Long range fliers - share your tips of flying long range?

[StevenBrodsky]

My favorite thing is flying long range.
Here are the things that come to the top of my head, how to get maximum from my flight:
- Turn off the obstacle avoidance sensor, to get more battery juice.
- Start low, and increase altitude slightly, every time when the RC signal bar decreases.
- Check the wind and consider that the Forced RTH spot, might not be enough and you need to RTH earlier than that.
- Do not press sticks to increase the speed, during RTH, because that drains battery faster.
- Do not fly in sports mode. Battery will drain faster.
- If you really going for LOOONG distance, make sure to set up a new, safe, home point somewhere along the way. So in case you will have to do emergency landing, and drive to pick up your bird - you know where it is, and it's safely landed.

What else, what other advice do you have for achieving maximum range on the long range flight?

Here is another suggestion:
- find a building or parking garage that you can access and fly from a very high balcony or the top of the parking garage. This will give you a better signal, and hopefully, at least, keep you from breaking the 400 ft altitude limit.

 

[BigAl07]

Here is another suggestion:
- find a building or parking garage that you can access and fly from a very high balcony or the top of the parking garage. This will give you a better signal, and hopefully, at least, keep you from breaking the 400 ft altitude limit.

How in the world is flying from the top of a building (or worse a balcony that's limiting your Overall Sight Picture) going to keep you (aka the UAS) from going above the 400' Max Altitude rule if you're flying anywhere but directly over the building? Let's break this down just a pinch:

This is specifically for USA/FAA Regulations discussion since the OP and many others are operating from other regions and other (although maybe similar) regulations.

• 1) The 400' from a structure if within 400' of the structure rule, is for Part 107 operators.
• 2) It's also important to note that this rule is not applicable in any "Controlled Airspace" as those authorizations etc are Absolute from ground level.
• 3) if you're flying BVLOS why in the world would you even worry about the 400' AGL rule anyway. Might as well not even bother with any rules since you can't really bother with BVLOS rules.

You do realize the altitude is calculated (by you not the # on the controller in your hand) from the point of terra firma directly under the UAS. It's 100% on you to accurately estimate the UAS's altitude above the small piece of ground directly UNDER the aircraft and simply going "by the # on the controller" is a huge error and is not going to hold up should an "incident" happen.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Compliant advice: Launch from a hill/mountain where you can see a broad vista for miles. In this way you can adhere to both the 400' rule and VLOS for as far as you can see... But some bright strobes on it and do it in the evening. Ideally, a hillside in farm or foothill territory, where it's all grass fields, no forest.

 

[Droning on and on...]

You do realize the altitude is calculated (by you not the # on the controller in your hand) from the point of terra firma directly under the UAS. It's 100% on you to accurately estimate the UAS's altitude above the small piece of ground directly UNDER the aircraft and simply going "by the # on the controller" is a huge error and is not going to hold up should an "incident" happen.

Spot on, and it's near impossible to estimate and maintain ANY AGL at the upper limits with accuracy better than 50ft or so. Yeah, when the drone's close, but get 1000 feet away in a hilly, complex environment (trees, urban development, etc.) and its near impossible to stay around 400ft.

That's generally way up there for most applications anyway, including most imagery. My strategy has been to fly between 150-200' most of the time with imagery applications, and I'm reasonably good at estimating that after all these years, but pilot load and everything it's easy to get distracted with what you're filming, and find you're at 300ft AGL. Still in compliance, you can correct.

FPV, well, the nature of it just doesn't make a ceiling an issue.

 

[zeusfl]

I guess at this point the only way to do it is taking off from the roof of the building and land the drone on the ground next to the building and turn off the propellers. Turning on again will reset (in theory) the altitude and you will have the ground altitude and you can have the real AGL (estimated) on the controller at that point but while you fly from the roof.

 

[StevenBrodsky]

How in the world is flying from the top of a building (or worse a balcony that's limiting your Overall Sight Picture) going to keep you (aka the UAS) from going above the 400' Max Altitude rule if you're flying anywhere but directly over the building? Let's break this down just a pinch:

This is specifically for USA/FAA Regulations discussion since the OP and many others are operating from other regions and other (although maybe similar) regulations.

