I2 hitting 2 miles

[Donnie Frank]

But you are not in the UK where the OP is.

Touché. But my point that the entire paradigm is flawed and backwards - regardless of geography - is still valid.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) the UK UAV laws are just that. They are not 'rules' or 'regulations' but actual law passed by an act of Parliament.
Breaking those laws can mean an unlimited fine and up to 5 years in prison (or both).

Yep. I'm aware. Read above. I'm not advocating breaking any laws. I just disagree with those who actually believe that VLOS is somehow safer than beyond VLOS. I simply haven't found any data to support that assertion.

The USA is still the Wild West.

HA! I know, right!

2 or 3 years ago I predicted that the drone industry would go through an "over-regulation" period. And then the dust would settle, drones will become passe', and everyone can get back to making a living again. We'll see. I may be dead by the time that happens....<:^/

D

 

[Donnie Frank]

Don't bother.
The configs file will not work on your version of the app.

I have tested the .configs file as working on Go 4 v4.0.8, and Go v3.1.1. I highly recommend these legacy versions for the most function with the least DJI interference.

D

 

[Donnie Frank]

Can you not get a waiver from the FAA when you need to fly beyond VLOS? Just curious.

None of the waivers we get specifically specify VLOS or not. I'm not even sure that waiver exists. The problem is VLOS is unpredictable and subjective. On a good day, with the sun just right, I've had eyes on 2,200' out. On a bad day with white clouds behind a white drone, I've lost sight 1,000' out. We stick to the parameters of the waiver. Worth noting, ALL "beyond-VLOS" work is conducted out in the boonies away from traffic, buildings, people, etc.

If you ever followed my "broken aftermarket prop failure" threads in the Phantom forums, those catastrophic failures (yes, plural) occurred about 1.5 miles from launch point on a mapping job out in the middle of nowhere. Read; Zero property damage. Zero injury. And NOT by "accident" or "luck." Flights are engineered that way.

D

 

[Donnie Frank]

Can you not get a waiver from the FAA when you need to fly beyond VLOS? Just curious.

I don't know. I've never applied for one. As I stated in another comment, VLOS is subjective depending on the sky, the sun, etc. My VLOS work is always done away from buildings, people, etc.

D

 

[Donnie Frank]

@Donnie Frank , I take it you’re a 14 CFR Part 107 Remote Pilot?

And you freely admit, in an open, public forum, that you regularly violate 107.31?

I’m sure you simply failed to mention that during these activities, you use a Visual Observer (107.33) to satisfy (107.31 b2).

Right?

Sure.

Just curious. How much money did your drone company make last year?

D

 

[Donnie Frank]

A number of years ago I had twin fixed wing we successfully ground tested for video and control to 6 miles and on paper we figured 20-25 at least. I fly an I2 and fully understand Donnie's argument and respect his point of view, though I am not in agreement. VLOS is all about safety. I have had near misses with power lines and small trees when flying out a ways.

With all due respect, that is your fault for not understanding your environment and adjusting your flight accordingly. I NEVER fly beyond VLOS @ < 200' AGL, and more often than not fly closer to 400' AGL. I may not visually SEE my bird, but I know where it is. So if I see full scale aviation in the area, we pause operations and descend to a safe altitude. I have done this several times. Keep in mind, the camera is pointing down anyway, so it's super easy to see what's below us. Also worth noting is most beyond-VLOS operations are automated flights that are terrain aware. So you can bet everything is considered, including power lines, towers, etc. when building those flights. Any manual flying beyond VLOS has been done in the film industry, out in the middle of nowhere. It's no accident that I've not had any of the close calls you mention.

VLOS also deals with flying beyond return (ie wind, new rain issue, etc).

Again, these are environment variables I am painfully aware of and calculate flights accordingly. If I feel the wind is over 10 mph, I fly an ATTI flight to collect wind data @ 100', 200', 300' and 400'. I'm OCD when it comes to understanding and adjusting for wind. Rain is never an issue because we don't fly under the threat of rain.

It has been a big deal for the FAA to open the door to commercial flight. I have no problem respecting their regs. And my clients are also careful to make sure all images are legal or else they could have corporate issues.

Anybody who believes the 107 test guarantees any level of safe UAS operation, with all due respect, is insane. That test guarantees nothing. Quite the contrary, ANY yahoo can take and PASS that test without EVER TOUCHING A DRONE. Let that sink in. Don't get too invested in the 107. I believe the 107 is GREAT for understanding airspace and I APPLAUD the authors for including that in the test. But the rest of it is a bunch of crap. Airport signage???? Seriously? METARs???? Useless.

