Small aircraft and quadcopters

[ResevorDG]

To defend most light aircraft pilots, they would be well more qualified and knowledgable then most people flying Phantoms. There is plenty of evidence on here of people breaking aviation laws that they would have no idea about.

Some food for thought (laws differ country to country but would be similar):

Before you talk to the FAA, CAA, CASA etc I would make sure you know what your talking about. You would feel pretty stupid if you got yourself in trouble.

This is a good point, my info only goes as far as the USA, and even then I still don't know much about unmanned aircraft. But if you have a question about normal piloted general aviation airplanes, I have a fair amount of knowledge there.

 

[Erroneous007]

To defend most light aircraft pilots, they would be well more qualified and knowledgable then most people flying Phantoms. There is plenty of evidence on here of people breaking aviation laws that they would have no idea about.

Some food for thought (laws differ country to country but would be similar):
1) It's illegal to fly within 3nm(6km) of an aerodrome
2) Flight above 400ft is illegal
3) Flight out of visual line of site is illegal. You need to see you Phantom at all times. You FPV doesn't count.
4) Aircraft can legally be at 500ft in unpopulated areas. Many can go lower legally for a variety of reasons. The difference between your Phantom at 400ft and aircraft at 500ft will look very close.
5) Aircraft will have almost no chance of seeing a Phantom until impact.
6) Aircraft have right of way over your Phantom.

Before you talk to the FAA, CAA, CASA etc I would make sure you know what your talking about. You would feel pretty stupid if you got yourself in trouble.

My advice would be to contact your local airport somehow. Be it a flight school, operator etc and make sure your doing everything legally!

What country are you in and which law are you referring to regarding it being illegal to fly above 400 feet? I know there were voluntary guidelines put out by the FAA in the 1981 (Advisory 91-57), but I am not aware of any law that restricts height. (although the guidelines are probably a good idea).

 

[ianwood]

So today is a sunny, unusually warm Saturday - and everyone is out flying.

At least two light aircraft kept flying around me, maybe more. In a 10 minute quadcopter flight, there were at least 5 passes! I dunno if they are circling, or what.

EDIT: IN the 30 minutes since I posted this, they passed by 8 more times - that I happened to notice. Unreal amonut of air traffic!

I didn't get good video of the lowest and closest, but did get this ... this one is a bit higher and offset from me, so it's not a great example of the worst 'offenders', but is a quick glimpse of what I mean. It's well within my flight range.

I know, not that big a deal, who cares.. but, that's sort of what I meant, just a bit lower though are the concerning cases.. that and the high frequency of pass-bys meaning lots of air traffic over this location (even if only a few planes).

It's very hard to tell anything from your video, but if I had to guess that plane is on a normal climb out from your local airport and is most likely above 500ft. It is very unlikely that so many different aircraft would be violating a very basic rule. It sounds like your flying area is on the flight path from the nearby airport which makes it a bad place for you to fly your Phantom. I would suggest that you should find a different area to fly or at the very minimum stay below 200ft and fly LOS at all times. I would again strongly recommend a different place to fly.

 

[Big Ben]

Are these planes all flying in the same direction and perhaps into the (general direction of the) wind? If so they might simply be on approach to or departure from the airfield. I'd suggest going to the airfield and familiarising yourself with normal flight operations there. You'll be able to recognise which planes are on such normal flight paths and which are not (and possibly to a degree predict their presence based on wind direction).

 

[wat17]

What country are you in and which law are you referring to regarding it being illegal to fly above 400 feet? I know there were voluntary guidelines put out by the FAA in the 1981 (Advisory 91-57), but I am not aware of any law that restricts height. (although the guidelines are probably a good idea).

"Some food for thought (laws differ country to country but would be similar):"

May not be a law with in your country but makes sense to keep unapproved drone traffic away from regular aircraft. Common sense shouldn't need to be legislated.

 

[Jeremyconk]

What country are you in and which law are you referring to regarding it being illegal to fly above 400 feet? I know there were voluntary guidelines put out by the FAA in the 1981 (Advisory 91-57), but I am not aware of any law that restricts height. (although the guidelines are probably a good idea).

"Some food for thought (laws differ country to country but would be similar):"

May not be a law with in your country but makes sense to keep unapproved drone traffic away from regular aircraft. Common sense shouldn't need to be legislated.

+1

 

[Erroneous007]

I agree that common sense should prevail (of course we know it won't in all cases) and manned aircraft do have the right of way in the US, so we need to be on the lookout and stay out of their way. But it always good to know the difference between common sense, policy guidelines and the law because one of those can lead to fines or jail time. I had a Park Ranger try to confiscate my Phantom and tell me that it was illegal to fly on National Park Property. Which if course, it isn't (36 CFR only applies to MANNED aircraft by definition). But when I asked him to show me that law, he couldn't and did not confiscate it. But of course, I left voluntarily and he thanked me for complying and wished me good luck with my photography. I can't imagine why I would really need to fly higher than 400 feet for my photography using the Vision lens anyway, but that depends on how "ground" is defined. In San Diego, I took off and was 50 feet above the ground, but as soon as I flew off the cliff and out over the ocean I was more than 400 feet above that ground. The same could be the case in hilly areas.

