Mavic Pro boring for me once I learned I can't fly out of LOS

[lisadoc]

Not correct. If you use a spotter (and follow the other VLOS guidelines in either section) you are fine using Goggles.

As I've noted earlier in this thread, technically the FAA (and thereby Federal rules) does not defer to the AMA or any other organization with respect to flying VLOS (they do for other things like altitude, etc). In order to fly under Section 336, you must be flying VLOS (irrespective of what the hobby rules say). It's the price of admission according to the FAA. If you want to be considered a recreational flyer, you must be flying VLOS, and the FAA's definition is that the operator cannot use a spotter for this. Thereby, legally, the FAA considers it against federal regulation to fly recreationally using the DJI goggles (by the pilot - not a 3rd party).

Now... is this sensible and worthy of abiding? That is another question entirely and up to the individual operator. But if you ask the FAA, it is illegal to do so as a 336 pilot.

 

[FlyGuy8675309]

As I've noted earlier in this thread, technically the FAA (and thereby Federal rules) does not defer to the AMA or any other organization with respect to flying VLOS (they do for other things like altitude, etc). In order to fly under Section 336, you must be flying VLOS (irrespective of what the hobby rules say). .

Sorry, you are not reading the rules correctly. There is a difference between "flying VLOS" (your "rule"), and flying "within VLOS" (the actual rule).

_______________________________________________________________________

Option #1. Fly in accordance with the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (Public Law 112-95 Section 336). Under this rule, operators must:

• 1. Register their UAS with the FAA
  2. Fly for hobby or recreational purposes only
  3. Follow a community-based set of safety guidelines
  4. Fly the UAS within visual line-of-sight

________________________________________________

So a hobbyist using goggles is fine as long as there is a spotter keeping VLOS on the AC at all times AND the operator can see the AC if they take off their goggles or look up from the screen. Interpreting as "no goggles or FPV" would cause rule 3 to contradict rule 4.


I really don't understand why there is so much confusion over this and things like night flying. It's all spelled out in the rules.

 

[Wrinkle249]

Sorry, you are not reading the rules correctly. There is a difference between "flying VLOS" (your "rule"), and flying "within VLOS" (the actual rule).


_______________________________________________________________________

Option #1. Fly in accordance with the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (Public Law 112-95 Section 336). Under this rule, operators must:

• 1. Register their UAS with the FAA
  2. Fly for hobby or recreational purposes only
  3. Follow a community-based set of safety guidelines
  4. Fly the UAS within visual line-of-sight

________________________________________________

So a hobbyist using goggles is fine as long as there is a spotter keeping VLOS on the AC at all times AND the operator can see the AC if they take off their goggles or look up from the screen. Interpreting as "no goggles or FPV" would cause rule 3 to contradict rule 4.


I really don't understand why there is so much confusion over this and things like night flying. It's all spelled out in the rules.

Ok, so my second point in my post could be ok in that if I fly in an area where I can see everything for a few miles around my MP, but not necessarily my MP (because it blends in with the background, I temporarily look at my screen, etc.) by your reading of the rules I would be ok?

 

[blurred55]

Wait so its not just enough to see a strobe of my Mavic Pro at night I need to know the orientation at VLOS of it along with specific coloring???? And some are saying night flying is illegal all together. So what I just did a few nights ago to test and flew it 2000 feet away at night and was able to see it wasn't enough?

Geez seems everything is illegal these days

Well I guess I can still fly my Mavic in the middle of nowhere in an open field miles away from all people and structures at only 100 feet away from me in circles. Fun!!

Sad to say all of these laws and restrictions took all of the joy out of flying for me. Now I'm on edge worrying if I'm breaking the hundreds of ambiguous laws and all it will take is one pissed off "authority" figure to destroy my life over it

 

[beachcombing]

It does seem like the DJI Goggles are illegal than if you can't use a spotter

Unless you got a commercial waiver for no VLOS

Which are you not going to get.

 

[beachcombing]

Ok, so my second point in my post could be ok in that if I fly in an area where I can see everything for a few miles around my MP, but not necessarily my MP (because it blends in with the background, I temporarily look at my screen, etc.) by your reading of the rules I would be ok?

It doesn't matter that you can "see everything for a few miles". If you (or your spotter) can't see your drone, then you are not within VLOS.

Looking down briefly are your screen is acceptable and doesn't negate VLOS as long as you can still visually see your drone.

 

[Canuk]

Wait so its not just enough to see a strobe of my Mavic Pro at night I need to know the orientation at VLOS of it along with specific coloring???? So what I just did a few nights ago to test and flew it 2000 feet away at night and was able to see it wasn't enough?

