500m away ? 1000m away ?
Possibly very minimal, as that little screen view, be it a phone, mini 4, small tablet etc can only give you that little window in front of the camera.
No peripheral vision or as noticeable audible alerts of (other aircraft) engine noise like we can have when flying closer.

If you are 2km / 3km away and can see your ARCII strobes flashing away, it certainly isn't in the spirit of VLOS.

I am coming to terms with accepting this myself.
In the past I have flown to 1km away, in the Pilbara, many many 100's of km away from any aircraft terminal / aristrip, low aircraft etc, within 25m alt, no strobes then, but I felt confident in my app / screen tools exactly where I was, usual flight data, the controller readings help too, but I could not have seem something unexpected, even if it were say a fraction of 1% something might happen along.

All other flights I recall are pretty well within VLOS, I like seeing my aircraft.
I'll still use strobes on some flights, just to not lose sight of it when adjusting settings etc and looking back up.

I do have my thoughts on flying VLOS and current rules, and have personally talked to CASA rep about some examples / cases, they have told me they aren't too concerned about cases I've put to them (including my Pilbara flight, which is on my YT channel, I even state on it in text I'm 1km away !).
They are after people flouting VLOS in more dangerous circumstances, urban etc . . . or people flying over people flagrantly etc.

 

[Algebruh_m8]

Where I stand here is that it is very annoying but also very understandable to have laws and regulations of VLOS. Although as for the situation of the Mavic it is indeed a very small drone AND pretty quiet. When I hit 40 MPH near me and let go of the sticks it first gives this loud buzzing noise but then a second later... you don't hear it anymore and that is about 100 feet in a straight line from me. I barely go about 800 feet out and I have trouble spotting the drone at that distance. Although I will be honest it varies on the conditions of that day. Is it too bright, too dark or hazy or cloudy? VLOS limits what you can do and record with the drone and even with a spotter, it won't give too much help because you STILL need to maintain VLOS. I'm not attacking the law or regulation so anyone who comes at me thinking I'm an idiot and shouldn't be flying should rethink their comment. I even mentioned to why it is very reasonable and understandable to have but with a craft this small it does come quite difficult to keep that line of sight to do anything productive. Impressive drone with autonomous functionalities but also very small and portable which has its pros and cons.

 

[Dakarenduro]

This to me is somewhat similar to speed limits. You have a car that can go 100mph but the speed limit is 50. A percentage of drivers will drive 50 or below and the others will go beyond. Same here (to me). It is just a question of enforcement. How will that be done? Just like speeding, some folks are being 'caught' by their YouTube videos (or so the stories go). Nothing like posting self incriminating evidence.

For me I am too nervous about my expensive toy to go way far. But I am willing to admit it can be 200ft away and if i look away when I try to find it again it is almost impossible sometimes. And other times at 1000ft I can still see it. Sometimes I go further but usually I try to stay close to my subject. My objectives for my flights are for video and photos.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

It is just a question of enforcement. How will that be done?

I agree with your analogy . . . people are human after all, and some like a little risk, others are risk averse.

As far as enforcement goes, I'd just take a punt on say upward of 90% of actions by the main various airspace agencies to date are reactive enforcement, or rather punishment, after an incident etc.
It would be (well, it is) a fairly small fraction of a % getting into trouble, considering how many flights are made in these countries for eg US, UK, Australia, nations with fairly similar rules and airspace regs.

There might even be a slightly higher number of people prosecuted where others report flights to FAA, CAA, CASA etc that are posted on social media.

 

[dgarzoli]

My main point in starting this thread was at least two fold, 1). At best a three or four inch object can be seen, without lights, about 1000 ft. 2) eyes vary from person to person so the 1000 ft distance might be a whole lot less for most pilots.

When the FAA police show up what test do they administer to check LOS? I am serious on this. Even a spotter cannot see any farther than a pilot. I am not advocating breaking any laws, but we need to advocate for laws that are reasonable. With the rapid advancement of technology, especially since the laws were first enacted,, studies on new drone safety laws need to be made.

How does Amazon expect expect to meet LOS requirements? A lot of reasonable study needs to be done by knowledgeable people and not politicians.

There are no faa drone pol9that will ever show up. This law is there to [Language removed by AMIN] AFTER the fact. Hit an aircraft, or crash it onto people on the ground and do enough damage to get the attention of the authorities, you better be able to prove you had eye contact with it at all times.

 

[deleted member 877]

There are no faa drone pol9that will ever show up. This law is there to **** you AFTER the fact. Hit an aircraft, or crash it onto people on the ground and do enough damage to get the attention of the authorities, you better be able to prove you had eye contact with it at all times.

No that is incorrect. Airspace regulations are in place primarily to minimise and manage risk. For example, in the context of this discussion, VLOS related regulations have been mandated regardless of how likely it is in any given situation that an accident will be caused by a drone operator flying BVLOS. For obvious reasons a blanket approach must be taken - that is how all laws work in a civilised society.

 

[GadgetGuy]

For obvious reasons a blanket approach must be taken - that is how all laws work in a civilised society.

It's not obvious at all, nor mandatory that a blanket approach must be taken, nor is there anything uncivilized about using a different approach that is situational in managing and minimizing risk. VLOS is primarily to locate the pilot rather than to ensure safety. There are many situations where flying by FPV is actually safer than flying by VLOS. The military seems to manage their drones quite well without VLOS!

 

[WithTheBirds]

It's not obvious at all, nor mandatory that a blanket approach must be taken, nor is there anything uncivilized about using a different approach that is situational in managing and minimizing risk. VLOS is primarily to locate the pilot rather than to ensure safety. There are many situations where flying by FPV is actually safer than flying by VLOS. The military seems to manage their drones quite well without VLOS!

It might be you have information available to you that others don’t. I can’t see any evidence to suggest identification of pilot location is the principal intent of VLOS requirements. No depth perception, limited FOV, greatly reduced situational awareness and limited opportunity for early identification of a threat as compared to within VLOS operation. Now consider the situation with loss of downlink, even worse the drone diligently following a direct RTH path blindly from a distance perhaps several km distant from the operator. To suggest the VLOS requirement isn’t imposed with the principal intent of safety seems more than a little ridiculous.