This makes me very sad

[Skipper1]

Finally someone that is totally honest and doing the right thing, you don’t want to break the law. Remember not to drift through any stop signs, speed up when the light turns yellow or go over the speed limit. And by all means, do not spit on the sidewalk.

 

[Motorcycle Rider]

So you are really arguing that a few miles per hour over the speed limit is equivalent to driving with your eyes closed? That all law-breaking is equivalently serious? And you have clearly never piloted an aircraft - you are constantly scanning the sky forwards and sideways, and the assumption is that anything closing on you from behind will see you because they are doing the same. Your FPV is useless in comparison.

The utility of taking photos without FPV is a complete red herring, because you can have both, you just can't not have VLOS.

You are obviously not an IFR pilot. I fly IFR regularly, nothing to see out the windows, just the instruments in the panel. Go do some IFR time with an instrument rated pilot, then come back and read your own post again.

 

[coneslayer]

You are obviously not an IFR pilot. I fly IFR regularly, nothing to see out the windows, just the instruments in the panel. Go do some IFR time with an instrument rated pilot, then come back and read your own post again.

What on earth does IFR have to do with our drones? How would we maintain separation BVLOS without radios, without ATC following, without transponders, without flight plans, and without clearances?

 

[Motorcycle Rider]

What on earth does IFR have to do with our drones? How would we maintain separation BVLOS without radios, without ATC following, without transponders, without flight plans, and without clearances?

He stated that pilots are constantly scanning outside, which is false. I flew IFR in the Air Force, still do. Making blanket statements, that others are incorrect, while the person saying it is incorrect, deserves to be corrected.

 

[Miss Chrisy Co]

Unfortunately every time you sit behind the wheel of your automobile you're potentially putting someone else's life at risk. The real question is what is the actually level of risk. I content that visual line of sight is really meaningless in a discussion of judging the proximity of a manned aircraft and a drone within visual line of sight beyond a couple of hundred meters. Your eyes are not capable of making an accurate judgement of proximity at that distance.

I can hear when any aircraft is going to be within stratum of my drone, and that gives me an extra layer of protection. I live within a few miles of 2 helipads and about 6 miles from a regional airport. I always hear them before I see them and there's no way that you're going to be situationally aware of a heli or plane if you can't even hear it because the drone is 2 miles away. When I hear a low flying plane or helicopter I immediately try to find it and avoid flying my drone near it or at worst I bring it down to tree line level without a problem.

 

[Deleted member 125445]

Finally someone that is totally honest and doing the right thing, you don’t want to break the law. Remember not to drift through any stop signs, speed up when the light turns yellow or go over the speed limit. And by all means, do not spit on the sidewalk.

I agree with you, but unfortunately I predict you will hear from members of this group who will tell you the analogy is not appropriate because they think VLOS violations are more serious.

 

[TheFlaneur]

if I let any of these regulations dictate what I do id never even bother buying a drone to begin with.

 

[Deleted member 125445]

if I let any of these regulations dictate what I do id never even bother buying a drone to begin with.

Yes, I was aware of that VLOS regulation before I bought the drone, but I wanted to check out the situation for myself. It took me only two days of flying to realize what I already suspected, that I could not enjoy the hobby under the current restrictions. Anyway, my experiment is over, and I dropped the hobby I really wanted to take up.

 

[Deleted member 93449]

I can hear when any aircraft is going to be within stratum of my drone, and that gives me an extra layer of protection. I live within a few miles of 2 helipads and about 6 miles from a regional airport. I always hear them before I see them and there's no way that you're going to be situationally aware of a heli or plane if you can't even hear it because the drone is 2 miles away. When I hear a low flying plane or helicopter I immediately try to find it and avoid flying my drone near it or at worst I bring it down to tree line level without a problem.

I don't think the issue is hearing or seeing the aircraft but determining based on sight and/or sound distance, altitude, direction of travel, proximity of the aircraft with respect to the drone and the best course of action to take if you perceive there might be a collision. The hearing is going to be very dependent on the type of aircraft. Helicopters are especially loud while small fixed wing aircraft not so much.

