DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

Out of signal range waypoint missions

Yesterday I flew two out-of-signal waypoint missions [...] Watching the video from the second one, the drone seemed to not fly the correct waypoint mission.
"DJI drones are extremely reliable."
You say your second waypoint mission produced unexpected results, yet you believe the drone is reliable. Which is it?

Why would they have the continue when signal lost option if it wasn't safe. I'm a pilot.
Many of the DJI drone models no longer have that option, precisely because it is NOT safe. If control signal is lost, the drone will abort the waypoint mission and perform its configured Failsafe procedure.

Firstly, it is never entirely "safe" to fly your drone out of sight when you are unable to visually scan the surrounding airspace for conflicting traffic. Secondly it is beyond merely "unsafe", it is downright foolhardy dangerous to send your drone out of sight and beyond the range limit of your control signal. Then you no longer have a video signal so you can't see anything of what your drone is doing. You have no telemetry being sent back to your control screen, so you have no information whatsoever as to whether the flight is proceeding safely. But most importantly, you have no means available to resume control, even if you could see what's going on.

Under the best of circumstances, you're just sending the drone away completely blind and hoping that it will eventually return. But you're blindly sending it into airspace busy with manned aircraft. How is that "safe"?

One interesting thing I found out, is there's a small plane airport, right next to the international airport. And its runway isn't in the red zone. So you can fly fight over the runway.
Please tell me you knew that small airport was there before sending your drone on its way!

DJI allows you to self-authorize a flight into a Blue Authorization Zone, where this small airport is located. Once self-authorized, that means you physically can fly right over the runway because DJI won't prevent you from doing that. But that doesn't mean it's legal to do that.
 
You say your second waypoint mission produced unexpected results, yet you believe the drone is reliable. Which is it?
I haven't verified that yet. It just looked strange when I watched the video. I'm not saying it's ok to fly over any runway. The technology has existed to fly remote vehicles to a certain point ever since gps was launched. We used that in our cruise missiles in the first gulf war.
If the onboarding computer of the mavic 3 fails, you will lose your drone anyway. How often does that happen.
Again, planes have to be at 1,000 feet except on takeoff and landing.
The mavic 3 waypoint capability just came out, so they obviously think flying out of signal range is safe.
Have you ever heard of a cruise missile, ever hitting an airplane it wasn't targeting?
 
I live only a mile from the airport, so then I could never fly at all! And what would be the logic of that? Planes aren't going to be at 400 feet 10 km from the airport. Plus, in the Philippines, they don't enforce laws.
Who says you have to have the right to fly where you live? You have to go to wherever you're far enough from any airport.

I'm in Jamaica right now, there is a little airstrip nearby, about 5 little planes per day - yet, there is a 5 km zone around that airstrip (and any airport, heliport etc.) where I'm not allowed to fly. So yes, I have to leave my home and go somewhere where it is allowed to fly.

I wasn't talking about logic, just about the laws in your country. What you are doing is illegal. Now whether you or the authorities care about that is another story. It's not uncommon that nobody cares - until something bad happens ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlairAir
Who says you have to have the right to fly where you live? You have to go to wherever you're far enough from any airport.

I'm in Jamaica right now, there is a little airstrip nearby, about 5 little planes per day - yet, there is a 5 km zone around that airstrip (and any airport, heliport etc.) where I'm not allowed to fly. So yes, I have to leave my home and go somewhere where it is allowed to fly.

I wasn't talking about logic, just about the laws in your country. What you are doing is illegal. Now whether you or the authorities care about that is another story. It's not uncommon that nobody cares - until something bad happens ...
Ok, well you can do what you want. I'm not going to worry about stupid laws. I doubt you, or any other drone owner, never breaks any drone laws, not to mention all laws. Have you ever exceeded the speed limit while driving?
 
The mavic 3 waypoint capability just came out, so they obviously think flying out of signal range is safe.
There are (at least) three different things you should consider carefully each time before you fly your drone.

Is it safe, is it legal, are you doing something you might come to regret?

The Mavic 3 will reliably fly waypoint missions, even beyond the range of your control signal. That does not necessarily equate to it being safe.

Is it legal to do what you're doing? I'm not familiar with Philippine regulations, but my gut feeling is this is almost certainly not legal. But you don't seem to care about that.

Are you doing something you might regret? So far, evidently, you've been lucky. Your drone has reliably returned from those waypoint missions, so you have not yet experienced regret.

On September 21st, 2017, a mid-air collision occurred between a DJI Phantom 4 Pro and a US Army UH60 Blackhawk helicopter. The NTSB investigation concluded the collision was caused by, “the failure of the [drone] pilot to see and avoid the helicopter due to his intentional flight beyond visual line of sight. Contributing to the incident was the [drone] pilot's incomplete knowledge of the regulations and safe operating practices.”

