Fun flight and question about VLOS

[SnagsWolf]

Yesterday I took the Evo to a local park in order to practice sending the drone out a horizontal distance away. The park is fairly open, so I figured that if something happened, I'd be able to find it easily. There was a kids' lacrosse game going on at one end of the park, so I stayed away from that.
As soon as I got the bird up, a group of about 6 or 7 young boys came running over to see what was going on. They were pretty excited, so I was happy to answer their questions. Questions like:

"If I move the landing pad, will it follow it?" (No, it uses GPS.)
"If you bring it down lower, can we throw stuff at it to knock it down?" (Hell no.)
"How much did it cost?" (A lot.)
"Can you make it do stunts?" (Not that kind of drone.)
"Can you fly it over the lacrosse game?" (No, if something happens, I don't want it falling on someone's head.)
"Can we see ourselves on the screen?" (I brought the Evo down to get us all in the shot, and let them see it. They waved to the camera.)
"How long do the batteries last?" (About 25 minutes.)
"When the batteries run out, will it just fall down?" (No. I demonstrated Return to Home.)
"How fast does it go?" (Well, let's see. I put it into Ludicrous Mode and did a few high flybys. They were impressed. "It sounds like a race car.")
"How high will it go?" (I took it up to 400 feet.)
"How far will it go?"

That last question reminded me of what I wanted to practice, so I said, "Let's see," and started towards the other side of the park. Flew over two (empty) baseball fields, and finally ended up over the last picnic pavilion. At that point it was about 300 feet in altitude, and a little over 2,000 feet away. Between looking at the sky and the screen, I'd lost visual sight of it.
"Can you see it?" I asked the boys, and one of them replied, "Yeah, I still see it. It's turning."
He was right, I was in the process of turning it around for the flight back. But as much as I squinted, I couldn't locate it. And that far away, I couldn't hear it either. Maybe if I'd followed it the entire way, without looking at the screen, I might've had a chance to pick up the tiny speck.

Which brings me to my question about VLOS. How feasible is that, really? In terms of these types of drones, 2,000 feet isn't that big of a distance. They're built to go much further. From 2,000 feet away, something the size of an Evo is just going to be a tiny speck. Anything further, and it's going to be invisible.

When I was flying Syma drones, letting the drone get out of sight was unthinkable. Because not being able to see it made if very difficult to get it back. But with Evo, I just have look down at the screen to see where it is, orienting me correctly. And there's Return to Home as a safety net.

So my question is, is VLOS becoming an outmoded restriction? Has technology improved so much that keeping the drone in visual sight is no longer a valid safety concern? For programs like DJI Refresh, is allowing the drone to get out of VLOS a valid reason to deny a claim?

The lacrosse game wrapped up and the boys had to leave with their parents, but I hope I gave them a positive drone experience. They certainly brightened my day.

 

[CraigCam]

If you loose site of it then you’ve lost VLOS and technically in violation of the current rules. The boy who still saw it you could argue was your spotter who provided you with an assist. The temptation to fly beyond line of site increases with the drones technology which is why DJI users are usually the ones ignoring this aspect of the rules. There ocu sync is much more reliable for video feed and apparently distance is a measurement that must be “won” for a drone to be macho enough for a vast majority of those pilots.

The Evo can handle some decent distance and is detectable in the sky more then others with its orange shell. There are two causes of loss of sight typically. One is loosing your clear view because it’s shape blends in with background shapes like mountain rocks or tree clumps etc...That is usually fixed and line of sight restored by climbing up and getting the Evo into more open sky where its movement is obvious. The second is not looking towards the actual location because you moved off it while looking down at your screen.

This sounds like your experience and it’s where having a dedicated spotter becomes necessary. It’s impossible to look down at your video feed and then back to your drone when too far away without orientation confusion. The map can help you figure out if your facing the ship if it’s loaded and working but again, it’s an assist because with GPS, nothing is absolute. The risk of loosing VLOS is always the risk of loosing your drone regardless of the technology it has installed.

 

[Ansia]

Here are the most common rules applied to drones, straight from the Federal Aviation Administration. Hope it helps.

Step 2: Review the Rules
It is important to review the rules for flying your drone, prior to your first flight.