No practical test means ZERO guarantee of pilot safety or skill. My operations are safe FAR beyond the safety given by the 107. I credit the 107 for helping me understand the NAS, NOTAM's, NFZ's, etc., but I took it to the next level understanding full scale aviation flight patterns, glide slope, wind patterns, and all other manner of aviation that contributes GREATLY to the insurance of safe operations that's not even MENTIONED on the 107. Again, my safety record is perfect, which is often dismissed.

Do not toss your stuff. Glad you are not hacking it. Fly legal.....

We fly legal, permitted, and respect full scale aviation and the NAS. You can bet your last dollar on that.

D

 

[Akoni]

I concur with @Donnie Frank.
I primarily work as a construction drone operator and a large percentage of what I do fall out side VLOS.

Aside from the rush that the kool kids get from flying BLOS, it is also a way of testing the full capabilities of our drone.

I personally have not done a 2 mile range test, because it tad bit irresponsible on my part. I tested the range of my i2 at 1800 lat, without any hiccups, and for me it’s enough. The i2 has been a great work horse for me this season.

 

[Akoni]

On the side note: As far as the 32CH hack, you can roll back the DJI Go apk

 

[Warren]

Let’s just move on pal

 

[Fred Garvin]

Sure.

Just curious. How much money did your drone company make last year?

D

LOL.....I fly Yuneec Typhoons.....pretty sure they’re bleeding money.....

 

[Donnie Frank]

LOL.....I fly Yuneec Typhoons.....pretty sure they’re bleeding money.....

Well that's kind of my point. When given a choice between feeding my face or following a ridiculous set of rules set by those who know literally nothing about UAS flying (which has absolutely nothing to do with full scale aviation), I feed my face. I understand the spirit of the rules. I don't necessarily follow them to the letter because flying drones IS my day job. Safety is my top priority. Not compliance. Anyone foolish enough to put the latter ahead of the former is a danger in my book. Ignorance is bliss... Common sense be damned.

D

 

[Akoni]

LOL.....I fly Yuneec Typhoons.....pretty sure they’re bleeding money.....

You’re still flying your Yuneec? Yuneec is not ready for primetime and is now dead [emoji23] I sold mine and left the YuneecPilot forum. The kool kids there has their panties up in a bunch, when it comes to DJI.

 

[The Editor]

Well that's kind of my point. When given a choice between feeding my face or following a ridiculous set of rules set by those who know literally nothing about UAS flying (which has absolutely nothing to do with full scale aviation), I feed my face. I understand the spirit of the rules. I don't necessarily follow them to the letter because flying drones IS my day job. Safety is my top priority. Not compliance. Anyone foolish enough to put the latter ahead of the former is a danger in my book. Ignorance is bliss... Common sense be damned.

Donnie - whilst I might not fully agree with you on all points. I do understand where you are coming from.
I also appreciate you have a knowledge and understanding of both your aircraft and airspace rules.
You also put safety as a priority.

However, the OP has demonstrated he has no knowledge of the laws, rules or his own aircraft - even to a rudimentary level.
He also insists on pushing out BVLOS to over 2 miles distance.
Do you think he fully understands both the RTH behavior of his UAS or has contingency plans in place in case of an emergency?

He has no intention of educating himself in any of the above disciplines which can only be a recipe for disaster

If he destroys his own aircraft (which is probably inevitable) then so be it - we will all be safer.

The concern is, with his intransigent attitude to learn, be educated or helped in safely flying, he will end up injuring someone or damaging property or both .......or worse!

These are exactly the kind of individuals the FAA/CAA are really concerned about.

 

[Steve@AerialImagesPro]

Well that's kind of my point. When given a choice between feeding my face or following a ridiculous set of rules set by those who know literally nothing about UAS flying (which has absolutely nothing to do with full scale aviation), I feed my face. I understand the spirit of the rules. I don't necessarily follow them to the letter because flying drones IS my day job. Safety is my top priority. Not compliance. Anyone foolish enough to put the latter ahead of the former is a danger in my book. Ignorance is bliss... Common sense be damned.

D

There is no circumstance when flying BVLOS is safer than compliance. That's the problem. I agree, there should be an exception to the VLOS rule for when you're flying in an UNPOPULATED area, but again, stating you're against the rule and claiming safety is your first priority over compliance isn't really valid in the VLOS argument.

It only encourages numb nutz like the OP

 

[Fred Garvin]

You’re still flying your Yuneec? Yuneec is not ready for primetime and is now dead [emoji23] I sold mine and left the YuneecPilot forum. The kool kids there has their panties up in a bunch, when it comes to DJI.