• 1) The 400' from a structure if within 400' of the structure rule, is for Part 107 operators.
• 2) It's also important to note that this rule is not applicable in any "Controlled Airspace" as those authorizations etc are Absolute from ground level.
• 3) if you're flying BVLOS why in the world would you even worry about the 400' AGL rule anyway. Might as well not even bother with any rules since you can't really bother with BVLOS rules.

You do realize the altitude is calculated (by you not the # on the controller in your hand) from the point of terra firma directly under the UAS. It's 100% on you to accurately estimate the UAS's altitude above the small piece of ground directly UNDER the aircraft and simply going "by the # on the controller" is a huge error and is not going to hold up should an "incident" happen.

I should have said 400ft AGL and not used an enclosed structure as an example.

When you position yourself on a hill, tower, roof, other structure or land formation with a panoramic view and the surrounding area is no higher than the hill, tower, roof, other structures or land formations that the pilot positions him/herself on, then there is no longer a worry about losing a radio signal at the original take off AGL. The pilot will not need to increase their height above the 400ft AGL FAA limit the further away the drone gets (unless ,if the floor of the ground drops, then the drone's altitude would need to be lowered.)

The drone can stay at the original takeoff altitude of 100-200 or 400 feet AGL as it travels over the area in front of you, as long as there is no other hill, towers, roofs, or other structures in between the remote signal and the drone.

It's about the angle of inclination between the pilot's remote, structures in between and the drone. It increases when there are impediments/structures in between the drone and remote. Thus, a drone's altitude needs to increase the further away the drone gets from the remote.

The OP wanted us to share our tips on long range flying. Yes, he should not go beyond his visual line of site. He may be in line of site, but not VLOS. He'd be breaking one rule, but not two. By its very nature, this whole post is about not following a USA FAA rule, ie VLOS. Perhaps it's best to let the OP know and close the thread.

 

[Clipper707]

In fact this whole post is about breaking a rule, ie VLOS. Perhaps it's best to let the OP know and close the thread.

It's ok to talk about range.

As others have mentioned, this is an international forum with many different situations and rules, including the absence of rules.

Following the rules isn't always safe. Breaking the rules isn't always unsafe.

I've flown from villages where the locals have literally never seen an airplane. The danger from BVLOS can be non-existent.

 

[StevenBrodsky]

It's ok to talk about range.

As others have mentioned, this is an international forum with many different situations and rules, including the absence of rules.

Following the rules isn't always safe. Breaking the rules isn't always unsafe.

I've flown from villages where the locals have literally never seen an airplane. The danger from BVLOS can be non-existent.

I clarified that part of my post to USA FAA rules. Thanks for reminding me of the international nature of this forum.

 

[DARKSeifer]

• 3) if you're flying BVLOS why in the world would you even worry about the 400' AGL rule anyway. Might as well not even bother with any rules since you can't really bother with BVLOS rules.

Speeding is one thing, driving on the opposite lane another, but people have a tendency to polarize.

You can long range and stay under 120m with perfect connection if you take off from a place with a nice unobstructed line of sight. top of a building, top of a small hill, etc.

 

[BigAl07]

Speeding is one thing, driving on the opposite lane another, but people have a tendency to polarize.

You can long range and stay under 120m with perfect connection if you take off from a place with a nice unobstructed line of sight. top of a building, top of a small hill, etc.

We will just have to agree to respectfully disagree.

 

[mavic3usa]

I honestly feel like many pilots believe if they stay under 400 feet, the likelihood of colliding with another aircraft becomes pretty tiny. They mistakenly believe *manned* aircraft must fly at 500 feet or higher, unless they are landing/taking off so if you are not near an airport....so the saying goes. I would agree your risks for a collision are much more slim if you keep it under 400 feet AGL and I believe your risks go up...way up, if you start to fly in the 500 feet, 1000 feet, 1500 feet airspace. Some people live way out in teh country side and in very rural places and it's almost impossible to even see a low flying aircraft much less hear one, there just aren't any. OTOH, some people live in urban areas with tall structures all over creation and honestly, if an aircraft is under 400 feet, something is really wrong. It is dodging towers and buildings and apartments and power lines....not your drone. However, the law says 400 feet AGL and we all need to stick with that....I have no problem with 400 feet AGL or lower especially in controlled airspace.