• Fly only for fun or recreation
• Follow the safety guidelines of a model aircraft community-based organization
• Fly at or below 400 feet when in uncontrolled airspace (Class G)
• Fly within visual line-of-sight, meaning you as the drone operator use your own eyes and needed contacts or glasses (without binoculars), to ensure you can see your drone at all times.
• Never fly near other aircraft.
• Never fly over groups of people, public events, or stadiums full of people.
• Never fly near or over emergency response efforts.

If you want to fly more advanced drone operations, review the Part 107 operational waiver information.

Recreational Flyers & Modeler Community-Based Organizations

www.faa.gov

 

[SnagsWolf]

If you loose site of it then you’ve lost VLOS and technically in violation of the current rules.

• Fly within visual line-of-sight, meaning you as the drone operator use your own eyes and needed contacts or glasses (without binoculars), to ensure you can see your drone at all times.

Thanks for the responses. I'm aware of the rules. This post was intended to be a discussion of the rules, not a dry reading of them. Hence my question:

So my question is, is VLOS becoming an outmoded restriction? Has technology improved so much that keeping the drone in visual sight is no longer a valid safety concern?

Opinions on that?

 

[butch]

I would say yes. (in some cases)
I live on our farm. It's around about 70 acres mostly pasture and a few trees and a pond on each end.
If I fly from my house to say the big pond, it's over 2000 ft. away and no way to see the drone at that distance. However, the drone is still over our property with no danger to anyone or anyone's property. So, my answer is yes VLOS is a outmoded restriction. (in some cases)'
butch

 

[Jagerbomb52]

I would say yes. (in some cases)
I live on our farm. It's around about 70 acres mostly pasture and a few trees and a pond on each end.
If I fly from my house to say the big pond, it's over 2000 ft. away and no way to see the drone at that distance. However, the drone is still over our property with no danger to anyone or anyone's property. So, my answer is yes VLOS is a outmoded restriction. (in some cases)'
butch

The problem with your theory is you do not own the air space above your property. Its called the NAS for a reason. You still have to abide by the rules and regulations that the FAA has set out.

 

[SnagsWolf]

The problem with your theory is you do not own the air space above your property.

You do, but it's not an unlimited height.

Air rights - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[rkyleh]

If you build a 1000 foot radio tower on your property then is the air space above your property yours?

 

[Ansia]

@Agustine According to the the case you posted a bit ago (forgot the name) the immediate airspace that you could occupy is your property, anything above that belongs to the NAS.

@SnagsWolf I do believe VLOS is very important, when you are flying BVLOS, all you get is a 90° field of view of what the drone can see in front of it, on a really small screen. The drone has 5 more sides that you are blinded. Anything from a small power line, to a powered paraglider can sneak up into you and cause a crash. It's like my car. I know it can do 145mph, but I don't go faster than 75mph. Just my opinion on the matter.

 

[Ansia]

If you build a 1000 foot radio tower on your property then is the air space above your property yours?

Government will never allow you to build one.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

@Agustine According to the the case you posted a bit ago (forgot the name) the immediate airspace that you could occupy is your property, anything above that belongs to the NAS.

I believe the number was 90 feet but if you want to double check look up the case.
United States v. Causby

 

[SnagsWolf]

I believe the number was 90 feet but if you want to double check look up the case.

The 90 feet number (actually, 83 feet in this case), was a minimum. That's the lowest the planes were flying over this guy's property.

The Supreme Court ruled that the government didn't have a claim to the airspace down to the ground, and that property owners didn't own the airspace infinitely over their heads. Then they remanded the case back to the Court of Claims to make a ruling on compensation.

The Court of Claims then ruled that planes flying at 83 feet were violating the property owner's airspace. But they also ruled that flights over 365 feet were part of the public airspace, and didn't violate the owner's property.

So, that would set the upper limit to 365. But I'm not sure how much of a precedent that number set, because it was part of a Court of Claims ruling, not a Supreme Court decision.

With advent of drones, it's possible we may see more of a clearer SCOTUS test case on this issue in the coming years. If people own the immediate airspace above their property, does that mean private drones can't violate it? Or does the drone have to adversely affect the property value in some way, as it did in US v. Causby?