 

[dbcch]

Of course I do give these guys the right of way, and in-fact, never fly above 250 feet around here, and always keep it below 400 feet wherever I am.

They may be approaching a local airfield, it's only a couple/few miles away. However, I am more inclined to think these are enthusiasts just getting a good view of the lake and state park near-by. Or maybe there is a flight school, I dunno.

My surprise was just the amount of traffic, and the sudden realization that I need to be aware of them. Asking this question was to get an idea of the regulations that are in place to keep us all at a safe distance from one another. And THANK YOU to all of you for the info, and opinions.

There are definitely safety issues, especially if you have inexperienced or irresponsible quadcopter pilots.

It's something that should be mentioned more often I think ... sure, it's common sense, but, especially for noobs, it might not be a consideration .. until suddenly it is!

 

[dbcch]

After checking the map and further study: Apparently I happen to live right under a standard approach vector for the local airport, hence all the traffic. I just never noticed until I was also in the air with them.

So, you guys who theorized such were right.

Needless to say, I will be using extreme caution flying around here, if at all. Definitely not going over 200 feet. I am pretty sure none of the aircraft are below 400 feet.

 

[SilentAV8R]

One of the fundamentals in general aviation is the responsibility to "see and avoid", and that applies to everyone putting anything into the air, whether or not you're inside it, not under radar air traffic control. So you did a great job as you were concerned and took avoiding action. Height perception can be difficult, so whether you needed to or not I don't know, but it's a lot easier for you to see (and hear) and therefore avoid the light aircraft than it is for them to see and avoid you. Always fly defensively, and if in doubt get yourself out of the way. I'd say you did a good job, captain!

First, it is nearly impossible for a full scale pilot to see an RC aircraft. Second, it is the responsibility of the RC pilot to give way to FS traffic. Period. So talk of reporting the FS pilot are beyond humorous.

Just saw your post above. Looking at your video that was my guess too, you live near a general aviation airport. Keep in mind that it is legal for them to be under 500 feet if they are in the process of landing or taking off. Sounds like you are taking the right path, stay low and aware. But folks need to understand, that at least in the US, there is NEVER a time that any RC aircraft will have right of way over a FS plane.

 

[Pull_Up]

What part of my quote disagreed with what you just said?

 

[dbcch]

I don't think he was disagreeing with your post. Yours just happened to be the one he quoted.

He was just saying that reporting pilots is absurd. Under these circumstances, it is.

BUT, initially in this thread, the circumstances were not clear. That got us into discussing plane pilots who do fly recklessly and might need reported. That isn't the case here, but probably does happen.

What's funny is how many times we sometimes go in circles and all say the same thing ;p. It's the nature of forums though.

 

[Topeeka]

Keep in mind the difficulty that the pilot of a small plane would have in seeing a relatively tiny object such as a Phantom. Remember that most times the small plane pilot will be looking DOWN at what can be a very 'active' and confusing background. Lots of trees, flowers, trash, cars, people...on and on...AND...he might be travelling at 70, 80 or more MPH. So it can be almost impossible for him / her to pick a Phantom out of the background visual 'clutter' and take any sort of evasive action. I seriously doubt that there are more than a few really boneheaded pilots who would try to 'buzz' an object that was in their airspace. Not only could they be in some legal hot water, but a collision with something even as light weight as a Phantom could do great damage to their aircraft.

We who are flying Phantoms....have this task a LOT easier...oftentimes our quads are contrasted by nothing but clear blue skies, travelling more like 15 mph and in our visual sight. Even at that, it's very easy to lose sight of a quad even when we know the general area that we have flown it to...

So....constant vigilance should be the watchword...always good to have a second "spotter" with you...to keep scanning the nearby skies for ANYTHING else...kites, eagles, etc.

 

[SilentAV8R]

What part of my quote disagreed with what you just said?

Nothing. I was using your post as a means of making a point. Too often we ground based pilots rely on the FS guy being steeped in the "See and Avoid" mindset. That is true, but in practice when it comes to them seeing us not very practical.

My other comments were in general to those that were beating the "report him" drum. A fool's errand with the FAA.

Lastly, as a long time RC pilot (45 years) I am generally appalled at the things I see many people in this and other forums doing. As I often say, Pogo was right, "We have met the enemy and he is us"

One issue I am having right now is a deep concern about where to fly. I will not fly over people, private property, roads, vehicles, etc. I also avoid places where I might draw undue attention as well.