I live with a 2 mile gap between to class C sections of controlled airspace. Depending on the ambient noise and terrain my experience is I can see a fixed wing aircraft at a greater distance than I can see them. With helicopters you can usually hear them before you see them but even then I find it difficult to determine direction, distance and altitude before seeing them. In both cases I don't need to see my drone to know if it is in the general airspace where the aircraft is located and even if I could see it making judgements about proximity are very difficult due to the limitations of human depth perception and the disparage in size.

My outlook on this is I don't see any real safety advantage in VLOS versus BVLOS as long as you know the general location of the drone and can see aircraft traveling into that area (you should be looking in that general area for aircraft approaching). If an aircraft should come into view in that area lower your altitude until you see the aircraft leave the area. The overwhelming vast majority of aircraft are not going to be flying at 400 feet or lower.

 

[sar104]

You are obviously not an IFR pilot. I fly IFR regularly, nothing to see out the windows, just the instruments in the panel. Go do some IFR time with an instrument rated pilot, then come back and read your own post again.

The discussion assumes VFR. What does IFR have to do with it?

 

[sar104]

He stated that pilots are constantly scanning outside, which is false. I flew IFR in the Air Force, still do. Making blanket statements, that others are incorrect, while the person saying it is incorrect, deserves to be corrected.

No - you are being completely disingenuous here. Yes - I could have stated during VFR flight, which is the analogous situation, but I didn't think anyone would be foolish enough to assume otherwise.

 

[Miss Chrisy Co]

I don't think the issue is hearing or seeing the aircraft but determining based on sight and/or sound distance, altitude, direction of travel, proximity of the aircraft with respect to the drone and the best course of action to take if you perceive there might be a collision. The hearing is going to be very dependent on the type of aircraft. Helicopters are especially loud while small fixed wing aircraft not so much.

I live with a 2 mile gap between to class C sections of controlled airspace. Depending on the ambient noise and terrain my experience is I can see a fixed wing aircraft at a greater distance than I can see them. With helicopters you can usually hear them before you see them but even then I find it difficult to determine direction, distance and altitude before seeing them. In both cases I don't need to see my drone to know if it is in the general airspace where the aircraft is located and even if I could see it making judgements about proximity are very difficult due to the limitations of human depth perception and the disparage in size.

My outlook on this is I don't see any real safety advantage in VLOS versus BVLOS as long as you know the general location of the drone and can see aircraft traveling into that area (you should be looking in that general area for aircraft approaching). If an aircraft should come into view in that area lower your altitude until you see the aircraft leave the area. The overwhelming vast majority of aircraft are not going to be flying at 400 feet or lower.

I've never had a problem hearing any fixed wing going in and out of the nearby airport that would be in stratum of my drone while remaining in VLOS. I don't know about you, but I've rarely ever identified an aircraft from the FPV of the drone, in fact, I find it very difficult to find the aircraft on my tablet or phone vs what my eyes can see. I think it's rather amazing you can see aircraft before you hear them because that's almost never been the case for me, unless I was visually scanning all sectors of the sky somehow simultaneously looking at my drone and all possible approach vectors, I'm not really sure how that's possible unless the aircraft happens to go across my VLOS, in which case, it's probably already a problem and time for evaluating has passed and actions are needed.

If the drone is 2 miles away, your not going to see the aircraft that's 3 miles away on an approach in the opposite direction of your line of sight. I disagree that there is no real safety advantage in VLOS, and unless all aircraft are now required to transmit ADS-B, I will continue to disagree with you.

 

[Sxottie]

IMHO anyone who has flown drones for any amount of time has violated the VLOS rule at one point or another. Having a VLOS to your drone is one thing. Actually being able to see your tiny drone is another issue altogether. You must maintain a situational awareness of where your drone is at all times in relation to it's surroundings which are constantly changing while you fly and as things move around the drone.

 

[fGene]

I beleive the UAV rules put forward by FAA (in the US, at least), in general, are not well thought out and are sometimes more detrimental than conducive to flight safety. They are more or less an umbrella that attempts to cover way too many different circumstances. Let me emphasize -- I don't think we UAV pilots should not follow them, but I believe we should criticize (voice our opinions about) them whenever possible, in hope of eventually making the rules more sensible.

