The video remains on Youtube, so it would seem that Heron doesn't regret it very much at all.
Thoughts on this "VLOS" Ken Heron video?
- Thread starter iReviewFrozenDinners
- Start date
- Status
The video remains on Youtube, so it would seem that Heron doesn't regret it very much at all.
hiflyer201
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2018
- Messages
- 2,674
- Reactions
- 2,116
Nine zillion videos are out there offering proof that most drone videographers are not staying line of sight and not only that, they are giving evidence that it's not all that unsafe. What's more disturbing to me are the posts that say "I flew downwind and my drone crashed...I flew with a low battery and my drone crashed ..I flew in icing conditions and crashed..I purchase refresh because I know I'm going to crash"...and those events are all treated as if they are perfectly legal.
Please excuse the rant
Please excuse the rant
I will be brief, yes most pilots do fly beyond vlos at some time but this is a situation where the pilots involved knew they were at risk of failing to return to base. Regardless of the risk to people below their flight route they flight was over highways and buildings.
Irresponsible and dangerous!
- Joined
- May 27, 2017
- Messages
- 14,458
- Reactions
- 19,467
- Location
- Los Alamos, NM
- Site
- www.mavicpilots.com
I think the problem is that "not all that unsafe" is just not good enough in aviation safety, especially when it's not the operator, but other people on the ground or in the air whose safety is at risk.
There's no doubt that this breaks the rules, so that's not the focus of my commentary.
From a pure entertainment perspective, I thought this video was just awesome! It's a drone that's going somewhere, not just buzzing around where you can see it. Staying fanatically VLOS is like a manned aircraft pilot never leaving the pattern.
If I were making/changing the rules, this flight would be legal if, and only if, the pilots involved had gotten their (not yet defined) BVLOS rating. Many people consider the instrument rating to be the hardest manned pilot rating that there is, and I agree with that. Still, any reasonably good pilot who puts in the time and effort to learn how to fly on instruments, can, both legally and safely.
The (not yet extant) BVLOS rating should be just like that. Hard to get, but accessible to anyone with enough dedication and skill. There are also minimum experience requirements for the instrument rating, and that should be the case for the BVLOS rating. I couldn't take my instrument check ride when I was ready, because I didn't have enough cross country flight logged. Easy enough to cure, and a good requirement.
This is a very good point. Even VFR manned flights have reserve requirements, and the reserve requirement for instrument flights is greater. I think that's a good requirement for BVLOS flights as well.
Intentionally flying with virtually no battery reserve, with that many people around, is Bad. I wouldn't do it, and I'd keep it illegal if I was Czar of the Regs. If they'd been flying off shore just a wee bit, then no problem.
I'd welcome additional videos like this, and if they're any good (this one was good), I'll watch 'em. I wouldn't do it, because it's way too far outside the existing regs, but the regs should be changed to allow me to do it, with proper experience, training, and testing.
Just like the instrument rating.
Thanks for posting this, and for catalysing this discussion!
TCS
Let's imagine that BVLOS flight is legal and those pilots were qualified to operate BVLOS.
What they did is still foolish, dangerous, and irresponsible. Flying an aircraft with an essentially depleted battery over a public walkway with people on it is simply wrong. I can see no value in publicly displaying and celebrating operations like that.
No, it's not. Because one is a legal requirement and the other is a personal choice. Sadly, the impression that the original video gave, especially to new drone pilots, is that this sort of behaviour is acceptable. The bottom line is that everyone should be aware that, like it or not, going beyond VLOS is illegal in many countries.
Jagerbomb52
Well-Known Member
Here is what I say needs to be done to these hot shot Youtubers doing these range tests to gain likes and subs to their channel. And there are lots of them out there. Instead of the FAA giving them a fine suspend their 107 certificate for a period of time like a year. This will shut them down on monetizing their channel and hurt them big time as most live off their channels. They might actually have to go out and get a real job again.
As a licensed ‘pilot‘, I would not deliberately break VLOS. But most of us have, possibly without realising it, because it isn’t just about distance—when you stand under a tree because it’s otherwise too hot or because you can’t see your screen, for example, is your drone visible at all times without relying on the screen? And what about launching from the roof of your car while sitting inside—can you see the drone at all times without the screen? In either case, if you can’t directly ‘eyeball’ the drone, you are not in VLOS.
Last edited:
You need to watch the video posted by @Agustine and then look up the TNL video where Ken had Sean on his show after Sean stepped away from cohosting on TNL. Ken sure didn’t seem sorry for posting the video at that time and more or less taunted Sean for being a rules follower. Here is the link for the TNL video and the interview starts at the 9:10 mark.
I agree with your assessment of this time of year being one of the worst for airing such a video considering all the new drone owners at Christmas time.
Last edited:
Agreed. There was zero remorse. In fact, there was defiance, and Ken implied that he had no problem with the VLOS rule being broken because he didn’t agree with the rule. And in doing so, he utterly misses the point.
