How many people depend on FPV?

LOS can get you into trouble also, It can appear that you are a lot higher than a smoke stack when you are a way from it then all of a sudden you hit the darn thing. Had to run home and order me a new one and I will wait for parts to become available to fix it.

More people loose their phantoms flying into trees than those flying fpv going for distance records
 
  • Like
Reactions: Richard in ky
Over here the CAA define it as 500m.

Personally, I'll happily exceed that as long as I can comfortably see what's around the drone. It's possible to lose sight of the drone at close range without obstacles if the background doesn't offer contrast. When flying at long distances, I'm more concerned with other much larger flying objects which would definitely be visible... and audible.

If there's the merest hint of FPV feed loss, I'll abort and return.
 
I've read plenty of people say how we should never depend on FPV and how we should only depend on LOS for flying our aircrafts. This is very difficult for people like myself that wear eyeglasses and I can't see too far distances anyway. I usually only fly pretty close so I can do LOS but there are times that I like to go farther to get those good lake shots and whatnot.

So I wonder how many other people may be out there who depend on FPV just like myself?

Well, in an attempt to GET BACK ON TOPIC, I have this to say.

I wear spectacles as well and NEVER rely on FPV. Maybe you could go to the dollar store and get some magnifiers that will fit over your glasses without scratching them. It's just a thought, but it works for me in close up work. It also works without my prescription specs at distances where they don't work quite right.

Is it really so difficult to stay ON TOPIC?
 
Copied and pasted...
UK CAA definition of VLOS

Visual Line of Sight (VLOS)


"Operating within Visual Line of Sight means that the Remote Pilot is able to maintain direct, unaided (other than corrective lenses) visual contact with the UA which is sufficient to monitor its flight path in relation to other aircraft, persons, vessels, vehicles and structures for the purpose of avoiding collisions. Within the UK, VLOS operations are normally accepted out to a maximum distance of 500 m horizontally and 400 ft vertically from the Remote Pilot. Operations at a greater distance from the Remote Pilot may be permitted if an acceptable safety case is submitted. For example, if the aircraft is large it may be justifiable that its flight path can be monitored visually at a greater distance than 500 m. Conversely, for some small aircraft, operations out to a distance of 500m may mean it is not possible to assure or maintain adequate visual contact."

Based on this, Line of sight means "as long as you see it". So, Op, FPV or not, if you can't see it beyond 30 meters, this is the limit of your LOS and you should not operate further without a spotter.
 
Last edited:
You're still reliant on the app to do your navigating. If the app or phone crashes (and yes I know there has not been one documented case of that ever happening) you have to fly the craft using vision and sticks alone.


If the app or phone crash you hit RTH. Why continue to fly? Even in LOS if my app or phone crashes (which it never once has) , I'm hitting RTH and letting the technology do its job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: snowghost
If the app or phone crash you hit RTH. Why continue to fly? Even in LOS if my app or phone crashes (which it never once has) , I'm hitting RTH and letting the technology do its job.

Why not? But when you don't have sight of the craft you hit that button and hope - hope it initiates, hope it recorded the home point correctly, hope nothing is in the way - you are no longer in control.
 
yeah, yeah...I've seen your legalese strewn everywhere. Good luck with that bro. You must be a real hoot at dinner parties.
@SteveMann has been contributing a lot of information to this forum, so there is no need to be sarcastic. With all the noise generated by so many peoples with opinions, it is good to see actual references to what is brewing at the governing bodies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sergekouper
yeah, yeah...I've seen your legalese strewn everywhere. Good luck with that bro. You must be a real hoot at dinner parties.

The point is there are to many flying cowboys out there who think they can defy the rules and recommendations.
Well go on bro and within no time you will be strangled by rules!
 
I believe that you need both LOS and FPV. As a matter of fact, even those two are not enough, and I would want a UAV to have a separate camera for flying than the one used for photography. You could be flying with the camera pointed down and missing an obstacle just ahead of you.

FPV is needed for flying, there is no doubt. But it is not the type of FPV we have now. It will need to be PPV (Pilot Point of View) to be effective.

The inspire separated the controls for the pilot and the camera operator, but didn't provide the pilot with PPV. I guess we will need to wait for another generation for that. Eventually we will have drones with PPV and SPV (Spectator Point of View, or Shooter Point of View)

Of course the other avenue of obstacle avoidance is still much in pursuit, but I see this taking away from the actual flying experience. It would probably be more effective in waypoint navigation.
 
I am sorry if you can't comprehend the published rules or current law regarding personal drones. I was pointing out that BLOS (and FPV) will be illegal for hobby flight when Part 107 rules are finalized. It has nothing to do with the occasional long range or high altitude flights on Youtube. Most of which are perfectly legal in the US today.
 
Why not? But when you don't have sight of the craft you hit that button and hope - hope it initiates, hope it recorded the home point correctly, hope nothing is in the way - you are no longer in control.
Hope? It tells you before u take off HOMEPOINT HAS BEEN SET. It tells you when it initiates when u hit RTH and if you lose signal it comes back regardless.

Ive seen it multiple times. I use RTH almost everytime I fly because It's easier then when it gets close I regain.

It's obvious you're a "what if guy". I didn't spend my life savings on this. If mine crashes or doesn't come back I'll buy another one. I trust the technology that I paid for.
 
You're still reliant on the app to do your navigating. If the app or phone crashes (and yes I know there has not been one documented case of that ever happening) you have to fly the craft using vision and sticks alone.

I'm honestly not sure if you're being sarcastic here, but my phone crashed and restarted mid-flight just yesterday. Luckily it was basically 100ft directly over my head so landing was easy, but still an "oh ****" moment when the screen went black!
 
A combination of FPV and LOS is the order of the day. I try and stay LOS, but sometimes you can lose it for a few and the FPV keeps you on track. Also the map.
 
I never flew out of LOS defined by GudetGuy, but FPV is useful to confirm camera angle. No necessary to fly out of LOS within civil park (do not go out above roads, railroads or property of other), mountain or beach. Temporal out of LOS (described by Foosy) so many, however. Somebody who fly FPV out of LOS want to shoot behind the nearest building...? Professional architect may, but me. No necessary, and too fear...

edit: Doesn't FAA require us to fly within VLOS? That is, LOS + visible??? I sometimes fly within LOS but out of my eyesight... that's because of certificate of reach of radio, and possibility of taking back when she drops, but will it be illegal on FAA rule?
 
Last edited:

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,355
Members
104,934
Latest member
jody.paugh@fullerandsons.