Aircraft are required to fly 1000' over populated areas and 500' over unpopulated areas. Helicopters and gyros are allowed to fly at an altitude that will enable them to land safely, so much less than fixed wing aircraft. In addition, rotary wing aircraft are often flying a pattern opposite fixed wing aircraft. You are flying in a very dangerous area and to do so without visual or even a controller connection is putting aviators at risk. A risk that could prove to be deadly at worst, and very expensive at least. Please reconsider your actions, regardless of the government's enforcement of the regulations.
Out of signal range waypoint missions
- Thread starter shb
- Start date
BlairAir
Well-Known Member
I HAD a near collision with a helicopter. Flying 300 AGL at a local Seminary- what was previously Wake Forest College. 2 summers ago, I was a relatively new drone pilot and flying directly over a building with a center spire. Doing a manual orbit to capture it I heard, then immediately saw a helicopter flying at almost identical altitude. In the moment I froze, stopped all movement of the drone and watched as the helicopter flew within a hundred feet of my drone. Maybe this was a "near collision" or maybe not, but it was too near for me. I landed, packed up and went home, shaken by how that could have gone. Was I legal? Absolutely! If there had been a collision, I could have been reasonably able to defend my actions. Even if blame wasn't attributed to my actions, I don't think I'd want an FAA investigation to include me, or see the local paper having a blurb about it. It would certainly get me all the wrong kind of attention.
Having more experience, today I would be more able to help avoid a collision by taking action, but that was a great wake up call and a lesson about diligence, planning and awareness of your environment. I read this thread with interest and a sense of foreboding. The OP is absolutely wreckless, justifying his actions with all types of rationalizations. He won't stop until something causes him to stop and hopefully no one gets hurt or killed in order for that to occur. Still, he will blame the authorities for lack of enforcement, or DJI for allowing flights out of rsnge, or something or someone else. One thing he will never do is take personal responsibility for putting people and property at risk. Because people speed in cars, see? His country doesn't enforce laws, right? How can he possibly be responsible when these things are true?
Having more experience, today I would be more able to help avoid a collision by taking action, but that was a great wake up call and a lesson about diligence, planning and awareness of your environment. I read this thread with interest and a sense of foreboding. The OP is absolutely wreckless, justifying his actions with all types of rationalizations. He won't stop until something causes him to stop and hopefully no one gets hurt or killed in order for that to occur. Still, he will blame the authorities for lack of enforcement, or DJI for allowing flights out of rsnge, or something or someone else. One thing he will never do is take personal responsibility for putting people and property at risk. Because people speed in cars, see? His country doesn't enforce laws, right? How can he possibly be responsible when these things are true?
I guess you are pretty naive about drones. I can only see my Mavic 3 from 1,500 feet away. So do you think when people do range tests on YouTube, and get 10 miles away, they can still see their drone?
FLDave
Well-Known Member
Legal defense in case of a crash with helicopter, really? Failure to give way to manned aircraft. Failure to maintain VLOS with UAS to know what is in the airspace surrounding it.
Exactly. Litany of breaches.. He would have been found gilty without a doubt. Unless his legal team could convince the court that he should be dealt with under mental healt act claiming insanity or a serious congnitive impairment
I don't believe you guys. He's just trying to contribute to this thread, and you're getting on his case. He never said he didn't have VLOS. Why was the helicopter flying at 300 feet? A drone has never downed any kind of aircraft. Drones have equal rights to fly.
I value his contribution and him sharing his close encounter with a helicopter but that does not mean that I should condone this. He by his own admission has learned from his mistake and that hopefully will serve to other members of this forum as a reminder to be very careful when flying their drones and to never underestimate the danger a drone can pose to a maned aircraft.
I don't see how BlairAir made any "mistakes." He was flying in legal airspace, at a legal altitude, doing a legal activity. He was VLOS as he stated he was able to see his drone and the helicopter. He may have vapor locked, but he didn't spaz out and send his drone careening into the helicopter. The outcome was positive and it is only his own self flagellation that he could have done better, but I submit he could have done worse.
