VLOS: Have we have always been conditioned to think one way?

[DarR-T]

What does it really mean?
Does it mean you have to "See" the RPA at All Times or does it mean you must keep a Visual Line of Sight?
It's not the same thing.
Has it been challenged in court? Perhaps? What was the verdict?

 

[msinger]

What does it really mean?

The FAA defines Visual Line of Sight (VLOS) as the ability of the remote pilot in command (RPIC), the person manipulating the controls, or a visual observer (if used) to see the unmanned aircraft (drone) throughout the entire flight without the use of visual aids other than corrective lenses.

That means the following:

• Unaided Vision: You must be able to see the drone with your natural vision, though glasses or contact lenses are permitted. Binoculars, telescopes, or other magnifying devices are not allowed to maintain VLOS during the flight.
  
  
• Location Awareness: You must be able to know the drone’s location, orientation, altitude, and direction of flight at all times.
  
  
• Avoidance Capability: Maintaining VLOS is essential to see and avoid other aircraft, people, or obstacles.
  
  
• Continuous Monitoring: The drone must be observed throughout the entire operation, without relying solely on cameras or first-person-view (FPV) systems.

You'll need to refer to the rules in your country if you're not flying in the US.

Has it been challenged in court?

Which part of that do you feel needs to be challenged?

 

[mavic3usa]

Has it been challenged in court? Perhaps? What was the verdict?

Probably not; for this reason: FBI investigates mysterious drones spotted over New Jersey

I'm thinking you meant has a charge related to flying bvlos been reviewed and/or adjudicated in a legal setting such as a courtroom in front of a judge/jury and the answer is most likely not. It would be nice if we could get a ruling of some sort on the different elements involved with it but no worries, vlos will become a thing of the past one day (soon).

Edit: my answer pertains to the FAA/USA.

 

[Jim622]

Here is an article on the topic.

Section 107.31 Visual line of sight aircraft operation.

Section 107.31 limits how far an aircraft can fly from the remote pilot in command. The distance is NOT set in stone. The distance changes depending on multiple factors. To understand what affects the distances, we need to understand the regulation. Section 107.31 says: “(a) With vision that is...

jrupprechtlaw.com

 

[DarR-T]

Probably not; for this reason: FBI investigates mysterious drones spotted over New Jersey

I'm thinking you meant has a charge related to flying bvlos been reviewed and/or adjudicated in a legal setting such as a courtroom in front of a judge/jury and the answer is most likely not. It would be nice if we could get a ruling of some sort on the different elements involved with it but no worries, vlos will become a thing of the past one day (soon).

Edit: my answer pertains to the FAA/USA.

Indeed. There are certain applications where VLOS (as per 107) is difficult to maintain or even logistically prohibitive.
BTW, I'm not trying to suggest that I would do anything other than maintain VLOS - I'm just curious if anyone else reads 107.31 the way I do.

107.31 (a) With vision that is unaided by any device other than corrective lenses, the remote pilot in command, the visual observer (if one is used), and the person manipulating the flight control of the small unmanned aircraft system must be able to see the unmanned aircraft throughout the entire flight...

If all three must be able to see.... What’s the point of even having a visual observer if the pilot can never fly beyond VLOS?

Even 107.33 (b) The remote pilot in command must ensure that the visual observer is able to see the unmanned aircraft in the manner specified in 107.31.

How does the PIC ensure that the visual observer is able to see the unmanned aircraft throughout the entire flight as in 107.31 (a). "Ensure" being the operative word.

It's helpful and interesting to hear other perspectives on things.

 

[Bad Santa]

VLOS on a small drone is probably 1000 feet at best. Yet we know people fly them much further than that.

 

[mavic3usa]

Indeed.
BTW, I'm not trying to suggest that I would do anything other than maintain VLOS - I'm just curious if anyone else reads 107.31 the way I do.
Even 107.33 (b) The remote pilot in command must ensure that the visual observer is able to see the unmanned aircraft in the manner specified in 107.31.
How does the PIC ensure that the visual observer is able to see the unmanned aircraft throughout the entire flight as in 107.31 (a).
It's helpful and interesting to hear other perspectives on things.

In the US, 107.31 does not apply to recreational drone pilots.

 

[DarR-T]

In the US, 107.31 does not apply to recreational drone pilots.

Now that's an interesting topic for another thread. In Canada, we don't differentiate between recreational and commercial. We do however differentiate between Basic and Advanced Operations where the later provide the pilot with the credential to fly in controlled airspace with prior ATC clearance.