1. The VLOS rule leaves a lot of room for misinterpretation. Can I take my eyes of the drone to look at my screen to check battery level, or other crucial telemetry data? Can I use a circular quickshot to fly around that lone tree in front of me, as I won't be able to clearly see the drone through the foliage when it's on the other side? What "knowing attitude and orientation" actually means (for instance, when the right stick is pushed in any direction, the orientation of the drone can be easily deduced, even if it is just a speck in the sky. Again, there's telemetry.) And so on.

2. I don't think the VLOS rule is actually enforceable, except in extreme situations. Anyone can claim to be a Hawkeye while in fact they could not see the drone at all, but rely on camera view and telemetry instead (and no one could tell, let alone prove otherwise). Thus, this rule is easily abusable. Personally, I would much prefer if there was a hard distance limit beyond which we are prohibited to fly, and that this limit would depend on, firstly, on the type of airspace, and secondly, on actual pilot's qualifications (which could be judged by FAA, for instance, through a series of tests). I know from experience that a newbie flying his new drone in the park in plain sight could be far more dangerous (to himself, others and any aircraft in the vicinity) than a pro flying BVLOS. But, according to FAA, the newbie is operating within the rule, and the pro isn't.

3. There is not enough distinction between UAV types. Honestly, dividing them into anything below 250 g and anything above that, up to 55 pounds(!) is laughable. I used to pilot a 23 lb. octocopter with 16-inch carbon fiber props. It is a monster that can casually chop off a tree branch one inch in diameter and not even stop in its tracks. Yes, I could see its orientation from at least a mile away, so technically I was not violating the VLOS rule. Did it make me comfortable, or more importantly, should it make anyone else more comfortable? Not the slightest bit. I hated to fly it, because I knew that if something went wrong the damage would be extensive. Now it rests in my closet as memorabilia, and I am not planning to fly it ever again. Even better example is a large single-rotor, or "regular" RC helicopter. These guys are extremely dangerous, much more so then any multirotors. Yet the current law makes no distinction between them and, say, a Mavic Air. All of them weigh more than 250g, same rules apply, and that's it.

I didn't mean to offend anybody by my post, just expressing my point of view. Thanks for understanding.

 

[Deleted member 125445]

I beleive the UAV rules put forward by FAA (in the US, at least), in general, are not well thought out and are sometimes more detrimental than conducive to flight safety. They are more or less an umbrella that attempts to cover way too many different circumstances. Let me emphasize -- I don't think we UAV pilots should not follow them, but I believe we should criticize (voice our opinions about) them whenever possible, in hope of eventually making the rules more sensible.

1. The VLOS rule leaves a lot of room for misinterpretation. Can I take my eyes of the drone to look at my screen to check battery level, or other crucial telemetry data? Can I use a circular quickshot to fly around that lone tree in front of me, as I won't be able to clearly see the drone through the foliage when it's on the other side? What "knowing attitude and orientation" actually means (for instance, when the right stick is pushed in any direction, the orientation of the drone can be easily deduced, even if it is just a speck in the sky. Again, there's telemetry.) And so on.

2. I don't think the VLOS rule is actually enforceable, except in extreme situations. Anyone can claim to be a Hawkeye while in fact they could not see the drone at all, but rely on camera view and telemetry instead (and no one could tell, let alone prove otherwise). Thus, this rule is easily abusable. Personally, I would much prefer if there was a hard distance limit beyond which we are prohibited to fly, and that this limit would depend on, firstly, on the type of airspace, and secondly, on actual pilot's qualifications (which could be judged by FAA, for instance, through a series of tests). I know from experience that a newbie flying his new drone in the park in plain sight could be far more dangerous (to himself, others and any aircraft in the vicinity) than a pro flying BVLOS. But, according to FAA, the newbie is operating within the rule, and the pro isn't.