Geez seems everything is illegal these days

Well I guess I can still fly my Mavic in the middle of nowhere in an open field miles away from all people and structures at only 100 feet away from me in circles. Fun!!

Sad to say all of these laws and restrictions took all of the joy out of flying for me. Now I'm on edge worrying if I'm breaking the hundreds of ambiguous laws and all it will take is one pissed off "authority" figure to destroy my life over it

There is a very good chance that if you are worried about someone causing you trouble over you flying your drone you can do the same as me and fly it in remote spots . If you are away from people you will be able to wear your drone out . Most times if your out of site you are out of the mind of someone looking to cause trouble . When I go out to our trapline there are no strangers around for 20 miles in any direction. The only ones that will be at our cabin will be family and friends all waiting to try out the goggles as I take them for a VR ride . Canada has terrible drone laws but if your not drawing attention to your self chances are all the drones will get lots of use with no stress or trouble from law enforcement . I live in a small town and some bonehead bought a drone and is hovering over peoples back yards . People like that cause trouble for us as a angry home owner was on Facebook ranting and Carrying on that she wanted the law to step in and arrest the person . One bad drone operator can cause grief for the rest of us

 

[neggy]

Wait so its not just


Wait so its not just enough to see a strobe of my Mavic Pro at night I need to know the orientation of it along with specific coloring???? Geez seems everything is illegal these days

Well I guess I can still fly my Mavic in the middle of nowhere in an open field miles away from all people and structures 100 feet away in circles. Fun!!

Sad to say all of these laws and restrictions took all of the joy out of flying for me. Now I'm on edge worrying if I'm breaking the hundreds of laws and all it will take is one pissed off "authority" to destroy my life over it

I, like a few others here are, am a Part 61 Private Pilot.

I can tell you that when we fly at night, and we are scanning the sky, we are looking for lights, not only on tall buildings, radio towers, construction cranes, wind turbines, light houses, at airports, etc etc etc, but we are looking for green, red and white lights moving in the sky because that tells us what it is, where it is, where we have to go to avoid if we are going to intersect/ interact in any way. In the same way boats have a lighting requirement at night and with specific colors and mounting positions, Aircraft, including sUAV's do too. The FAA specifies 3 mile visibility as the minimum distance that they can be seen. This is assuming VFR conditions, and you should not fly a sUAV in anything other than VFR conditions IMHO.

The chances of getting caught, or anything going wrong are small, but if or when the SHTF you want to be able to defend yourself by being able to state that you took all precautions for a safe flight.

It is all about safe flight.

Here is an example. I have my sUAV height limited to 600 feet, although under Part 107, legally I am supposed to stay under 400 feet in most cases. Why? Because the FAA says I can exceed 400 feet to prevent an accident. If for example a Helicopter came in fast, and I did not have the option of going down in altitude, I can legally go up, and I don't even have to report it unless there is an accident or the FAA requests a statement in writing. If another sUAV wandered by I can also exceed the 400' to avoid them. 100% legal.

 

[FlyGuy8675309]

Ok, so my second point in my post could be ok in that if I fly in an area where I can see everything for a few miles around my MP, but not necessarily my MP (because it blends in with the background, I temporarily look at my screen, etc.) by your reading of the rules I would be ok?

There's a difference between keeping something "in" your line of sight and "within" your line of site.

You must be able to see it for it to be within your site. So by your examples:

- "blending in with background". Not allowed, because it's not within your site. You can't see it.

- "looking down at screen" - allowed as long as it doesn't interfere with the safe operation of your AC, but you must be able to re-acquire VLOS at a moments notice, whether you have a spotter or not. Ideally you should be able to monitor the AC visually even when looking at the controls or the FPV screen, at least peripherally.

Your biggest threats are low flying helis and birds attacking your AC. Hitting either will ruin your day so fly with common sense.

 

[FlyGuy8675309]

Wait so its not just enough to see a strobe of my Mavic Pro at night I need to know the orientation at VLOS of it along with specific coloring???? And some are saying night flying is illegal all together. So what I just did a few nights ago to test and flew it 2000 feet away at night and was able to see it wasn't enough?

Geez seems everything is illegal these days

Well I guess I can still fly my Mavic in the middle of nowhere in an open field miles away from all people and structures at only 100 feet away from me in circles. Fun!!

Sad to say all of these laws and restrictions took all of the joy out of flying for me. Now I'm on edge worrying if I'm breaking the hundreds of ambiguous laws and all it will take is one pissed off "authority" figure to destroy my life over it

People are making this more complicated that it needs to be. Your fine flying with the stock lighting at night as long as you can see where it is and which way it's pointing. Pretty easy: solid red in the front (make sure they're turned on in the Advanced Settings), and green strobe in the back (which may turn yellow or red depending on the state of the Mavic).

