To VLS or not to VLS? That is the question?!

[mavic6611]

I guess we all have our own ideas and opinions on VLS and I'm intrigued to know what you guys think/feel about it. What's your opinion and why?

I have my own opinions on it which are simple, being that I believe flying beyond VLS is perfectly fine in the hands of a pilot with enough experience, common sense and knows and respects thoroughly all the do's and donts!
I personally feel so much safer flying through the camera rather than looking at the aircraft directly for so many different reasons.

I personally believe it's a much safer way do fly.

What do you think and why?

 

[dirkclod]

 

[mavic6611]

[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]

 

[ascension]

You can still operate the thing using the camera while still being in line of site.
Line of site is so you can see anything else sharing the airspace.It doesn't mean you have to constantly stare at it. You just need to be able to see it,
I cringe when I think what folks who have fought the FAA for decades from imposing restrictions on requirements, licensing and equipment to operate in the lower airspace would think if they read these kinds of things from people they may share the airspace with.
Hopefully, people from the AOPA, EAA Ultralights, skydivers, and other concerned operators don't read this stuff.

 

[CaveDrone]

I guess we all have our own ideas and opinions on VLS and I'm intrigued to know what you guys think/feel about it. What's your opinion and why?

I have my own opinions on it which are simple, being that I believe flying beyond VLS is perfectly fine in the hands of a pilot with enough experience, common sense and knows and respects thoroughly all the do's and donts!
I personally feel so much safer flying through the camera rather than looking at the aircraft directly for so many different reasons.

I personally believe it's a much safer way do fly.

What do you think and why?

Sometimes I fly with goggles, with my co-pilot acting as a spotter. I stay within her VLOS. When I reach the limits of her vision about 600-750 feet she taps me on the shoulder and I turn back a little and keep flying. She is also looking out for aircraft/choppers. When she sees something , she does a double tap and I immediately drop down below tree level and land if possible. My partner is prepared to take the controls if necessary if something goes awry. All of this legal under the rules of AMA and FAA recognizes them.

 

[Knight Hawk]

Sometimes I fly with goggles, with my co-pilot acting as a spotter. I stay within her VLOS. When I reach the limits of her vision about 600-750 feet she taps me on the shoulder and I turn back a little and keep flying. She is also looking out for aircraft/choppers. When she sees something , she does a double tap and I immediately drop down below tree level and land if possible. My partner is prepared to take the controls if necessary if something goes awry. All of this legal under the rules of AMA and FAA recognizes them.

Well said.

 

[mavic6611]

Trust me I totally understand what you guys are saying, but how do you feel about the fact that your basically tied to an apron string? Do you feel confident and experienced and sensible enough to have that apron string cut and be free to fly sensibly where you want?

 

[mavic6611]

You can still operate the thing using the camera while still being in line of site.
Line of site is so you can see anything else sharing the airspace.It doesn't mean you have to constantly stare at it. You just need to be able to see it,
I cringe when I think what folks who have fought the FAA for decades from imposing restrictions on requirements, licensing and equipment to operate in the lower airspace would think if they read these kinds of things from people they may share the airspace with.
Hopefully, people from the AOPA, EAA Ultralights, skydivers, and other concerned operators don't read this stuff.

What do you mean when you say you hope they don't read this stuff.. What stuff are you referring to?

 

[Rnl]

I fly by camera most of the time, I'm in the country and can go 2 miles in 2 directions with no houses all fields and woods. I feel nothing wrong with it I follow all other rules stay below 300 when I'm flying but camera.

 

[CaveDrone]

IMHO, it is best fly on the side of caution. When you are 2 miles out, there is no way you can hear a approaching ultra-light or a chopper flying low and goggles have a limited feild of view. The odds are against it for sure but who wants to risk it for a little fun?

I am the first to admit it is FUN to fly with goggles and VERY tempting to just be free but there is that little voice in my head saying no as it flashes pictures of newspaper headlines "Drone hits glider pilot"..... Not worth it. I am not the drone police, I am just stating my own personal opinion period.

