If a drone must be kept within line of sight, is it reasonable to assume the smaller it is the nearer it should be?

yes if you have a clon of yourself in the opposite side

VLOS is surely subjective?  Some people have far greater visual acuity than others.

No, "line of sight" doesn't say that you have to be able to detect it with your eyes!  Line of sight stretches away to infinity.

If the rules say that it must be visible then yes, that is a reason to fly a Phantom instead of a Spark

Nigel_ Posted at 2018-1-29 11:43
No, "line of sight" doesn't say that you have to be able to detect it with your eyes!  Line of sight stretches away to infinity.

If the rules say that it must be visible then yes, that is a reason to fly a Phantom instead of a Spark

On the contrary, we are supposed to keep our drones within Visual Line of Sight.  On your premise, we would be allowed to fly them "To infinity, and Beyond!"  as per Buzz Lightyear ;)
If you can't see it, it's too far away.

Keep a good pair of binoculars handy.

Blériot53 Posted at 2018-1-29 12:16
On the contrary, we are supposed to keep our drones within Visual Line of Sight.  On your premise, we would be allowed to fly them "To infinity, and Beyond!"  as per Buzz Lightyear ;)
If you can't see it, it's too far away.

Actually he was correct.  
You could fly 10 miles out and be in line of sight.
Line of sight is about the line and not about necessarily about seeing anything.
Having a clear, unobstructed line of sight means there's nothing between you and the Phantom.
It's very hard to fly if you don't have a line of sight to your Phantom.

The term visual line of sight is something different.

Labroides Posted at 2018-1-29 13:49
Actually he was correct.  
You could fly 10 miles out and be in line of sight.
Line of sight is about the line and not about necessarily about seeing anything.

Visual line of sight also may not mean that you can make the aircraft out.   It should just mean that there is nothing blocking the view allowing you to see the location of the aircraft.  Radio line of sight is a bit different since you could have fog in the way and still have radio contact but not visual contact.

In the UK, the regulations require that you :

• "must maintain direct, unaided visual contact with the aircraft sufficient to monitor its flight path in relation to other aircraft, persons, vehicles, vessels and structures for the purpose of avoiding collisions."
  

which clearly means that you must be able to see the aircraft, and not just as a black dot on the horizon, you need to be able to judge its distance relative to other aircraft.

Labroides Posted at 2018-1-29 13:49
Actually he was correct.  
You could fly 10 miles out and be in line of sight.
Line of sight is about the line and not about necessarily about seeing anything.

"Line of sight is about the line and not about necessarily about seeing anything"

In the normal context of "line of sight" that may be correct but it is very misleading and irrelevant in the context pf the OP's requirements.
The OP is from the UK and the CAA in the UK clearly says that drones must be in the operator's direct sight at all times. I believe that is also the case in most countries.

VLOS means visual line of sight with vision unaided by binoculars or telescopes- at least in the USA.

JockC Posted at 2018-1-29 18:40
"Line of sight is about the line and not about necessarily about seeing anything"

In the normal context of "line of sight" that may be correct but it is very misleading and irrelevant in the context pf the OP's requirements.

Line of sight is a term that has been in use in radio for over 100 years.
It's only in recent times that drone people invented the mongrel term visual line of sight and abbreviated that to line of sight which started confusing people.

Nigel_ Posted at 2018-1-29 14:41
Visual line of sight also may not mean that you can make the aircraft out.   It should just mean that there is nothing blocking the view allowing you to see the location of the aircraft.  Radio line of sight is a bit different since you could have fog in the way and still have radio contact but not visual contact.

In the UK, the regulations require that you :

I can see the point of the rule of VLOS, to avoid collisions with aircraft. What aggravates me about this rule is people on the ground have absolutely no way to judge how high and how far a plane is.  You could have your drone 10 ft away up at 300 or 400 feet and you will not be able to tell if the plane will hit it unless you see it through the camera. I have to be extremely cautious when I fly at home, even though I am just about right on the 5 mile radius from the nearest grass airfield (bigger airports in the 10-20 mile radius) alot of times planes seem to be flying at less than 400 feet. I was walking my dog at the park down the street from me (a little bit outside the 5 mile radius) when a large plane, possibly a DC-9 around that size came roaring overhead which to me on the ground looked like he was no more than 100 feet above the trees. I could see all the markings very clear. I then thought to myself I am glad I was not flying my drone right then because unless he was over 400 feet with the very short amount of time that you hear the plane then actually see it, if I was flying at 400 feet and brought it down to try to avoid the plane, if it was in the planes flight path, my phantom could very well hit it while trying to descend and get out of the way.  This seems to be becoming more of a problem, too many planes and helicopters seem to ignore their 500 foot rule even over semi-populated land. Then if they collide  it is still our fault because we have to give way to airplanes at all times.