Some people like to put additional lights on for safety or to travel further than the stock lighting allows, but they are aren't necessary for recreational night flying.

Think of it like a bike. Here in Florida, like most states, you need a white headlamp and a red taillight. That's the minimum, but you are also allowed (and encouraged) to supplement this with additional lighting. So if I'm taking a spin around the block at night, I just have the two lights on. If I'm going on the main roads at night, I'm lit up like a fire truck.

 

[neggy]

Your fine flying with the stock lighting at night as long as you can see where it is and which way it's pointing.

Remember folks, all rules, regulations, and laws aside, the FAA can use this little section of the law to hang you at any time

"Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the Administrator to pursue enforcement action against persons operating model aircraft who endanger the safety of the national airspace system."

How risk adverse are you? The statement above is pretty broad, and covers 336 operations

You may be able to see your drone from the ground at night with only the DJI lights, but if another aircraft can not see you, and the SHTF, they will drag out title 14 section 23.1401, and what ever else they can throw at you and hang you.

The cost of 5 strobes and some velcro is cheaper than an hour of an Attorneys time.

 

[FlyGuy8675309]

In the same way boats have a lighting requirement at night and with specific colors and mounting positions, Aircraft, including sUAV's do too. The FAA specifies 3 mile visibility as the minimum distance that they can be seen. This is assuming VFR conditions, and you should not fly a sUAV in anything other than VFR conditions IMHO.
.

Model aircraft flown for recreation have no lighting requirements other than being able to tell the attitude and orientation of the AC. That's what the AMA has to say it about it, so as long as you follow that you are flying within the "nationwide community guidelines" rule.

That being said, I agree with you 1000% percent on the safety aspect. I really wish DJI followed the traditional red/green navigation/position lighting scheme (anyone know if you can pop a green LED into the right side front lamp? ) And yes, strobes are a great investment. This video shows my current "default" night flying set-up. I think it would meet your approval (I even have the proper color nav/position lights!

 

[lisadoc]

Sorry, you are not reading the rules correctly. There is a difference between "flying VLOS" (your "rule"), and flying "within VLOS" (the actual rule).
So a hobbyist using goggles is fine as long as there is a spotter keeping VLOS on the AC at all times AND the operator can see the AC if they take off their goggles or look up from the screen. Interpreting as "no goggles or FPV" would cause rule 3 to contradict rule 4.

Well, you can interpret it however you want, but I'll quote the FAA again, as they have already declared what they interpret it as:

"By definition, a model aircraft must be “flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft.” P.L. 112-95, section 336(c)(2). 1 Based on the plain language of the statute, the FAA interprets this requirement to mean that: (1) the aircraft must be visible at all times to the operator; (2) that the operator must use his or her own natural vision (which includes vision corrected by standard eyeglasses or contact lenses) to observe the aircraft; and (3) people other than the operator may not be used in lieu of the operator for maintaining visual line of sight." (emphasis added)

They clearly denote that the aircraft must be visible at all times to the operator. Not only when they look up or when they take off their goggles, or capable of being seen if the operator takes the time to do so. Visible at all times. And people other than the operator may not be used in lieu of the operator for maintaining visual line of sight. It doesn't get much clearer than that.

Secondly, the operator must use their own eyes/ natural vision to observe. Again, not through binoculars or via goggles, or even via a handheld screen. The operator must use their own eyes to observe.

You can declare that the language difference for "within" VLOS does not connote "in" VLOS, but the FAA has already clearly published their interpretation. You could argue with a judge that your interpretation is correct over the FAA's but since the FAA has formally published their interpretation and requested feedback during a public comment period, it would be significantly difficult to convince a judge that this shouldn't be the standard you will be held to when flying under 336 rules.

This "within" VLOS argument was already hashed out by the FAA during the public comment period for Part 107 and again, the FAA made it clear that if a pilot was using a separate device, that a visual observer must be maintaining VLOS (Part 107 does allow for a 2nd party observer, where 336 rules do not). Though the argument was made that goggles were sufficient (from either party), the FAA did not buy that argument.

"The FAA understands and accepts that the person maintaining visual line of sight may lose sight of the unmanned aircraft for brief moments of the operation. This may be necessary either because the small unmanned aircraft momentarily travels behind an obstruction or to allow the person maintaining visual line of sight to perform actions such as scanning the airspace or briefly looking down at the small UAS control station. For example, a remote pilot in command stationed on the ground utilizing a small unmanned aircraft to inspect a rooftop may lose sight of the aircraft for brief periods while inspecting the farthest point of the roof. As another example, a remote pilot in command conducting a search operation around a fire scene with a small unmanned aircraft may briefly lose sight of the aircraft while it is temporarily behind a dense column of smoke.

