Why flying BVLOS isn't a good idea . . .

[BigAl07]

For those who say, "If an airplane/helicopter is flying less than 400' AGL they have problems on their hands and should never be flying in "My Area" that low" you're WRONG!

Take a look at a picture snapped right here in western NC yesterday from someone's front deck (This is not a drone/aerial pic). This C-130 (and the other 3 shortly there after) were flying legally at about 200' AGL.



If you can't See & Avoid you shouldn't be flying at all . . .

 

[vindibona1]

I agree. And understand that it is our obligation to make way for any manned aircraft. But I'm not sure that we have the maneuverability to do much if we don't have a lot of warning. Fixed wing craft are almost certainly flying faster than 100mph and I would suspect helos wouldn't be much slower. S

Last week or so I was flying over Lake Michigan at a relatively low altitude, probaby under 200', and heard a helicopter off in the distance but couldn't see it. My first reaction was to pull down on the left stick and descend as fast as I could until I could spot it knowing that in that area it could be flying relatively low over the water. I never did visually spot it, but took note that if it were close at any type of cruising speed I would be powerless to get out of the way in a significant way, though I recognize that a only few feet can avoid collisions. Even if VLOS the angles at which I can see and the angle of an approaching aircraft makes it difficult to know which way to manueuver for avoidance.

 

[BigAl07]

I agree. And understand that it is our obligation to make way for any manned aircraft. But I'm not sure that we have the maneuverability to do much if we don't have a lot of warning. Fixed wing craft are almost certainly flying faster than 100mph and I would suspect helos wouldn't be much slower. S

Last week or so I was flying over Lake Michigan at a relatively low altitude, probaby under 200', and heard a helicopter off in the distance but couldn't see it. My first reaction was to pull down on the left stick and descend as fast as I could until I could spot it knowing that in that area it could be flying relatively low over the water. I never did visually spot it, but took note that if it were close at any type of cruising speed I would be powerless to get out of the way in a significant way, though I recognize that a only few feet can avoid collisions. Even if VLOS the angles at which I can see and the angle of an approaching aircraft makes it difficult to know which way to manueuver for avoidance.

I understand what you're saying but I'll say this, if you're flying in a manner/location that limits you're ability to see/hear in space/time enough to See & Avoid then you need to change something. Aviation is about Risk Reduction (not elimination unfortunately as that's impossible) and it's up to us to fly in a manner to ensure Aviation Safety. If that means not flying in that perfect area so be it. If it means doing a CSC in order to avoid UAS to Manned Aircraft it is our responsibility to do that and lose the UAS.

 

[sar104]

I understand what you're saying but I'll say this, if you're flying in a manner/location that limits you're ability to see/hear in space/time enough to See & Avoid then you need to change something. Aviation is about Risk Reduction (not elimination unfortunately as that's impossible) and it's up to us to fly in a manner to ensure Aviation Safety. If that means not flying in that perfect area so be it. If it means doing a CSC in order to avoid UAS to Manned Aircraft it is our responsibility to do that and lose the UAS.

That is a really important point that so many people clearly fail to get; the responsibility lies with sUAS pilots to avoid conflicting with manned aircraft, and that may mean not flying somewhere even if it is legal to do so.

In the example above, flying over water (or any sparsely populated area) where there might be a reasonable expectation of encountering fast, low-flying aircraft or helicopters that there would not be time to avoid, then the answer is not "fly and hope for the best" - it's don't fly there.

 

[BigAl07]

That is a really important point that so many people clearly fail to get; the responsibility lies with sUAS pilots to avoid conflicting with manned aircraft, and that may mean not flying somewhere even if it is legal to do so.

In the example above, flying over water (or any sparsely populated area) where there might be a reasonable expectation of encountering fast, low-flying aircraft or helicopters that there would not be time to avoid, then the answer is not "fly and hope for the best" - it's don't fly there.

Exactly!!

I think many don't fully understand they don't HAVE to fly... it's a desire (strong one usually) but sometimes we have to think Big Picture and not what makes us feel good for a moment.

 

[Gkinghrn]

You don’t need to ‘fly’ out of its way .. just descend quickly or if it’s obvious you might hit , because you aren’t beyond VLOS obviously ? , kill the motors and lose it … better than hitting a manned vehicle

 

[MS Coast]

I agree. And understand that it is our obligation to make way for any manned aircraft. But I'm not sure that we have the maneuverability to do much if we don't have a lot of warning. Fixed wing craft are almost certainly flying faster than 100mph and I would suspect helos wouldn't be much slower. S

Last week or so I was flying over Lake Michigan at a relatively low altitude, probaby under 200', and heard a helicopter off in the distance but couldn't see it. My first reaction was to pull down on the left stick and descend as fast as I could until I could spot it knowing that in that area it could be flying relatively low over the water. I never did visually spot it, but took note that if it were close at any type of cruising speed I would be powerless to get out of the way in a significant way, though I recognize that a only few feet can avoid collisions. Even if VLOS the angles at which I can see and the angle of an approaching aircraft makes it difficult to know which way to manueuver for avoidance.

"But I'm not sure that we have the maneuverability to do much if we don't have a lot of warning. "

I have difficulty imaging an aircraft with greater maneuverability than a DJI, or similar, drone. Having flown power planes and gliders before getting into drones, I can say that my Mini and 2S are far, far more maneuverable than anything I flew before.