It's going to be interesting.

United States v. Causby - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Jagerbomb52]

I think the way you are going to see the laws go is with the privacy act for which laws are already written. Even then they will have to have a magic number that you can fly. With all these companies trying to take up airspace for commercial flights its going to be tricky for sure.

 

[WayneH]

Here are the most common rules applied to drones, straight from the Federal Aviation Administration. Hope it helps.

Step 2: Review the Rules

• Fly within visual line-of-sight, meaning you as the drone operator use your own eyes and needed contacts or glasses (without binoculars), to ensure you can see your drone at all times.

Recreational Flyers & Modeler Community-Based Organizations

www.faa.gov

A point that must be stressed, but is oftentimes is conveniently forgotten - YOUR OWN EYES. Spotters are not the answer.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

I am curious about the distinction, if there's a distinction, between "illegal" and "against the rules." When does a rule have the weight of law? We all know, for example, that were not supposed to fly from/over a National Park. That was a decision by the NPS, but it was not (to my knowledge) ever passed as law by Congress. So is it illegal, or just against the rules?

I am not advocating either way, and the NPS example is just one of many. So how about it... Can we discuss illegal vs against the rules?

Is this the way it works or is this the way it should work but doesn't LOL
Congress writes laws, and the executive branch implements them. One way the executive branch implements laws is by writing regulations, also known as rules. These regulations have the force of law because they are a vehicle to implement law.
Some laws specifically define how the regulators are to implement them; other laws give regulators wider authority and/or discretion to achieve the purposes/goals defined in the laws. Regulators may take cues from Congress not only from direct legislative language but also from "committee reports" on bills.
Regulators occasionally overstep their authority (or at least their critics think they do). That's when the courts get involved and decide whether the rules in question are true to the letter and/or spirit of the law, and/or whether they are constitutional.

Right from a lawyers mouth

“Laws” include agency rules. The agency gets its power from Congress but can also make and enforce its own rules.

Anybody confused yet

 

[Ansia]

I am curious about the distinction, if there's a distinction, between "illegal" and "against the rules." When does a rule have the weight of law? We all know, for example, that were not supposed to fly from/over a National Park. That was a decision by the NPS, but it was not (to my knowledge) ever passed as law by Congress. So is it illegal, or just against the rules?

I am not advocating either way, and the NPS example is just one of many. So how about it... Can we discuss illegal vs against the rules?

Is this the way it works or is this the way it should work but doesn't LOL
Congress writes laws, and the executive branch implements them. One way the executive branch implements laws is by writing regulations, also known as rules. These regulations have the force of law because they are a vehicle to implement law.
Some laws specifically define how the regulators are to implement them; other laws give regulators wider authority and/or discretion to achieve the purposes/goals defined in the laws. Regulators may take cues from Congress not only from direct legislative language but also from "committee reports" on bills.
Regulators occasionally overstep their authority (or at least their critics think they do). That's when the courts get involved and decide whether the rules in question are true to the letter and/or spirit of the law, and/or whether they are constitutional.

Right from a lawyers mouth

“Laws” include agency rules. The agency gets its power from Congress but can also make and enforce its own rules.

Anybody confused yet

ANARCHY!?

 

[Madhungarian]

What about flying FPV?

Yesterday I took the Evo to a local park in order to practice sending the drone out a horizontal distance away. The park is fairly open, so I figured that if something happened, I'd be able to find it easily. There was a kids' lacrosse game going on at one end of the park, so I stayed away from that.
As soon as I got the bird up, a group of about 6 or 7 young boys came running over to see what was going on. They were pretty excited, so I was happy to answer their questions. Questions like:

"If I move the landing pad, will it follow it?" (No, it uses GPS.)
"If you bring it down lower, can we throw stuff at it to knock it down?" (Hell no.)
"How much did it cost?" (A lot.)
"Can you make it do stunts?" (Not that kind of drone.)
"Can you fly it over the lacrosse game?" (No, if something happens, I don't want it falling on someone's head.)
"Can we see ourselves on the screen?" (I brought the Evo down to get us all in the shot, and let them see it. They waved to the camera.)
"How long do the batteries last?" (About 25 minutes.)
"When the batteries run out, will it just fall down?" (No. I demonstrated Return to Home.)
"How fast does it go?" (Well, let's see. I put it into Ludicrous Mode and did a few high flybys. They were impressed. "It sounds like a race car.")
"How high will it go?" (I took it up to 400 feet.)
"How far will it go?"