However, the FAA emphasizes that even though the remote pilot in command may briefly lose sight of the small unmanned aircraft, he or she always has the see-and-avoid responsibilities set out in §§ 107.31 and 107.37." Additionally, "Similarly, first person view devices may be used during operations, but do not satisfy the VLOS requirement." (AC 107-2)

"Briefly losing sight" is not operating with goggles on or flying via a RC display (other than briefly glancing at it). And the language in Part 107 and the requirement for 336 rules is the same - within VLOS.

So you can declare all you want that the language is clear and that you "don't understand why there is so much confusion over this... It's all spelled out in the rules" but then you go and make declarations and legal conclusions in direct opposition to what the FAA has dictated as the standard.

 

[Wrinkle249]

Model aircraft flown for recreation have no lighting requirements other than being able to tell the attitude and orientation of the AC. That's what the AMA has to say it about it, so as long as you follow that you are flying within the "nationwide community guidelines" rule.

That being said, I agree with you 1000% percent on the safety aspect. I really wish DJI followed the traditional red/green navigation/position lighting scheme (anyone know if you can pop a green LED into the right side front lamp? ) And yes, strobes are a great investment. This video shows my current "default" night flying set-up. I think it would meet your approval (I even have the proper color nav/position lights!

Wow!! Nice setup... But I guess you are not doing many long exposure shots or video?

 

[BashNasty]

I actually registered to post in this topic since it’s been bothering me.

OP, you gotta lighten up, my man. The government isn’t going to come and destroy your life if they catch you flying out of visible line of sight (which would be very difficult to prove regardless).

I bought my Mavic Air about a month ago and have flown it out of visual line of sight multiple times. I’m also flying my drone in the middle of Chicago (admittedly, you don’t get a ton of distance in the city before running into signal interference).

Obviously I’m staying smart and making sure I have a good bead on the direction of my drone before it goes out of my line of sight, but a drone going out of line of sight is just something that’s going to happen, nothing wrong with that. If by some wild chance someone came up and accused me of something, I’d just talk to them, we’d figure it out, and all would be good.

Laws are... often stronger than they need to be, don’t let them ruin your life.

 

[DroningOn]

I actually registered to post in this topic since it’s been bothering me.

OP, you gotta lighten up, my man. The government isn’t going to come and destroy your life if they catch you flying out of visible line of sight (which would be very difficult to prove regardless).

I bought my Mavic Air about a month ago and have flown it out of visual line of sight multiple times. I’m also flying my drone in the middle of Chicago (admittedly, you don’t get a ton of distance in the city before running into signal interference).

Obviously I’m staying smart and making sure I have a good bead on the direction of my drone before it goes out of my line of sight, but a drone going out of line of sight is just something that’s going to happen, nothing wrong with that. If by some wild chance someone came up and accused me of something, I’d just talk to them, we’d figure it out, and all would be good.

Laws are... often stronger than they need to be, don’t let them ruin your life.

You nailed it!! Truer words have never been spoken here. Thank you for making the effort to chime in

 

[FlyGuy8675309]

Wow!! Nice setup... But I guess you are not doing many long exposure shots or video?

Nahh.. It mainly for cruising the skies at night. The P4 gets MUCH better night video!

 

[FlyGuy8675309]

So you can declare all you want that the language is clear and that you "don't understand why there is so much confusion over this... It's all spelled out in the rules" but then you go and make declarations and legal conclusions in direct opposition to what the FAA has dictated as the standard.

Yeah it's my fault that the FAA's rules contradict themselves.

 

[AClineman]

Pretty new here and to droning. Got my MPP a few weeks ago and a few flights under my belt. I printed out the manual and read it many times.
Since there is a lot of discussion here about flying at night (which I haven’t tried yet), how does this affect the craft when you use RTH? The manual states many times about low ambient lighting and basically causing the foward and downward avoidance feature to be useless. Does anyone use RTH at night or do you use it and set the return path at 120 meters or above your highest obstacle ?
Thanks in advance.

 

[FlyGuy8675309]

Pretty new here and to droning. Got my MPP a few weeks ago and a few flights under my belt. I printed out the manual and read it many times.
Since there is a lot of discussion here about flying at night (which I haven’t tried yet), how does this affect the craft when you use RTH? The manual states many times about low ambient lighting and basically causing the foward and downward avoidance feature to be useless. Does anyone use RTH at night or do you use it and set the return path at 120 meters or above your highest obstacle ?
Thanks in advance.

Practice manual landing and you'll be fine.