Yes.....I’m not having any issues with my H+....flies just fine, the C23 produces fantastic images and video....NFZ’s are unlocked....so it works for what I’m doing now. It’s a great bird. But I am concerned and watching closely.....lack of innovation and product, difficulty in parts supply and repair center issues, reduction (or elimination) of US based presence.... it does seem the writing’s on the wall.....

I’m shopping for an I2 kit....not for any immediate need to replace the H+, but to move up to MFT and interchangeable lenses...take my game up a notch.

 

[Donnie Frank]

However, the OP has demonstrated he has no knowledge of the laws, rules or his own aircraft - even to a rudimentary level.

Yes...I noticed this with the "tin foil hat over the satellite antenna" thread.

He also insists on pushing out BVLOS to over 2 miles distance.
Do you think he fully understands both the RTH behavior of his UAS or has contingency plans in place in case of an emergency?

"No" to both questions.

He has no intention of educating himself in any of the above disciplines which can only be a recipe for disaster

If he destroys his own aircraft (which is probably inevitable) then so be it - we will all be safer.

The concern is, with his intransigent attitude to learn, be educated or helped in safely flying, he will end up injuring someone or damaging property or both .......or worse!

MOST of these rogue "benchmark distance" guys tend to fly in rural or sparsely populated areas. I can only hope the OP is doing the same.

These are exactly the kind of individuals the FAA/CAA are really concerned about.

Touché. The unfortunate reality is the FAA doesn't see "good UAS pilots" or "bad UAS pilots." They see "compliant" or "non-compliant." Skill level is irrelevant. The FAA tends to lump all pilots into one category with regard for skill level or experience. I can only hope that someday there will be some kind of UAS pilot hierarchy so that guys like me won't be lumped into the same category as guys like the OP. You make good points.

D

 

[Cameradroid]

Or try telling a film director that his car chase can go no farther than 1,000' away from the director's chair. You'll never work again.

Not true Donnie. No professional director would ask you to break the law. Not to mention the film set safety officer who would shut you down immediately. Moreover, the producer, fellow technicians and actors wouldn’t work with you again.

 

[Akoni]

Yes.....I’m not having any issues with my H+....flies just fine, the C23 produces fantastic images and video....NFZ’s are unlocked....so it works for what I’m doing now. It’s a great bird. But I am concerned and watching closely.....lack of innovation and product, difficulty in parts supply and repair center issues, reduction (or elimination) of US based presence.... it does seem the writing’s on the wall.....

I profited from the Yuneec Typhoon H Plus, during a 10%-40% build doc. for the whole season last year and had to modified it to fly reliably and safely. Yuneec and other operators underestimate the capabilities of that drone, but it is the most solid drone in my fleet, and I was able to do manual mapping.

The only issue that Yuneec has is connectivity that points to being an unsafe drone. I save that drone twice from a flyaway and potential crash.. lol

I’m shopping for an I2 kit....not for any immediate need to replace the H+, but to move up to MFT and interchangeable lenses...take my game up a notch.

The i2 is a beast and yet gentle once you set it to your liking. I have been using it daily on 5 builds that I’m currently following.

Time to step up, bro

 

[Steve@AerialImagesPro]

Not true Donnie. No professional director would ask you to break the law. Not to mention the film set safety officer who would shut you down immediately. Moreover, the producer, fellow technicians and actors wouldn’t work with you again.

lol, I guess some people will just say anything to support their argument. This is so true Cameradroid! If what Donnie said was true, the director and producer wouldn't care less about OSHA laws either.. Here's a pub put out the Film industry that is for the purpose of film makers using drones to follow FAA laws to the letter.

http://film.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/UAS-Use-Requirements.pdf

 

[Donnie Frank]

Not true Donnie. No professional director would ask you to break the law. Not to mention the film set safety officer who would shut you down immediately. Moreover, the producer, fellow technicians and actors wouldn’t work with you again.

My experience has been different. And I generally follow the DP, not the director...but in lower budget productions the director has doubled as DP...but I digress... My point is that perhaps the DP may not be as hip to the rules as the director...I don't know. I'm always camera op, so I let my PIC do whatever he's comfortable with.

Also worth noting, 90% of my shooting has been 2nd-Unit, which is a little more relaxed than 1st-Unit. When we shot 1st-Unit, there was definitely a higher sense of compliance on set. All that said, I haven't shot film in about 1.5 years, so I concede things may have tightened up since I last shot.

D