 

[BigAl07]

"But I'm not sure that we have the maneuverability to do much if we don't have a lot of warning. "

I have difficulty imaging an aircraft with greater maneuverability than a DJI, or similar, drone. Having flown power planes and gliders before getting into drones, I can say that my Mini and 2S are far, far more maneuverable than anything I flew before.

That's very accurate. The "maneuverability" of a Mavic is exponentially greater than just about anything manned. It's comparing apples to rabbits. When you factor the potential for "Low & Slow" into the equation of manned aircraft and the maneuverability gets worse and MUCH more dangerous.

 

[KAOS Imagery]

I'm at the southern end of the Adirondack Mountains in NY and have routinely seen C-130s flying low altitude practice missions here, most typically on Tuesdays. Can't say if they were that low, but definitely under 500 AGL so it's not hard to have your drone in a bad spot depending on how hilly the area you are in. Also seen A10s race through the valleys and buzz the bigger lakes also at very low altitudes. I would hate to lose my drone if I had to ditch it, but the replacement cost would be far less than if there was an incident.

 

[sar104]

That's very accurate. The "maneuverability" of a Mavic is exponentially greater than just about anything manned. It's comparing apples to rabbits. When you factor the potential for "Low & Slow" into the equation of manned aircraft and the maneuverability gets worse and MUCH more dangerous.

If you had good direct FPV visibility of an aircraft approaching then the appropriate evasive action would probably not be too hard to figure out, but that's not generally going to happen - hence the VLOS requirement. But even with VLOS it is often going to be difficult to determine relative flight paths and altitude in order to decide whether to go up/down, left/right etc. Hopefully Airsense and RID will provide an extra layer of assurance, even though they are certainly not going to be infallible due to lack of ADS-B out on some manned aircraft.

 

[okw]

I once saw a C-130 doing low-altitude training flying below me as I drove down the interstate highway. The area looked very similar to the picture above (central WV). It popped up high enough to clear the ridge I was driving on and then disappeared down the other side. If you were flying in its flight path, you would have never heard it coming until it got to you.

I've also attended a funeral where a UH-1 Huey helicopter did an extremely low flyover. It topped the hill behind the grave site at no more than 50' above the trees and then circled us. We heard nothing until it was less than 200' from us.

 

[Gagey52]

As UAV pilots we are required to operate our vehicle in a safe manner, I don't believe flying a C130 at 200 feet is responsible operations out side of a training area that is. The rise of drones has increased the risk in the airspace available to us, and it is imperative to maintain separation. My thoughts.
Regards

 

[neggy]

was there a NOTAM or was it in a area marked on the sectional as Restricted or Prohibited?

was it a MTR / MOA ?

Normally in NH when the ANG is using the White Mountains as a duplicate for Afghanistan's mountains, it is NOTAM'd / TFR'd

 

[BigAl07]

was there a NOTAM or was it in a area marked on the sectional as Restricted or Prohibited?

was it a MTR / MOA ?

Normally in NH when the ANG is using the White Mountains as a duplicate for Afghanistan's mountains, it is NOTAM'd / TFR'd

The vast majority of western NC is a MOA. Short answer is yes MOA.

 

[neggy]

Well that explains it.... those of us that do look at sectionals and read NOTAMS as part of flight planning would probably know enough to fly VLOS to begin with but certainly would take notice of the characteristics of the airspace and fly accordingly....

Unfortunately way too many people just toss a fresh battery in their sUAV and put it in the air with no consideration for the airspace outside of what the DJI or other app tells them.

 

[dronerdave]

So many drone operators insist a close call with manned aircraft is not the fault of the UAV owner because manned shouldn't have been below 500 feet when in many circumstances manned aircraft can and do fly legally close to the ground. I fly weekly off a couple of private airport runways and if you are flying too far out, as not to be able to react quickly enough to see and avoid, I sure would be worried if an investigation is opened up because I caused an incident. Even though one runway is a government facility closed to most aircraft, we often see many large planes doing low level fly-bys. I also like flying over water and that is another prime spot to encounter low level manned aircraft. Besides emergency aircraft, crop dusters and aircraft performing inspections are often less than 100' AGL. Many do not transmit ADS-B

 

[julius13]

Helicopters are limited to 200-500 agl. I live near a heliport that does routine maintenance for several LE and private pilots so they are flying over me several times a day. I make it a point to keep below 200 when flying in this area. Don't assume that planes don't fly below 500 ft either. I've watched a few come over around 300 ft.

 

[hiflyer201]

Low altitude flight routes are shown on the sectional. Some are used rarely but they are used and some of them are very high speed

 

[GFields]

Always yield to manned aircraft

 

[JimWest]

This morning I was flying around an old Cadillac Stamping plant to photograph its demolition--1/2 mile south of the Detroit City Airport runway. I'd asked Drone Zone for 50' (less than the height of the building) and they gave me 100'. I'd talked to the Tower and they knew I was there. Nevertheless, here comes a single engine private pilot on final approach--just barely clearing the building. I was at 95' when I saw it, and had plenty of time to descend to a safe level below the building. I'd been especially alert because I knew I was near the airport, but still, it was a lesson about what can happen if you're not paying attention.