Ice crystals on P3 arms after foggy flight

[GoodnNuff]

I'm actually surprised (I fly through fog quite often), but Peter Sachs and the Drone Law Journal are in agreement with you Olof Ekbergh:
Drone Law Journal

 

[BRENTHABBESHAW]

Did you just pull this out of your butt?! There is no such rule, law nor any prohibition for model aircraft. Where did you come up with this?

Nerd, you need to pull you head out of your butt and smell the roses, flying in line of sight, ring a bell? if he is flying in fog, which he cannot see, then he is flying out of sight! A violation! It is NERDs like you, who will screw it up for all the respectful flyers out there. And mark my work, regulations are coming sooner than you think!

 

[snerd]

Nerd, you need to pull you head out of your butt and smell the roses, flying in line of sight, ring a bell? if he is flying in fog, which he cannot see, then he is flying out of sight! A violation! It is NERDs like you, who will screw it up for all the respectful flyers out there. And mark my work, regulations are coming sooner than you think!

Flying LOS is a "recommendation", not a regulation. Yet.

 

[GoodnNuff]

Flying LOS is a "recommendation", not a regulation. Yet.

The Aerial videography company that was just fined $1.9 million by the FAA, wasn't part of their problem from flying BLOS?

Peter Sachs and the Drone Law Journal seem to take these as more than a "recommendation:"

• Operating a drones using “first person view” (“FPV”) is prohibited. This means you cannot use goggles or any modern “watch it on a monitor” system to fly, or even the long-accepted “buddy box” method where a second person (with a separate controller) observes the drone at all time while the pilot flies. Instead, the pilot’s own eyes must be able to see the drone at all times while flying.

Drone Law Journal

 

[DDW]

I'm trying to stay out of the food fight here. But you guys need to read your citations more carefully. Sachs does NOT agree with Olof. The quote from Sachs posted above is from a PROPOSED rule. Not an actual rule. Sach's whole point is that none of these "rules" are binding on anyone while they are "guidelines" or "proposed rules." What may be smart and safe operation is one thing. What is "illegal" is quite another. If we want to debate safety, great. But let's not mix up that discussion with improper assumptions about what is "illegal."

I quite often fly my drone over the ocean near the coast, below 200 feet, more than 5 miles from an airport, not over people. Every single day I have to avoid low-flying aircraft and especially helicopters sight seeing. Is my operation illegal? NO! Are their operations illegal? YES! Do you see anyone criticizing them? NO. is my drone flying in that environment smart? Debatable. So these are quite different issues.

 

[Gary E]

...Flying FPV w/o a safety pilot is also illegal, there must always be eyes on the model aircraft. This is even stated in the DJI manual...

The video shows another person watching the flight. The operator looks to have fulfilled this concern.

 

[Gary E]

...Aside from the damage you could do to your UAS, you are also violating FAA rules that specifically forbid flying a UAS in fog. While the aircraft is in the fog, you cannot see objects that might collide with it, and if it fails due to the moisture, the UAS could fall out of the sky and damage something or someone...

I missed the part in the video where it shows the craft flying in fog. Didn't see it. No harm, no foul?

 

[PilotHarry]

What is the concern in fog if VFR pilots have a minimum of 500?

Besides you might run into something haha

 

[Bryce]

There is no law stating that you cannot fly a quadcopter in fog.

People.... please don't get scared away from these doomsday folks. They cannot and will not cite anything on this... so please do not believe them and fly as you will.

 

[ParsnipHysorter]

The Aerial videography company that was just fined $1.9 million by the FAA, wasn't part of their problem from flying BLOS?

Peter Sachs and the Drone Law Journal seem to take these as more than a "recommendation:"

• Operating a drones using “first person view” (“FPV”) is prohibited. This means you cannot use goggles or any modern “watch it on a monitor” system to fly, or even the long-accepted “buddy box” method where a second person (with a separate controller) observes the drone at all time while the pilot flies. Instead, the pilot’s own eyes must be able to see the drone at all times while flying.

Drone Law Journal

Someone else again spreading misinformation. The discussion is about recreational aka hobbyist flying, NOT commercial, which indeed is very different to the FAA.

 

[Bryce]

Someone else again spreading misinformation. The discussion is about recreational aka hobbyist flying, NOT commercial, which indeed is very different to the FAA.

He does not understand that.

 

[Modern Vision]

Awesome video!! Thanks for sharing!!!

 

[jasonb777]

As far a the legality of flying in fog or even just behind a tree. It is illegal. The Model aircraft must always be in sight, and you must always have direct visual contact.

Flying FPV w/o a safety pilot is also illegal, there must always be eyes on the model aircraft. This is even stated in the DJI manual.

This is true for all drones, model helicopters and model airplanes. The AMA is a great place to learn about all the regulations. It is also illegal to fly above 400' AGL in the USA.

Personally I don't like to fly my P3P further out than about 1000' it is too easy to loose sight of it and hard to maintain orientation. Remember sooner or later you will loose the GPS and have to fly back in Atti mode. Ask me how I know.

I also have a S800 and that MR is much easier to fly further out to maybe 1200' or so because it is much bigger and has brighter Nav Lights.

Fly safe and respect the laws or we may all loose out.