3. There is not enough distinction between UAV types. Honestly, dividing them into anything below 250 g and anything above that, up to 55 pounds(!) is laughable. I used to pilot a 23 lb. octocopter with 16-inch carbon fiber props. It is a monster that can casually chop off a tree branch one inch in diameter and not even stop in its tracks. Yes, I could see its orientation from at least a mile away, so technically I was not violating the VLOS rule. Did it make me comfortable, or more importantly, should it make anyone else more comfortable? Not the slightest bit. I hated to fly it, because I knew that if something went wrong the damage would be extensive. Now it rests in my closet as memorabilia, and I am not planning to fly it ever again. Even better example is a large single-rotor, or "regular" RC helicopter. These guys are extremely dangerous, much more so then any multirotors. Yet the current law makes no distinction between them and, say, a Mavic Air. All of them weigh more than 250g, same rules apply, and that's it.

I didn't mean to offend anybody by my post, just expressing my point of view. Thanks for understanding.

Thank you for your thoughtful insight. I definitely think the VLOS rule needs to updated using common sense and taking into account the wonderful technology being built into drones these days.

 

[Sjkieffer]

I speed. I fly until the controller loses signal. Go ahead, hate me.

 

[Motorcycle Rider]

I speed. I fly until the controller loses signal. Go ahead, hate me.

No hatred here.
Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.
I've broken laws almost daily, my entire life. Even got arrested at 14 for drinking a beer on the beach. Some people just think that they are superior to others, and never ever break any laws. I guarantee you they have.

 

[SkyeHigh]

In my opinion, it's not a poor analogy. I'm comparing obeying the law in both scenarios, which I've done. But, you are also entitled to your own opinion .
It's a silly law to be honest. If you go fly a small Cessna, does anyone have VLOS to this aircraft? No, because you're inside flying it with a FIRST PERSON VIEW (FPV). It's the same argument that we as drone flyers have FPV and can get a view directly from the aircraft rather than looking at it from the ground. Try flying your drone 300ft in the air within 20-50ft distance out and take a few pictures/videos without the FPV and let me know how well you can orient yourself with your VLOS law. It's a stupid law, it sucks, but it is what it is.

With respect, your analogy to flying a Cessna light aircraft is showing a lack of understanding. The pilot of the Cessna has a first person view and an almost 360-degree view of the airspace immediately around his aircraft. You as a pilot do not. You have only the camera view. The Cessna pilot can turn his head around far quicker than your camera and drone can rotate. He also has radio comms to monitor air traffic, you do not, which is just one reason for ADS-B being introduced into law.

I could go one by explaining the pilot has a visual view of his aircraft’s height as well as an altitude indicator... Or the fact he know’s he’s flying in airspace where he knows other pilots are qualified and obey aviation regulations. Or his life and the safety of any passengers are his personal responsibility.

 

[yamahu]

This hobby is really not for Jim. Law is law. If I know where you return it I'll try to buy it as open box. This drone is practically new and as open box cheaper.

Yes, I was aware of that VLOS regulation before I bought the drone, but I wanted to check out the situation for myself. It took me only two days of flying to realize what I already suspected, that I could not enjoy the hobby under the current restrictions. Anyway, my experiment is over, and I dropped the hobby I really wanted to take up.

 

[Dale D]

I have wanted to fly a drone for years. When I finally made the decision to purchase my first drone a few weeks ago, I purchased the Mavic Air 2. The drone is great, and I had no trouble flying it. However, after only two days of flight, I realized I would not be able to abide by the FAA Visual Line of Sight rule. I soon realized that keeping the drone so close that I could actually see it was not going to be something that appealed to me. I do not want to reignite an argument over VLOS. The law is clear – you much be able to see your drone while flying it. I could have chosen to fly and simply ignore that rule, but I prefer to act within the law. So with a heavy heart, I returned the drone for a refund. Maybe someday that part of the FAA law will be updated or removed, but I am not holding my breath. I just have to accept the current situation and move on. My loss.

Totally disagree with the premise. In my experience, having flown out of sight on numerous occasions before I stopped doing it, I discovered how much I can capture by just going straight up to around 200 feet and flying in a very close area for both video and stills. It is amazing what a change in perspective can do to a photo. This is especially good for travel photography. You can capture your lodge, and vistas that would be impossible from ground level.

All of the attached photos were taken just above my head.