That last question reminded me of what I wanted to practice, so I said, "Let's see," and started towards the other side of the park. Flew over two (empty) baseball fields, and finally ended up over the last picnic pavilion. At that point it was about 300 feet in altitude, and a little over 2,000 feet away. Between looking at the sky and the screen, I'd lost visual sight of it.
"Can you see it?" I asked the boys, and one of them replied, "Yeah, I still see it. It's turning."
He was right, I was in the process of turning it around for the flight back. But as much as I squinted, I couldn't locate it. And that far away, I couldn't hear it either. Maybe if I'd followed it the entire way, without looking at the screen, I might've had a chance to pick up the tiny speck.

Which brings me to my question about VLOS. How feasible is that, really? In terms of these types of drones, 2,000 feet isn't that big of a distance. They're built to go much further. From 2,000 feet away, something the size of an Evo is just going to be a tiny speck. Anything further, and it's going to be invisible.

When I was flying Syma drones, letting the drone get out of sight was unthinkable. Because not being able to see it made if very difficult to get it back. But with Evo, I just have look down at the screen to see where it is, orienting me correctly. And there's Return to Home as a safety net.

So my question is, is VLOS becoming an outmoded restriction? Has technology improved so much that keeping the drone in visual sight is no longer a valid safety concern? For programs like DJI Refresh, is allowing the drone to get out of VLOS a valid reason to deny a claim?

The lacrosse game wrapped up and the boys had to leave with their parents, but I hope I gave them a positive drone experience. They certainly brightened my day.

You can ask for a waiver when you register with the FAA. This will allow you to fly farther, that is what I am doing.

Fly a UAS from a moving aircraft or a vehicle in populated areas	§ 107.25 – Operation from a Moving Vehicle or Aircraft
Fly a UAS at night	§ 107.29 – Daylight Operations
Fly a UAS beyond your ability to clearly determine its orientation with unaided vision	§ 107.31 – Visual Line of Sight Aircraft Operation
User a visual observer without following all visual observer requirements	§ 107.33 – Visual Observer
Fly multiple UAS with only 1 remote pilot	§ 107.35 – Operation of Multiple Small UAS
Fly a UAS without having to give way to other aircraft	§ 107.37(a) – Yielding Right of Way
Fly a UAS over a person/people	§ 107.39 – Operation Over People
Fly a UAS: Over 100 miles per hour groundspeed Over 400 feet above ground level (AGL) With less than 3 statute miles of visibility Within 500 feet vertically or 2000 feet horizontally from clouds	§ 107.51 – Operating limitations for Small Unmanned Aircraft

 

[Ansia]

What about flying FPV?

You can ask for a waiver when you register with the FAA. This will allow you to fly farther, that is what I am doing.

Fly a UAS from a moving aircraft or a vehicle in populated areas	§ 107.25 – Operation from a Moving Vehicle or Aircraft
Fly a UAS at night	§ 107.29 – Daylight Operations
Fly a UAS beyond your ability to clearly determine its orientation with unaided vision	§ 107.31 – Visual Line of Sight Aircraft Operation
User a visual observer without following all visual observer requirements	§ 107.33 – Visual Observer
Fly multiple UAS with only 1 remote pilot	§ 107.35 – Operation of Multiple Small UAS
Fly a UAS without having to give way to other aircraft	§ 107.37(a) – Yielding Right of Way
Fly a UAS over a person/people	§ 107.39 – Operation Over People
Fly a UAS: Over 100 miles per hour groundspeed Over 400 feet above ground level (AGL) With less than 3 statute miles of visibility Within 500 feet vertically or 2000 feet horizontally from clouds	§ 107.51 – Operating limitations for Small Unmanned Aircraft

So you are a Part 107 pilot or Part 101E pilot?

 

[Madhungarian]

107 and you can request it online.

 

[Ansia]

107 and you can request it online.

The waiver? Yup.