The VLOS can be sygnificantly increased, by adding some brighter LEDs to your aircraft.

Many drone pilots here, including myself use Lume Cube's with appropriate mounts, to have that advantage.

http://www.lumecube.com/164.html

I hope that helps you improve your longer flights. ;-)

In one of the several Strobe modes, it really is visible, a long way down the field.

RedHotPoker

Labroides Posted at 2018-1-29 20:28
Line of sight is a term that has been in use in radio for over 100 years.
It's only in recent times that drone people invented the mongrel term visual line of sight and abbreviated that to line of sight which started confusing people.

Thank you for the radio 101. I am fully aware of how the term is used in those circles. What I pointed out was that the rules in the UK (where the OP resides) do not talk about line of sight. The UK rules state that  the drone must be in the operator's "direct sight" at all times so the line of sight terminology is not particularly relevant to his local flying regulations.  The rules of most countries also appear to include words to the effect that the drone must be actually visible and not just in the "line of sight".  The line of sight terminology appears to be more of a shortened form of the actual requirements , shortened for the convenience of posters in this forum. In doing so, it misses the real requirement which, in most cases, requires that the drone be actually visible.

fansb1fe1104 Posted at 2018-1-29 20:52
I can see the point of the rule of VLOS, to avoid collisions with aircraft. What aggravates me about this rule is people on the ground have absolutely no way to judge how high and how far a plane is.  You could have your drone 10 ft away up at 300 or 400 feet and you will not be able to tell if the plane will hit it unless you see it through the camera. I have to be extremely cautious when I fly at home, even though I am just about right on the 5 mile radius from the nearest grass airfield (bigger airports in the 10-20 mile radius) alot of times planes seem to be flying at less than 400 feet. I was walking my dog at the park down the street from me (a little bit outside the 5 mile radius) when a large plane, possibly a DC-9 around that size came roaring overhead which to me on the ground looked like he was no more than 100 feet above the trees. I could see all the markings very clear. I then thought to myself I am glad I was not flying my drone right then because unless he was over 400 feet with the very short amount of time that you hear the plane then actually see it, if I was flying at 400 feet and brought it down to try to avoid the plane, if it was in the planes flight path, my phantom could very well hit it while trying to descend and get out of the way.  This seems to be becoming more of a problem, too many planes and helicopters seem to ignore their 500 foot rule even over semi-populated land. Then if they collide  it is still our fault because we have to give way to airplanes at all times.

The other issue is that if I have a Phantom and I'm flying it 300 meters away and 400ft above ground, and somebody with a Spark flies up at that location, I can see my Phantom, but I'm not going to be able to see the Spark, yet the UK rules require that I can see both aircraft.  The Spark owner has the same issue since there are drones a lot smaller than a Spark.   With drone technology allowing smaller and smaller drones, it's not really possible to be certain you are complying with the regulations however close you keep it.

As far as I know, the USA rules don't require that you can see the smaller aircraft?  

Nigel_ Posted at 2018-1-30 01:40
The other issue is that if I have a Phantom and I'm flying it 300 meters away and 400ft above ground, and somebody with a Spark flies up at that location, I can see my Phantom, but I'm not going to be able to see the Spark, yet the UK rules require that I can see both aircraft.  The Spark owner has the same issue since there are drones a lot smaller than a Spark.   With drone technology allowing smaller and smaller drones, it's not really possible to be certain you are complying with the regulations however close you keep it.

As far as I know, the USA rules don't require that you can see the smaller aircraft?

FAA says similar to UK rules
Keeping drone in sight throughout flight
It does not stipulate type or size of "aircraft" that you must keep track of; the accepted term here is 'see and avoid' for all aircraft, obstructions, and hazards.  See and Avoid is a catch all term as seeing a fighter jet coming at you at mach snot you have just a few seconds or so before it is on you and this assumes you see it at the farthest point out, you sure as heck wont hear it.  Which is another reason for the 400 foot restriction, however, for our drone operators out in "fly over" country where military low level routes exist puts all bets off.  Meaning, when flying something as capable as a Phantom or Mavic or more requires you to know a heck of a lot more about airspace and how to check for those areas that can be in conflict.

