- Joined
- Oct 18, 2015
- Messages
- 1,617
- Reaction score
- 747
- Age
- 70
How do you guys fly your drones?
- Thread starter Jasp03
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2015
- Messages
- 744
- Reaction score
- 191
You could end up in more trouble or just as much trouble as him by impersonating an FAA Official. Best to just report him to the FAA and let them truly make him learn the hard way. He is endangering all of us with what he has done and hope he gets caught in that regard. Just sayin.
So the other day when I was flying a Litchi mission a guy in a biplane flew very low and close. This is just an example that was caught in the video. So, yes there is a risk when flying these types of missions.
Is it even legal to fly 'by screen' now in the US? It's definitely forbidden in Canada and I was just looking at the new rules published by the FAA last month. It appears they've outlawed it as well. For small unmanned aircraft, they call for "visual line of sight only".
www.faa.gov/uas/media/Part_107_Summary.pdf
I often fly mine until it's a speck in the distance. (But, a speck that I can see
) I only use the screen for orientation to tell which way I'm facing and where to point the camera.
At the risk of sticking my head into a hornet's nest (I have observed that this is a sensitive topic, and for the record I am not saying that ops beyond VLOS are inherently dangerous or reckless - though they do introduce different risks that need to be considered and managed).
Generally, for the US, the answer is that the aircraft must be operated within VLOS. But there are multiple sets of rules . . .
For commercial ops, it is stated in 333 expemptions and in part 107 - both of which let you use a Visual Observer if it is beyond VLOS of the pilot.
For hobby / non-commercial, there is vagueness and confusion because of where the restriction is buried.
Based on how I read it, there are 2 items that come in to play for anyone considering hobbyist operation beyond VLOS:
1) The actual VLOS limitation is spelled out in the FAA reauthorization bill (Public Law 112-95) under section 336 "Special Rule for Model Aircraft." 336(c) defines a Model Aircraft, and 336(c)(2) specifically states that it is "flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft." So, if you want to be operating a model aircraft, you need to be VLOS - otherwise, I'm not sure what the FAA would say that you're flying.
2) If you decide to fly beyond VLOS, even though many hobbyists are not pilots, the FAA can pursue enforcement action if they feel you are endangering the safety of the national airspace system. Refer to 336 (b) for the exact text. So, if the FAA feels that you are a danger to airspace (and I'm assuming that they'd interpret that to include danger to people or property on the ground), they can pursue enforcement action against you. Enforcement action may not be practical or probable, but it is possible even against hobbyists.
If you are having problems falling asleep, or just want to see the text for yourself, here's a link to the law and the relevant sections that apply to the FAA: https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Sec_331_336_UAS.pdf
It's a subset of the relevant sections from the law applicable to the FAA and some of the most riveting government reading I've seen of late!
BTW, if I have my facts wrong, please help me understand where (the US Gov and FAA do not make it easy for mere mortals to understand their rules.)
Generally, for the US, the answer is that the aircraft must be operated within VLOS. But there are multiple sets of rules . . .
For commercial ops, it is stated in 333 expemptions and in part 107 - both of which let you use a Visual Observer if it is beyond VLOS of the pilot.
For hobby / non-commercial, there is vagueness and confusion because of where the restriction is buried.
Based on how I read it, there are 2 items that come in to play for anyone considering hobbyist operation beyond VLOS:
1) The actual VLOS limitation is spelled out in the FAA reauthorization bill (Public Law 112-95) under section 336 "Special Rule for Model Aircraft." 336(c) defines a Model Aircraft, and 336(c)(2) specifically states that it is "flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft." So, if you want to be operating a model aircraft, you need to be VLOS - otherwise, I'm not sure what the FAA would say that you're flying.
2) If you decide to fly beyond VLOS, even though many hobbyists are not pilots, the FAA can pursue enforcement action if they feel you are endangering the safety of the national airspace system. Refer to 336 (b) for the exact text. So, if the FAA feels that you are a danger to airspace (and I'm assuming that they'd interpret that to include danger to people or property on the ground), they can pursue enforcement action against you. Enforcement action may not be practical or probable, but it is possible even against hobbyists.
