New World Record: Epic flight bone stock (smart controller + mavic 2 pro ) 11km one way, 22 km round trip.

[MAvic_South_Oz]

I dont know what you are talking @10:50 about. The drone is just returning home in a straight line, watch the video again.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

At 10:50, or more precisely 10:55, your data shows you doing a 180 turn for home (heading changing rapidly, and distance counter starting to count backwards), but the view remains steady, flying straight ahead.
That sort of strange happening.

 

[kilomikebravo]

(Just chiming in..)

AFAIK, the feds consider VLOS to be precisely what the acronym stands for, Visual Line Of Sight. So IMHO, if you have strobes on the aircraft and you can see the strobes from the home point, you are in VLOS. It has nothing to do with depth perception at distance.

Now that would be effective.

Rob: That was a MOST excellent post and I completely agree with you on which groups truly affect legislation and, what DJI should do to deal with the issue.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

(Just chiming in..)

AFAIK, the feds consider VLOS to be precisely what the acronym stands for, Visual Line Of Sight. So IMHO, if you have strobes on the aircraft and you can see the strobes from the home point, you are in VLOS. It has nothing to do with depth perception at distance.

Hopefully you are correct, a lot (including me) are relying on strobes to give us a bit of freedom to fly FPV at times.
Let's face it, ou often don't need to be very far from your bird to lose sight of it.

But, think about it, why is VLOS important ?
You need to be able to see what's near your drone, what dangers you could be approaching / have approaching, and be able to react (land) immediately to avoid whatever it is.

You simply can't see that well at a mile or more, nor can you land (in general) as you'd lose wireless as you get too low, and the blasted thing would start RTH (or hover, or go into forced landing) with who knows what consequences.

Granted the risks are usually low for careful pilots, but the number of drones in the skies will only get higher, and odds are there will be more incidents or near misses due to that fact alone.
I think there are places you can 'get away with it' to some degree, but it you REALLY think about it, unless very remote with little risk of light plane / heli action happening . . . well, it's a gamble every time you are too far from the drones position to really be in control in such circumstances.

 

[sar104]

(Just chiming in..)

AFAIK, the feds consider VLOS to be precisely what the acronym stands for, Visual Line Of Sight. So IMHO, if you have strobes on the aircraft and you can see the strobes from the home point, you are in VLOS. It has nothing to do with depth perception at distance.

VLOS is defined pretty clearly in Part 107, and it is rather more than just being able to see the strobes:

§107.31 Visual line of sight aircraft operation.​

​

(a) With vision that is unaided by any device other than corrective lenses, the remote pilot in command, the visual observer (if one is used), and the person manipulating the flight control of the small unmanned aircraft system must be able to see the unmanned aircraft throughout the entire flight in order to:​

​

(1) Know the unmanned aircraft's location;​

​

(2) Determine the unmanned aircraft's attitude, altitude, and direction of flight;​

​

(3) Observe the airspace for other air traffic or hazards; and​

​

(4) Determine that the unmanned aircraft does not endanger the life or property of another.​

 

[kilomikebravo]

SAR: I hear you and agree. My point is that the reg doesn't address the issue of depth as mentioned by another member. Almost no one can judge depth even at much closer distances. IMHO, the key to line of sight is avoidance and to do whatever it takes to accomplish that.

Yes, #4 could be interpreted as though one does know the distance and direction of another aircraft. But the important thing for any potential mid-air is altitude and that you can fairly accurately judge from strobes. Unfortunately, unlike a manned aircraft, the pilot can't watch to see if the bearing to the conflict remains constant while distance decreases.

Will the drone operator always be at fault if there is an incident with a manned aircraft? I'd say the answer is a definite "yes" and it wouldn't matter if the operator had VLOS or not.

For me, just as it is in a manned aircraft..the most important part of flying a drone is to be vigilant for any potential conflict. But once ADS-B has been operational for some period of time, we will able to be a lot more aware of who is sharing the airspace with us.

 

[Former Member]

For me, just as it is in a manned aircraft..the most important part of flying a drone is to be vigilant for any potential conflict.

In a nutshell, thats what they are trying to advocate.

 

[kilomikebravo]

Hopefully you are correct, a lot (including me) are relying on strobes to give us a bit of freedom to fly FPV at times.

MSO: We all have our opinions <smiling> but I don't use the strobes to "get further" or to fly FPV. I got them so I could ALWAYS tell where the drone is located because, as we all know, even Superman couldn't see an M2 at 2000 feet much less a mile or more.

 

[sar104]

SAR: I hear you and agree. My point is that the reg doesn't address the issue of depth as mentioned by another member. Almost no one can judge depth even at much closer distances. IMHO, the key to line of sight is avoidance and to do whatever it takes to accomplish that.

Yes, #4 could be interpreted as though one does know the distance and direction of another aircraft. But the important thing for any potential mid-air is altitude and that you can fairly accurately judge from strobes. Unfortunately, unlike a manned aircraft, the pilot can't watch to see if the bearing to the conflict remains constant while distance decreases.

Will the drone operator always be at fault if there is an incident with a manned aircraft? I'd say the answer is a definite "yes" and it wouldn't matter if the operator had VLOS or not.

For me, just as it is in a manned aircraft..the most important part of flying a drone is to be vigilant for any potential conflict. But once ADS-B has been operational for some period of time, we will able to be a lot more aware of who is sharing the airspace with us.

Well there is no way you can judge distance, relative to other objects, just from a distant flashing light. And unless you have multi-colored lateral strobes then you can't judge attitude either. But my point, in any case, was that the FAA defined VLOS as far more than just the simplest literal interpretation of the acronym.

 

[kilomikebravo]

And unless you have multi-colored lateral strobes then you can't judge attitude either.

Not actual altitude, no, but relative altitude, yes, I can and I'm quite sure that I could avoid a conflict by staying below if need be.

Also, if everyone actually stayed below 400 AGL and, abided by the geofencing, we would almost never have an issue with our manned aircraft friends and VLOS.

 

[sar104]

Not actual altitude, no, but relative altitude, yes, I can and I'm quite sure that I could avoid a conflict by staying below if need be.

Also, if everyone actually stayed below 400 AGL and, abided by the geofencing, we would almost never have an issue with our manned aircraft friends and VLOS.

Attitude, not altitude - as required by 107.31 (a) (2).

 

[kilomikebravo]

I'm laughing at my mistake. Didn't have cheaters on, amigo...sorry. <still chuckling>