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