In this incident, the drone was still within control signal range, but it was so far away that he could not see it. He had no idea that a collision had occurred. He only noticed the connection suddenly stopped. He just assumed the drone would then automatically return to home upon losing control signal. But it never did.

Here's a link describing this event:
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/drone-collides-with-us-army-helicopter-puts-1-5-dent-in-rotor/

And here's a link to the NTSB docket with more details:
data.ntsb.gov/Docket/?NTSBNumber=DCA17IA202AB

In this incident, the drone pilot was eventually tracked down and identified via a serial number stamped on one of the drone's motors, which was recovered from the air intake debris screen of the helicopter's engine.

Think about this carefully. This could have been you. Except there are significant differences in your case.

The New York drone pilot flew his drone out over the ocean, where he thought it was safe because it's just empty space. He flew his drone beyond the point where he could no longer see it, but he still had a good control signal, up until the point of collision which destroyed his drone.

You, on the other hand, are flying your drone over a densely populated area and into the controlled airspace of an International Airport and a Philippine Air Force Base and a smaller flight instruction airfield. You are similarly flying your drone intentionally beyond visual line of sight, which means you cannot see whether your drone is in danger of colliding with other aircraft. But not only that, even if you could see an impending collision, you are unable to do anything to avoid that collision because your drone is flying beyond range of your control signal.

"intentional flight beyond visual line of sight", AND intentional beyond range of control.

You may be lucky so far. But, in the event of a regrettable disaster, the police won't need to search for serial numbers in the debris of your drone. They merely need to ask DJI for the identity of the responsible drone pilot. Remember that you have already identified yourself to DJI when you voluntarily AND intentionally chose to self-authorize your flight within a Blue Authorization Geozone.

DJI is certainly not going to accept any liability in the event of such a collision. They will be more than happy to pin that responsibility onto you.

So think about it carefully and ask yourself again. Is what you're doing safe, is it legal, are you doing something you might come to regret?
 
Last edited:
I started this thread about out of signal range waypoint missions. If you want to talk about drone laws, you should start your own thread.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: alegastar and slup
I started this thread about out-of-signal-range waypoint missions. If you want to talk about drone laws, you should start your own thread.
If waypoint missions were all you were asking about, no problem. I'm sure there are many people here who would be happy help you by sharing their own experience.

However, you started this thread by saying this in the very first post;
One bad thing is, you can't see the video for most of the mission, but one good thing is, when you watch it on your TV, you're watching something you've never seen before.
That statement alone should already set alarm bells ringing. It implies that you didn't research the area beforehand, and are blindly sending your drone there anyway. But your subsequent posts make it sound as though you didn't even know there was a smaller airport located right beside the International airport.

There must be better locations for you to conduct experiments with waypoint missions. You've previously posted Youtube videos of beaches and seaside locations. Surely you can find less hazardous places in which to experiment.

If you're looking for guidance on how to fly waypoint missions, there are many very helpful people on this forum. But if it involves blind waypoint missions beyond range of your control signal, you're less likely to find anyone willing to comment in public about such flights. I'm sure many people have secretly experimented with that option, but hopefully they did so in safer locations than yours.

Most of us on these forums live in countries where such flights are either totally prohibited, or are authorized only rarely under very tight restrictions. Power line and pipeline inspections are areas where such flights would be very useful.

Blindly sending a drone into controlled airspace is just asking for trouble. You might think your flights ended safely, evidenced only by having had your drone return to you undamaged at the conclusion of its waypoint mission. But you couldn't see the drone during the flight and, as you stated, you don't even have flight log telemetry data to verify exactly where the drone actually went while it was out of sight. You have no idea how many near-miss mid-air collisions might have occurred without you even noticing.

Your choice of flight location is unwise. If an incident were to occur, however unlikely and even if it did not result in injuries or fatalities, it would still create consequences for you, and would likely have far-reaching consequences for other drone enthusiasts around the world.

We're not out to criticize you personally. We've all done dumb things which we'd rather not admit to in public. But what you're doing is not right. That just my opinion, and as one drone flyer to another, I encourage you to find safer places to fly.

Enough said...
 
There are (at least) three different things you should consider carefully each time before you fly your drone.

Is it safe, is it legal, are you doing something you might come to regret?

The Mavic 3 will reliably fly waypoint missions, even beyond the range of your control signal. That does not necessarily equate to it being safe.

Is it legal to do what you're doing? I'm not familiar with Philippine regulations, but my gut feeling is this is almost certainly not legal. But you don't seem to care about that.

Are you doing something you might regret? So far, evidently, you've been lucky. Your drone has reliably returned from those waypoint missions, so you have not yet experienced regret.