People like you are the ones that push for these laws making it more difficult for us long range law abiding pilots to keep our rights and enjoying our hobbies in the right environments. There will always be people that break the laws and pushing for more regulations and laws will ultimately destroy our hobby. Please don't be part of the problem on this forum of trying this fear tactic to scare responsible flyers. And yes flying out 2 miles under 400ft. in the RIGHT ENVIRONMENT is responsible and safe...

 

[olof Ekbergh]

RANGE – ALTITUDE – WEIGHT – SPEED:

a) One of the requirements in Federal Law (Public Law 112-95 Sec 336 (c) (2) February 14, 2012) for model aircraft to be excluded from FAA regulations is that model aircraft must be flown within VLOS of the operator.

b) Model aircraft flown using FPV must remain at or below 400 feet AGL when within 3 miles of an airport as specified in the AMA Safety Code.

c) Model aircraft flown FPV are limited to a weight (including fuel, batteries, and onboard FPV equipment) of 15lbs. and a speed of 70mph.

Visual Line Of Sight (VLOS) is the distance at which the pilot is able to maintain visual contact with the aircraft and determine its orientation without enhancements other than corrective lenses.

OPERATIONS – REQUIREMENTS – LIMITATIONS:

1. a) FPV novice pilots undergoing training at low altitude must use a buddy-box system with
   
   an FPV spotter, or must go to a safer altitude if no buddy-box system is used.
   
   
2. b) All FPV flights require an AMA FPV pilot to have an AMA FPV spotter next to him/her
   
   maintaining VLOS with the FPV aircraft throughout its flight.
   
   
3. c) The FPV pilot must brief the FPV spotter on the FPV spotter’s duties, communications and
   
   hand-over control procedures before FPV flight.
   
   
4. d) The AMA FPV spotter must communicate with the FPV pilot to ensure the FPV aircraft remains within VLOS, warning the FPV pilot of approaching aircraft, and when avoidance techniques are necessary.
   
   
5. e) During an FPV flight, the FPV spotter must be prepared to acquire the transmitter/control from the FPV pilot and assume VLOS control of the model aircraft at any time safe operation of the flight is in question.
   

f) If an FPV pilot experiences a safety issue that does not appear to be a brief glitch, they must abandon FPV mode and fly VLOS.

1. g) Before the initial FPV flight of an FPV model aircraft and/or after any changes or repairs to essential flight systems, the FPV model aircraft must have an R/C test flight by conventional VLOS.
   
   
2. h) FPV model aircraft must use frequencies approved by the FCC for both the RC system and the wireless video system. Pilots must meet applicable FCC licensing requirements if they choose to operate the RC flight control system or the wireless video system on Amateur Band frequencies.
   

i) AMA FPV pilots must first be capable of flying their FPV model aircraft manually before utilizing FPV flight.



This is from this doc:
https://www.modelaircraft.org/files/550.pdf

 

[olof Ekbergh]

This is from
PUBLIC LAW 112–95—FEB. 14, 2012:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-112publ95/pdf/PLAW-112publ95.pdf



SEC. 336. SPECIAL RULE FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law relating to the incorporation of unmanned aircraft systems into Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, including this subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if—

(1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;

(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community- based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;

(3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection, flight test, and operational safety program adminis- tered by a community-based organization;

(4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and (5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport) with prior notice of the operation (model aircraft operators flying from a permanent location within 5 miles of an airport should establish a mutually-agreed upon operating procedure with the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the

airport)).

(b) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the Administrator to pursue enforcement action against persons operating model aircraft who endanger the safety of the national airspace system.

(c) MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘model aircraft’’ means an unmanned aircraft that is—

(1) capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;

(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and

(3) flown for hobby or recreational purposes.

 

[olof Ekbergh]

My two posts above show the documents the FAA will use to prosecute someone who is in violation.

Likelihood of being caught is very small for each pilot. But as there are more and more of us out there. Some will be caught and legal measures will be taken.

People can argue if the FAA has the right to inforce these "Federal Laws" but they will if you cause any damages or somehow are caught in violation.

So I am just saying be aware of these laws and act responsibly. I am afraid that there will be many more laws coming in the next couple years. And having incidents like we are hearing about almost every day now in the news of near misses with airplanes will only make them come faster and be more restrictive.

So fly responsibly and safely, to help preserve our current freedoms of operation.

 

[GoodnNuff]

Someone else again spreading misinformation. The discussion is about recreational aka hobbyist flying, NOT commercial, which indeed is very different to the FAA.

Nope, while the $1.9 million fine is against a commercial company, what Peter Sachs says in the Drone Law Journal pertains to recreational and commercial drone pilots.

 

[GoodnNuff]

He does not understand that.

Poor grasshopper:
(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and

(3) flown for hobby or recreational purposes.

 

[LuvMyTJ]

You guys need to simmer down a bit before this boils over and warnings are handed out.

While there are NO LAWS... YET, regarding hobby rc flights that doesn't mean you should not practice safe flying.
The 'guidelines' being used are not laws but there is no reason to not follow them.
By ignoring them you only put your hobby at more risk for regulations & laws.

Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

 

[LordEvil]

Pot meet kettle