If you are having problems falling asleep
, or just want to see the text for yourself, here's a link to the law and the relevant sections that apply to the FAA: https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Sec_331_336_UAS.pdfIt's a subset of the relevant sections from the law applicable to the FAA and some of the most riveting government reading I've seen of late!
BTW, if I have my facts wrong, please help me understand where (the US Gov and FAA do not make it easy for mere mortals to understand their rules.)
At the risk of sticking my head into a hornet's nest (I have observed that this is a sensitive topic, and for the record I am not saying that ops beyond VLOS are inherently dangerous or reckless - though they do introduce different risks that need to be considered and managed).
Generally, for the US, the answer is that the aircraft must be operated within VLOS. But there are multiple sets of rules . . .
For commercial ops, it is stated in 333 expemptions and in part 107 - both of which let you use a Visual Observer if it is beyond VLOS of the pilot.
For hobby / non-commercial, there is vagueness and confusion because of where the restriction is buried.
Based on how I read it, there are 2 items that come in to play for anyone considering hobbyist operation beyond VLOS:
1) The actual VLOS limitation is spelled out in the FAA reauthorization bill (Public Law 112-95) under section 336 "Special Rule for Model Aircraft." 336(c) defines a Model Aircraft, and 336(c)(2) specifically states that it is "flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft." So, if you want to be operating a model aircraft, you need to be VLOS - otherwise, I'm not sure what the FAA would say that you're flying.
2) If you decide to fly beyond VLOS, even though many hobbyists are not pilots, the FAA can pursue enforcement action if they feel you are endangering the safety of the national airspace system. Refer to 336 (b) for the exact text. So, if the FAA feels that you are a danger to airspace (and I'm assuming that they'd interpret that to include danger to people or property on the ground), they can pursue enforcement action against you. Enforcement action may not be practical or probable, but it is possible even against hobbyists.
If you are having problems falling asleep
It's a subset of the relevant sections from the law applicable to the FAA and some of the most riveting government reading I've seen of late!
BTW, if I have my facts wrong, please help me understand where (the US Gov and FAA do not make it easy for mere mortals to understand their rules.)
I think you have it right after researching this myself . .I'm registered with FAA and fly there some . . but VLOS is definitely the rule in CANADA recreational or commercial. Transport Canada is not shy about enforcing it either . . see F-18 Scramble above. Good discussion.
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2016
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 6
- Age
- 33
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2016
- Messages
- 1,626
- Reaction score
- 418
- Age
- 49
@DirtyBird Back in the day, couldn't you fly over the limit by holding down the RTH button? For all I know, you still can.Yeah right.
I have helicopters flying around me in the valley all the time no matter where I am which is why I always fly VLOG.
Also, NFZs wouldn't stop someone that's not that smart from flying in one. The latest I saw from DJI is not a no fly no matter what like from Yuneec but a agree to fly thing that you have to send before you can take off in an NFZ. Sort of strange really. If it's an NFZ, make it so.
As someone said earlier, once a drone brings down a plane, it's over. Better to promote responsibility and understanding of aviation.
I live very rural. I have crop dusting planes flying just above the trees coming and going to the fields. I have life flights that can fly between the nearest small town and the major hospital 50 miles away.
When I fly, I pay attention to the screen for photos and telemetry, but I also keep an eye on the craft. That said, I also LISTEN. The life flights and crop dusters are easy to hear.
I was flying last week and, while I could see my craft, I could not see a crop duster I could hear. I lowered my craft to below the trees to ensure I was out of their path while trying to ensure I would not cross paths. They passed well north of me and neither craft was in danger.
When I fly, I pay attention to the screen for photos and telemetry, but I also keep an eye on the craft. That said, I also LISTEN. The life flights and crop dusters are easy to hear.
I was flying last week and, while I could see my craft, I could not see a crop duster I could hear. I lowered my craft to below the trees to ensure I was out of their path while trying to ensure I would not cross paths. They passed well north of me and neither craft was in danger.
Attachments
Similar threads