To OP - No.

RedHotPoker Posted at 2018-1-29 20:53
The VLOS can be sygnificantly increased, by adding some brighter LEDs to your aircraft.

Many drone pilots here, including myself use Lume Cube's with appropriate mounts, to have that advantage.

That's true and it's a reasonable strategy during the day, but the FAA rule is a little different at night in regards to recreational flying.

During day, the rule is VLOS, as we all know.  We can argue about how close we "should" be, but nonetheless, as the rule is written, it's simply VLOS.  

During night, the rule is we must be able to see the AC's attitude and orientation.  Simple VLOS isn't quite good enough.  

If you think about it, it makes sense in that it solves the FAA's problem of drone pilots thinking they can fly 3x further at night if they have bright lights on their AC.  But I suppose if we had enough lights and played with the colors, we might find a way to satisfy that night rule...

Genghis9 Posted at 2018-1-30 03:10
FAA says similar to UK rules
Keeping drone in sight throughout flight
It does not stipulate type or size of "aircraft" that you must keep track of; the accepted term here is 'see and avoid' for all aircraft, obstructions, and hazards.  See and Avoid is a catch all term as seeing a fighter jet coming at you at mach snot you have just a few seconds or so before it is on you and this assumes you see it at the farthest point out, you sure as heck wont hear it.  Which is another reason for the 400 foot restriction, however, for our drone operators out in "fly over" country where military low level routes exist puts all bets off.  Meaning, when flying something as capable as a Phantom or Mavic or more requires you to know a heck of a lot more about airspace and how to check for those areas that can be in conflict.

And normally you can't see them "at the farthest point out" because they irresponsibly paint their aircraft in camouflage colours to deliberately make them hard to spot!

In UK low fly zones, unless you are flying from a boat, you can be sure that they will be flying at less than Mach 1, typically you will hear them about 3 seconds away, by which time it is too late to take avoidance action.  So if flying in a UK low fly zone you must check the timetable and not fly when they are flying.  The 400ft rule is irrelevant in a low fly zone since they don't use it and are quite likely to be below your 0ft.

Nigel_ Posted at 2018-1-30 04:12
And normally you can't see them "at the farthest point out" because they irresponsibly paint their aircraft in camouflage colours to deliberately make them hard to spot!

In UK low fly zones, unless you are flying from a boat, you can be sure that they will be flying at less than Mach 1, typically you will hear them about 3 seconds away, by which time it is too late to take avoidance action.  So if flying in a UK low fly zone you must check the timetable and not fly when they are flying.  The 400ft rule is irrelevant in a low fly zone since they don't use it and are quite likely to be below your 0ft.

Yeah the sneaky Bass-tards, they know they should be painted orange

Well to be honest, same here, no supersonic low level when in country, only over water i.e. well off the coast.  High alt mach is permitted in special use areas (MOAs) and all flights must be logged.

I dare say most US drone operators are not even aware of low level routes and how to find them let alone determine if they are open or not.  Even if they are aware enough to check NOTAMs it is still not enough.  I can't tell you how many puddle jumpers I've encountered in corridor that seemed oblivious to our presence SMH...

Genghis9 Posted at 2018-1-30 09:24
Yeah the sneaky Bass-tards, they know they should be painted orange

Well to be honest, same here, no supersonic low level when in country, only over water i.e. well off the coast.  High alt mach is permitted in special use areas (MOAs) and all flights must be logged.

We don't have NOTAMs for normal low flying in the low flying areas so no point checking them!
But the low flying areas are well marked on the map, if people bother to check.

They do occasionally hit Mach 1 accidently; I remember them breaking the glass in the school fire alarm button, one of the few times the fire brigade turned up since it was as real alarm instead of a practice!  However they always get into trouble when they do, so it doesn't happen often.

Very occasionally they do it intentionally:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-41496812
"A loud bang that shook homes across Suffolk was a sonic boom caused by military aircraft, police said.

People reported hearing what sounded like an "explosion" throughout the county, including in Stowmarket, Leiston, Framsden and Grundisburgh, at 08:35 BST.

The RAF said Typhoon aircraft were authorised to travel at supersonic speed for "operational reasons".