Personally, being in a free country, I understand that when people do what they do, they are just assuming the risks that I am unwilling to do, BUT please, be just as free in assuming the blame if things go wrong.

 

[mavic6611]

IMHO, it is best fly on the side of caution. When you are 2 miles out, there is no way you can hear a approaching ultra-light or a chopper flying low and goggles have a limited feild of view. The odds are against it for sure but who wants to risk it for a little fun?

I am the first to admit it is FUN to fly with goggles and VERY tempting to just be free but there is that little voice in my head saying no as it flashes pictures of newspaper headlines "Drone hits glider pilot"..... Not worth it. I am not the drone police, I am just stating my own personal opinion period.

Personally, being in a free country, I understand that when people do what they do, they are just assuming the risks that I am unwilling to do, BUT please, be just as free in assuming the blame if things go wrong.

I certainly don't disagree with you and what you're saying is absolutely righ to a degree.
But I do have to say this and I don't intend to sound like I'm trying to argue, just healthy debate as there is definitely 2 sides to this whole topic.
So my thoughts are this..
I know that Helicopters aren't allowed to drop below 500ft in general flying situations. And I would assume an ultralight would have the same rules being a manned aircraft.
So if a collision happened it wouldn't be the fault of the drone pilot as long as they was under 400ft

Also i assume you exceed the speed limit in your car from time to time?

 

[Rnl]

You have good view through camera, you would see a glider. planes and choppers don't fly that low here.

 

[Rnl]

I'm very cautious when I do this and I'm not in populated area.

 

[tangoseal]

I understand Visual Line of sight as being up high enough that I can see all the way to horizon.

 

[dbyantis]

I guess we all have our own ideas and opinions on VLS and I'm intrigued to know what you guys think/feel about it. What's your opinion and why?

I have my own opinions on it which are simple, being that I believe flying beyond VLS is perfectly fine in the hands of a pilot with enough experience, common sense and knows and respects thoroughly all the do's and donts!
I personally feel so much safer flying through the camera rather than looking at the aircraft directly for so many different reasons.

I personally believe it's a much safer way do fly.

What do you think and why?

Follow the regs. Always VLOS.

 

[CaveDrone]

You have good view through camera, you would see a glider. planes and choppers don't fly that low here.

What you don't see is them coming from the sides or from behind. In a VLOS situation, you can hear them well before it could be a problem.

 

[CaveDrone]

I certainly don't disagree with you and what you're saying is absolutely righ to a degree.
But I do have to say this and I don't intend to sound like I'm trying to argue, just healthy debate as there is definitely 2 sides to this whole topic.
So my thoughts are this..
I know that Helicopters aren't allowed to drop below 500ft in general flying situations. And I would assume an ultralight would have the same rules being a manned aircraft.
So if a collision happened it wouldn't be the fault of the drone pilot as long as they was under 400ft

Also i assume you exceed the speed limit in your car from time to time?

They may have be above 500' but hey, they're people too and maybe they want to do stuff. LOL. I'd rather error on the side of caution than be the cause of someone losing their life.

Manned aircraft always has the right of way even if they are in the wrong.

 

[dbyantis]

I understand Visual Line of sight as being up high enough that I can see all the way to horizon.

VLOS is the ability to see your drone, not how far away you can see.

 

[rydfree]

Also i assume you exceed the speed limit in your car from time to time?

Not sure how breaking one law relates to the other but only when in VLOS and have great visibility in all directions .

 

[mavic6611]

They may have be above 500' but hey, they're people too and maybe they want to do stuff. LOL. I'd rather error on the side of caution than be the cause of someone losing their life.

Manned aircraft always has the right of way even if they are in the wrong.

Again I do agree with you.. But the fact would remain that it would be them who is at fault and not the drone pilot in that situation. The air space belongs to everyone and as long as we're sensible and don't exceed the ceiling height, I don't see why we should be restricted.
This is only my opinion I'm not saying I'm right here. But the apron strings need detaching in my eyes.