On September 21st, 2017, a mid-air collision occurred between a DJI Phantom 4 Pro and a US Army UH60 Blackhawk helicopter. The NTSB investigation concluded the collision was caused by, “the failure of the [drone] pilot to see and avoid the helicopter due to his intentional flight beyond visual line of sight. Contributing to the incident was the [drone] pilot's incomplete knowledge of the regulations and safe operating practices.”

In this incident, the drone was still within control signal range, but it was so far away that he could not see it. He had no idea that a collision had occurred. He only noticed the connection suddenly stopped. He just assumed the drone would then automatically return to home upon losing control signal. But it never did.

Here's a link describing this event:
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/12/drone-collides-with-us-army-helicopter-puts-1-5-dent-in-rotor/

And here's a link to the NTSB docket with more details:
data.ntsb.gov/Docket/?NTSBNumber=DCA17IA202AB

In this incident, the drone pilot was eventually tracked down and identified via a serial number stamped on one of the drone's motors, which was recovered from the air intake debris screen of the helicopter's engine.

Think about this carefully. This could have been you. Except there are significant differences in your case.

The New York drone pilot flew his drone out over the ocean, where he thought it was safe because it's just empty space. He flew his drone beyond the point where he could no longer see it, but he still had a good control signal, up until the point of collision which destroyed his drone.

You, on the other hand, are flying your drone over a densely populated area and into the controlled airspace of an International Airport and a Philippine Air Force Base and a smaller flight instruction airfield. You are similarly flying your drone intentionally beyond visual line of sight, which means you cannot see whether your drone is in danger of colliding with other aircraft. But not only that, even if you could see an impending collision, you are unable to do anything to avoid that collision because your drone is flying beyond range of your control signal.

"intentional flight beyond visual line of sight", AND intentional beyond range of control.

You may be lucky so far. But, in the event of a regrettable disaster, the police won't need to search for serial numbers in the debris of your drone. They merely need to ask DJI for the identity of the responsible drone pilot. Remember that you have already identified yourself to DJI when you voluntarily AND intentionally chose to self-authorize your flight within a Blue Authorization Geozone.

DJI is certainly not going to accept any liability in the event of such a collision. They will be more than happy to pin that responsibility onto you.

So think about it carefully and ask yourself again. Is what you're doing safe, is it legal, are you doing something you might come to regret?
You see in this case, the helicopters were flying too low, at around 300 feet.

"The UH-60M had been flying as CAVM087 (“Caveman 87”), the lead craft in a flight of two helicopters that were getting their bearings to monitor a set of “temporary flight restrictions” (TFRs) involving the UN General Assembly and President Donald Trump."

There was no reason to be flying at 300 feet to monitor temporary flight restrictions. Being higher would of made it easier to see other planes. No one was hurt in this incident, and they don't say if the pilot was charged with a crime. Also, they don't say how fast the helicopter was going, and why didn't the helicopter see the drone. How far is VLOS? So the helicopter had that far to avoid the drone. One collision in the 6 year history of drones is not bad. It's a lot better than aircraft to aircraft collisions. Did you here about the Texas airshow crash, where many people were killed?
If you watch YouTube drone videos, you see many illegal flights. One guy in Hawaii flew very far away to show it could be done. One guy in Greece flew very high, to show it could be done.
You never answered my question, if you ever speed in your car?
 
You see in this case, the helicopters were flying too low, at around 300 feet.

"The UH-60M had been flying as CAVM087 (“Caveman 87”), the lead craft in a flight of two helicopters that were getting their bearings to monitor a set of “temporary flight restrictions” (TFRs) involving the UN General Assembly and President Donald Trump."

There was no reason to be flying at 300 feet to monitor temporary flight restrictions. Being higher would of made it easier to see other planes. No one was hurt in this incident, and they don't say if the pilot was charged with a crime. Also, they don't say how fast the helicopter was going, and why didn't the helicopter see the drone. How far is VLOS? So the helicopter had that far to avoid the drone. One collision in the 6 year history of drones is not bad. It's a lot better than aircraft to aircraft collisions. Did you here about the Texas airshow crash, where many people were killed?
If you watch YouTube drone videos, you see many illegal flights. One guy in Hawaii flew very far away to show it could be done. One guy in Greece flew very high, to show it could be done.
You never answered my question, if you ever speed in your car?
Maybe, just maybe, there are not so many incidents with drones because there are rules in place to avoid such incidents, and the vast majority of people actually follow those rules ...
 
I would say the majority of people don't follow all the rules.
Your logic seems to be, if most people don't follow all the rules, you can break every rule.

You are aware that there are levels to this, right? To go with your car analogy (which hardly ever works) - if I drive 40 where 30 is allowed, does that mean it's ok if you sent a self driving vehicle beyond your oversight and beyond your control with 300 through the same road? You think that flying a drone in 9.5 km distance from the airport (which is breaking the rules in the Philippines) is the same as letting it fly (again beyond VLOS and without any control) right next to it?