After watching the videos and reading the related comments, it becomes apparent that Ken and others like him believe that those who would criticize him for breaking the rules are just “do-gooders“ who follow the rules because they agree with them and who don’t listen to reason as to why they are bad rules. That couldn’t be further from the truth. I, like many droners, don‘t like the VLOS rule and think that common sense exceptions to it should be legally available. But the point is that drone regulations are only getting more restrictive and more onerous, and continuing to violate those regulations is only going to lead to more of them. You don’t convince a regulatory behemoth like the FAA to consider changing regulations by continuing to flagrantly violate them. If you so brazenly and so publicly break the rules because you think they’re stupid, well, like they say, you ain’t seen nothing yet. The next step is for the FAA to require drone manufacturers to hard code horizontal distance limits into their firmware, and who wants that? Honest, responsible pilots, some of whom make their living flying their drones legally and safely, are in a constant struggle against even more restrictive regulations that will make flying for all drone pilots that much more difficult. And people like Ken and those who would agree with him are not our allies in that fight. This is the point that he misses entirely.
Saw both the original and the geeksvana response. I subscribe to both—one mainly for entertainment; one for reliable information.
I know this will ruffle some feathers of friends and colleagues here but, this is TYPICAL KH antics. I quit watching his childish antics when he flew (a few years ago) next to an active airport and laughed it off.
He's using stuff like this as pure clickbait and he's a total disgrace to the community as a whole.
He's using stuff like this as pure clickbait and he's a total disgrace to the community as a whole.
Ken just doesn't "get it".
He thoroughly offended Sean on this TNL episode, laughing off any attempt to hold a serious discussion. Then, starting at 41:19 within the same episode, Ken further flaunts the BVLOS restrictions by airing his own video of a traffic backup on I-95. He said he was stuck there for 4 hours, so decided to fly his FPV drone up the line to check what the problem was.
I, like most people here, freely admit to having occasionally (even frequently) broken the VLOS restrictions. Yes, there is a strict letter-of-the-law interpretation. And yet, there is also a practical common sense interpretation, with the dividing line between those two varying depending on who you ask. I have my own personal line at which I feel safely in control, and I won't step over that line into doing what's obviously stupid. But what I see being done by some people on YouTube makes me cringe.
Flying his drone up to see how far the traffic jam extends seems like a good idea. Ken could have sent his drone directly up vertically to get a good overview on the situation. But nope. With his goggles on, he flies it straight down the median of the highway, low over the heads of other people standing alongside their cars, and mere feet away from the high-speed oncoming traffic in the unobstructed opposite lanes. He flies a long long way up the line before turning around, then admits he has no idea where the drone is in relation to his own position. He was hoping to spot himself standing outside of his car, but there are lots of other people doing the same. It's only when he finally hears his drone coming back that he figures out where it is.
I mean, really? He could have flown it at treetop height down the side of the highway away from everybody. Still illegal BVLOS, but clearly more safe. But he flies it right down the median of the highway? And then airs this video for the world to see on his public broadcast?
Was anyone hurt? No.
But it sure makes me cringe.
I am pretty sure he has accomplished what he was going for, I assume next Thursdays episode will be a rating's banger.
I will just sit back and watch with popcorn of the overall impact here and by that reaction make a judgement of risk vs reward from the couch on all this.
I will just sit back and watch with popcorn of the overall impact here and by that reaction make a judgement of risk vs reward from the couch on all this.
dirkclod
Well-Known Member
Yes he accomplished what he wanted. ,more hits on his channel by it just being posted here. Most would have never seen it if not If not.
Just me but don’t care for him or his channel as several more that post here.
Just looking to bump his hits and though he didn’t post it someone else did . He knew they would and this is something that has been
talked about till I want to
Just me but don’t care for him or his channel as several more that post here.
Just looking to bump his hits and though he didn’t post it someone else did . He knew they would and this is something that has been
talked about till I want to
If not off topic, does he gain income from such videos? If so who pays him and are they aware of what they are paying for?
If off topic appolgises.
If off topic appolgises.
- Joined
- May 27, 2017
- Messages
- 14,458
- Reactions
- 19,467
- Location
- Los Alamos, NM
- Site
- www.mavicpilots.com
It's a monetized channel so presumably he gets paid per visit, and that's probably all he cares about. The dark underbelly of YT.
i have resisted from making any comments up to now ,and for me this thread has done nothing to improve the hobby ,and as DC said it has just stirred up the subject of VLOS ,into the usual two camps on the subject,its quite sad that a friendship that had existed between Ken and Sean ,was used in this way
personally i think that this thread has gone on long enough, and should be put to bed
lets get back to drone flying ,and enjoyment of our hobby
personally i think that this thread has gone on long enough, and should be put to bed
lets get back to drone flying ,and enjoyment of our hobby
- Status
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
1. Mini 2
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
Forum statistics