The OP on the other hand IS a menace to aircraft and seems to be proud of that fact.
Well, I'd like to apologise for my previous comment. I got entangled in this thread, did not read all the comments carefully and somehow missed that the BlairAir was actually flying in VLOS and only 300ft altitude. Someone commented after that he can only see his Mavic up to 1500ft away and that got me mixed up. I thought that BlairAir was flying further than that when he had the near miss with the helicopter. Anyway, I just wanted to put on record that my comment was out of line and unintentionally harsh.
I did not go right over the little airport. You ca see I'm not even over the taxiway.
What I've found out since, is that the mavic 3 drone flight logs are encrypted, and only DJI can read them.
I just reread the entire thread, and no one has ever explained how i am a menace to aircraft. I stay below 400 feet, and do not fly over runways. There are no helicopters here. Illegal does not mean unsafe. I've been flying 3 out of signal missiond most days, and have not had any problems.
What people are trying to tell you is that things not always go as planned, there are emergencies.
Planes don't always fly about 400 feet. And not always straight over the runway.
There are no helicopters where you are? How can you be so sure? Police or medical helicopters will never ever come to your area?
"Never had any problems" is a weak argument to predict outcomes in the future ...
If I plane is making an emergency landing, the small chance he will hit a drone is the least of his problems.
Living here around 25 years, I've never seen a helicopter flying. This isn't a developed country, where they always send out helicopters on rescue missions or have police or news helicopters.
Have you ever seen a commercial jet flying at 500 feet far from an airport?
Same with small planes.
I will make one last appeal to your better judgement. Flying BVLOS at an airport is simply asking for trouble. You can't SEE what is happening and don't KNOW if you are creating an issue.
I am a pilot with 1200 hours in small aircraft. I fly at an uncontrolled airport and have seen some pilots make odd mistakes, like flying a left hand pattern instead of a right. Landing on runway 05 when 23 was active. Landing on a taxiway, thinking it was a runway. I've seen people drag out their landings from 500' or lower. So, don't think that just because you are on the non-operational side of the airport you can't create a hazard.
And, consider this: If you down an airplane, you are going to have one very long day and this entire thread will come back to haunt you.
That's like saying, you put on a blindfold and blindly stumble across a busy roadway three times a day, but have not been run over yet. That doesn't mean it's safe to do that.
The issue is that you are sending your drone on missions beyond control signal range with no means to monitor what it is actually doing, no means to assess whether it has had any close calls or near misses along the way, and most importantly no means to abort the mission or resume control to take avoiding action even if you were able to detect an impending collision.
The fact that your Mavic has (so far) reliably returned from these flights doesn't mean it's safe to do this.
You keep trying to deflect responsibility for your actions by saying DJI designed their drones with this capability therefore it must be safe, or other people have flown their drones on 10 mile range tests, or other people break speed limits with their cars, etc. None of that is relevant.
Certainly there are situations and circumstances under which out-of-signal waypoint missions can be conducted safely and legally, or even safely but illegally. But where you're launching from, into controlled airspace of an international airport and air force base, is plain nuts.
15°10'01.0"N 120°35'31.0"E · 468-456 Tomas, Balibago, Angeles, Pampanga, Philippines
468-456 Tomas, Balibago, Angeles, Pampanga, Philippines
goo.gl
I can see what happened, because I watch the videos when the drone gets home. I am far away from any planes.
I was a student pilot too. I don't think there's any pattern at this airport. They always seem to fly straight in, and takeoff straight out.
Actually, I'm not flying that waypoint mission anymore, because I'm flying new ones, in the opposite direction of the airport. I can actually see planes at the airport, right from my house, using the 7x zoom.
Which Mavic 3 are you using again? Cause I'm not aware that there are models that have 360 degree cameras.
Though even if it would be irrelevant, you don't see what your drone sees until after the fact. It's the same stupid argument you're making over and over again - nothing ever happened, so nothing ever will.
Similar threads