You, Sir, are a lost case. Let's just hope that no innocent people are ever paying the price for your recklessness.
 
it's ok if you sent a self driving vehicle beyond your oversight and beyond your control with 300 through the same road?
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Self driving cars will be a lot safer than human driven when they are perfected. There is control when it's out of signal range. The drone is controlling itself. It still has obstacle avoidance, and low battery return to home. It's below all aircraft.
 
Well, I did four, out of signal range missions today. All worked good. The last one, was a 17 minute mission, 5 minutes longer than I had done before. It landed with around 24% battery left. So I probably won't try to go further. Found out something interesting. If your drone is turned on, without the motors running, and you load and run a mission, it will show a dialog saying "make sure you drone has a clear takeoff route, and the drone will fly to the start of the mission and execute it. Before, I had always gotten up about 300 feet before I ran the mission. Pretty neat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alegastar
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Self driving cars will be a lot safer than human driven when they are perfected. There is control when it's out of signal range. The drone is controlling itself. It still has obstacle avoidance, and low battery return to home. It's below all aircraft.
As I said, car analogies never work - you brought speeding into the discussion. But as of today no self driving cars are perfected. Neither are drones. Aircrafts and pilots are not perfect either, there are situations they have to fly lower than planned, that is why there is so much space around airports to make any extraordinary maneuvers safe. Good luck explaining that it's not your fault a plane went down after colliding with your drone cause it was flying too low according to your opinion.
 
there are situations where [aircraft] have to fly lower than planned, that is why there is so much space around airports to make any extraordinary maneuvers safe.
I'll even give an example. When I was a student pilot we practised forced approaches, i.e. what to do in the event of an engine failure.

Engine failures can occur at any time due to all sorts of different circumstances. If it happens at high altitude, then you have plenty of time while gliding to sort things out, or to pick an appropriate emergency landing site. But the worst time to suffer an engine failure is immediately after takeoff, because then you really do need to react quickly and appropriately.

I flew out of the St Catharines Flying Club, located here:

When taking off heading southwest from the long runway 24, I could always tell something was up when the flight instructor was quietly mumbling into the radio mic to alert the control tower to what was about to happen.

We had just lifted off and were gaining altitude, when the instructor reaches over and pulls the throttle to idle. What do you do now?

Trying to turn back to the runway is suicide. Steep turns at slow speed and low altitude will end badly every time.

Continuing straight ahead is also no good at all, as that puts us into the Welland Canal. Even if we could stretch the glide further across the canal, that just puts us into the built-up neighbourhoods of St.Catharines.

Trying to put the plane down straight ahead, but short of the canal, is also not a good plan, because those fields are full of grape orchards with grapevines hanging on wires stretched between posts. If we continue straight we'd be landing across those wires. They'll snag on our non-retractable landing gear and instantly pitch the plane onto its nose.

The best option is to turn South and try to put the plane down between the grape rows. The wooden grape posts will probably still tear the wings off the plane, but hopefully the fuselage will come to rest between the rows.

All of that needs to be decided quickly and acted on within the very short time available.

Our plane would be descending to near tree-top height before the instructor eventually declared whether my approach would have saved us or killed us. Then we'd add full power and climb outta there.

How is any of that relevant to this discussion?

Well, this is the sort of important stuff that is taught and regularly practised at any flying school, like the flight training school at your Omni Aviation airport.

All of our emergency manoeuvring put our plane at very low altitude well to the south of our runway's centre-line. After all that, it would suck to have @shb's drone come through our windshield!
 
Your example is a very good reason why VLOS should be maintained especially near airspace around airports @Zbip57 !

I am a little confused about the airspace at Clark International (named otherwise on up to date charts) shown on the World VFR charts on SkyVector.com. Some symbology appears like Class D in the US and part looks like Class B without the usual upside down cake appearance.

I remember flying into Minneapolis-St Paul and having our landing aborted about 200 ft AGL when ground traffic encroached the runway we were landing on. That was an experience when the throttles were suddenly increased and the 747 was put into a 45 degree left bank and climbed out and back into the pattern.

The point is that while traffic at an airport is normally predictable and consistent emergencies happen that can end up putting a manned aircraft into low altitude airspace where they would normally not be.

If you can’t see it, you can’t avoid it!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zbip57 and codex22
Clark International (named otherwise on up to date charts) shown on the World VFR charts on SkyVector.com
SkyVector shows it named as "Diosdados Macapagal" International.

I checked Google for a translation of that. Google says:
  • "Diosdados Macapagal" = "Diosdados Macapagal" 🤪
  • "Diosdados macapagal" = "God bless you" Thumbswayup
  • "diosdados macapagal" = "gods are lazy" :oops:
"Clark International" seems to be a less provocative name for an International Airport.
 
  • Like
Reactions: codex22
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
131,131
Messages
1,560,137
Members
160,100
Latest member
PilotOne