 

[StevenBrodsky]

I honestly feel like many pilots believe if they stay under 400 feet, the likelihood of colliding with another aircraft becomes pretty tiny. They mistakenly believe *manned* aircraft must fly at 500 feet or higher, unless they are landing/taking off so if you are not near an airport....so the saying goes. I would agree your risks for a collision are much more slim if you keep it under 400 feet AGL and I believe your risks go up...way up, if you start to fly in the 500 feet, 1000 feet, 1500 feet airspace. Some people live way out in teh country side and in very rural places and it's almost impossible to even see a low flying aircraft much less hear one, there just aren't any. OTOH, some people live in urban areas with tall structures all over creation and honestly, if an aircraft is under 400 feet, something is really wrong. It is dodging towers and buildings and apartments and power lines....not your drone. However, the law says 400 feet AGL and we all need to stick with that....I have no problem with 400 feet AGL or lower especially in controlled airspace.

Just remember- helicopters are the exception to 400 ft agl. They often fly below that and are always seen in the news as the manned aircraft getting hit or having near misses with UAVs. It's the helicopters we really need to worry about. I'm not saying ignore small planes, but the odds are in favor of a helicopter/UAV interaction.

 

[mavic3usa]

Just remember- helicopters are the exception to 400 ft agl. They often fly below that and are always seen in the news as the manned aircraft getting hit or having near misses with UAVs. It's the helicopters we really need to worry about. I'm not saying ignore small planes, but the odds are in favor of a helicopter/UAV interaction.

In my area, there are plenty of aircraft under 400 and that includes a bunch of news/traffic helicopters (every news station), police helicopters, every hospital has one. And they all have ADSB so my alerts are often. You need to remind the other folks that live in the countryside that have never seen a helicopter....remind them that helicopters fly that low in rural countryside even though there is nowhere to land. LOL. like I said, I get it. Other people don't, which is why you hear from *them* not me and they fly down here, you fly up there. But I guess I could be wrong, maybe they just don't care, that's probably the easiest way to think about it. Yes I agree alot of these collisions we've seen lately are drone vs. helicopter. I dont hear alot about near misses.

 

[KBF]

In my area, there are plenty of aircraft under 400 and that includes a bunch of news/traffic helicopters (every news station), police helicopters, every hospital has one. And they all have ADSB so my alerts are often. You need to remind the other folks that live in the countryside that have never seen a helicopter....remind them that helicopters fly that low in rural countryside even though there is nowhere to land. LOL. like I said, I get it. Other people don't, which is why you hear from *them* not me and they fly down here, you fly up there. But I guess I could be wrong, maybe they just don't care, that's probably the easiest way to think about it. Yes I agree alot of these collisions we've seen lately are drone vs. helicopter. I dont hear alot about near misses.

I live out in the country. Sparsely populated land to the west, farmland and trees then a river to the north, thousands of acres of forest east of me and farmland to the south.
We get a lot of military helicopters flying over. If I hear the drone of the helo I just land. You can stand there for five mins before they appear a few hundred feet over your head! No ADSB though.
A few weeks ago I heard a helo approaching, landed and waited, I usually give them a wave as they fly over ( they’re that low) then after a few minutes a chinook appeared briefly through a gap in the trees, he was flying, literally feet high, along the river. Very very cool to see but if I’d been bvos over the river ………

 

[Xitor]

For the sake of discussion, lets say your are in a remote area, not populated, requested and received BVLOS waiver (taking video of a large ranch at owners request for instance). If you are using Air3 or similar drone with waypoints that enable you to continue to the next waypoint automatically if it loses connectivity, then the distance becomes more a factor of battery time and not reception. Curious if there have been tests like this with waiver or in country where it doesn't violate local law.

 

[Laggard]

Why would anyone advertise that they were doing this?

 

[mobilehomer]

Why would anyone advertise that they were doing this?

In some countries and areas it is not illegal.

 

[KBF]

Why would anyone advertise that they were doing this?

Maybe OP is in another country

 

[tomfields55]

If you use an add on RID it always comes from the drone only so the drone Karen's don't know were you are. They only get your registered location.

 

[Droning on and on...]

If you use an add on RID it always comes from the drone only so the drone Karen's don't know were you are. They only get your registered location.

Well, it transmits the takeoff location, so if you don't move they'll know where you are.

Also, it's only legal (in the US) to use an attached RID module on a drone that doesn't have built-in RID.