 

[DarR-T]

VLOS on a small drone is probably 1000 feet at best. Yet we know people fly them much further than that.

True that. Even the micro DJI NEO can reach 1 km and back. There's not a chance of seeing it even at a small fraction of that distance.

 

[msinger]

What’s the point of even having a visual observer if the pilot can never fly beyond VLOS?

The pilot might be operating the drone from a location where they cannot see it directly or while wearing goggles that obscure their vision.

What’s the point of even having a visual observer if the pilot can never fly beyond VLOS?

A pilot may fly beyond VLOS with a waiver from the FAA.

 

[DarR-T]

The pilot might be operating the drone from a location where they cannot see it directly or while wearing goggles that obscure their vision.

A pilot may fly beyond VLOS with a waiver from the FAA.

Yes I agree with that. The thread is about the wording as opposed to the spirit of intent.
I'm also aware of 107.200 Waiver policy and requirements

 

[KB9Radio]

The rules seem quite simple and self explanatory to me. It's up to the individual to either follow the rules or not. As your eyesight deteriorates, your VLOS becomes shorter and shorter.

 

[JTorsrud]

VLOS on a small drone is probably 1000 feet at best. Yet we know people fly them much further than that.

To expand on your comment: You can see many videos on YOUTUBE that show Drones flying well beyond VLOS! These people are playing fire!

 

[Phantomrain.org]

After about a Dozen and one phone calls to the FAA , they do not do a deep dive on anything short of 5000 ft out.
Common Sense is still number 1 to the FAA .

With this said , until they figure out how to stop birds from flying into your drone , Flying beyond VLOS will always be Risky based on the Number of drones that go down because of this including mine.

My VLOS is about 2500 ft , enough where I can see the drone and the birds .

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly in the Rain. Land on the Water.

 

[Wild Drone Pilot]

VLOS on a small drone is probably 1000 feet at best. Yet we know people fly them much further than that.

More like 30ft for my old eyes! Drone Color Perfect to match cloudy sky.

 

[Bad Santa]

FWIW, I was looking at the screen on mine, having fun with birdseye view, and lost sight of mine 100-150 feet away.
I knew it was close so I hit RTH and it dropped straight down. It had been directly above me but I couldn't see it against the sky. Also didn't hear it directly above me.

If someone (even a cop) sees a drone, there's still the task of trying to see who is flying it. You can have your drone in view of you and observers might have no clue you are the pilot. That's why all those phone calls to the police or FAA are annoying for them.

 

[DarR-T]

In the US, 107.31 does not apply to recreational drone pilots.

While Part 107 does not apply to recreational RPA pilots, These later are subject to:
49-TRANSPORTATION SUBTITLE VII-AVIATION PROGRAMS, PART A-AIR COMMERCE AND SAFETY, subpart iii-safety, CHAPTER 448-UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.

49 USC 44809: Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft
Reads as follows:

49 USC 44809 (a) In General.-Except as provided in subsection (e), and notwithstanding chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code, a person may operate a small unmanned aircraft without specific certification or operating authority from the Federal Aviation Administration if the operation adheres to all of the following limitations:

49 USC 44809 (a) (3) The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co-located and in direct communication with the operator.

 

[mavic3usa]

While Part 107 does not apply to recreational RPA pilots, These later are subject to:
49-TRANSPORTATION SUBTITLE VII-AVIATION PROGRAMS, PART A-AIR COMMERCE AND SAFETY, subpart iii-safety, CHAPTER 448-UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.

49 USC 44809: Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft
Reads as follows:

49 USC 44809 (a) In General.-Except as provided in subsection (e), and notwithstanding chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code, a person may operate a small unmanned aircraft without specific certification or operating authority from the Federal Aviation Administration if the operation adheres to all of the following limitations:

49 USC 44809 (a) (3) The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co-located and in direct communication with the operator.

Agreed, we have our own "rules" and it is covered by CBO.

 

[DARKSeifer]

Imagine how you would fly a Mini 2 if it had no camera onboard, that's VLOS.

IRL you want to fly your drones LOS, that means, keeping an unobstructed line of sight between you and the drone to have perfect connection all the time. On the other hand, thanks to the RF capabilities of most drones, they can be flown through obstacles, specially under 1Km range.

PS: Absolutely no one flies drones VLOS.

 

[Chrislaf]

PS: Absolutely no one flies drones VLOS.

Maybe no one you know, but there are lots of people who do because they don’t want to put a manned flight at risk.

Chris