It said it "regretted" any inconvenience caused.

The RAF said Quick Reaction Alert Typhoon aircraft were launched from RAF Coningsby to intercept a civilian aircraft.

Jenny Denham, from Eye, said: "I thought it was a terrible explosion."

Others reported "glass rattling", "animals going crazy", "houses shaking" and "birds flying everywhere".
"

Nigel_ Posted at 2018-1-30 10:29
We don't have NOTAMs for normal low flying in the low flying areas so no point checking them!
But the low flying areas are well marked on the map, if people bother to check.

Yup that'll do it...operational missions are that one exception and since 911 they happen a lot more often.

I find the noise not nearly as interesting as feeling the shockwave from it, it is quite a thump.

Genghis9 Posted at 2018-1-30 10:45
Yup that'll do it...operational missions are that one exception and since 911 they happen a lot more often.

I find the noise not nearly as interesting as feeling the shockwave from it, it is quite a thump.

I used to hear Concord returning home nearly every evening, that gave a great sub-sonic thud, and even if I didn't hear it the pheasants did so it was followed by a lot of squawking as they all took to the air in panic.  The bang was hardly audible since it dropped below Mach 1 a couple of hundred miles away while still out over the sea but the thud still shook the windows.

Mark The Droner Posted at 2018-1-30 03:32
That's true and it's a reasonable strategy during the day, but the FAA rule is a little different at night in regards to recreational flying.

During day, the rule is VLOS, as we all know.  We can argue about how close we "should" be, but nonetheless, as the rule is written, it's simply VLOS.  

I can see my drone blinking, a couple of kilometers away, in the brightest day light.

At night that distance is probably doubled.

Day or night, it's still VLOS.


RedHotPoker

Chill out guys. I only said it tongue in cheek!

Maybe everyone should be armed with a distance metre to record aircraft over head and report them for flying under 400ft.  

Thus is the law here in australia.

Standard Operating ConditionsYou must only fly during the day and keep your RPA within visual line-of sight (VLOS) – close enough to see, maintain orientation and achieve accurate flight and tracking.This means being able to see the aircraft with your own eyes (rather than through first-person-view (FPV)) at all times.You must not fly your RPA higher than 120 metres (400ft) AGL.Referenced to a point on the ground immediately below the RPA at any time during the flight.You must only fly your RPA during the daytime only (not after sunset).

Genghis9 Posted at 2018-1-30 03:10
FAA says similar to UK rules
Keeping drone in sight throughout flight
It does not stipulate type or size of "aircraft" that you must keep track of; the accepted term here is 'see and avoid' for all aircraft, obstructions, and hazards.  See and Avoid is a catch all term as seeing a fighter jet coming at you at mach snot you have just a few seconds or so before it is on you and this assumes you see it at the farthest point out, you sure as heck wont hear it.  Which is another reason for the 400 foot restriction, however, for our drone operators out in "fly over" country where military low level routes exist puts all bets off.  Meaning, when flying something as capable as a Phantom or Mavic or more requires you to know a heck of a lot more about airspace and how to check for those areas that can be in conflict.

That's the problem its not just military planes...Where I live is considered rural-semi urban...when I moved here 20 years ago there was pretty much nothing but grass fields and trees in the area, now its very hard to find a place to fly around here without involving the flight plan to include flying over other peoples houses, except at the local parks. As I stated earlier the nearest airport around here is a towerless small grass field with ultralights and small planes. That is 4.7 miles from my house...I am constantly seeing small planes that appear to be flying at or below 400 feet often.

RedHotPoker Posted at 2018-1-30 11:13
Day or night, it's still VLOS.

Not in the USA.  VLOS isn't good enough at night.  See my post above...

Getting back on topic.
To answer your question you are correct.
To put all this legal jargon in plain simple terms.Many people will try to twist the legalities to suit themselves but if you use a little common sense then its very simple.
Keep your drone close enough that you can see its orientation and what it is doing.
Having a dot on the horizon is not flying vlos.
Flying purely by fpv i dont think is legal anywere and those that do this are not only breaking the law but also endangering peoples lives.
So your comment .... the smaller it gets the closer it should be is absolutely correct.

Nigel_ Posted at 2018-1-30 01:40
The other issue is that if I have a Phantom and I'm flying it 300 meters away and 400ft above ground, and somebody with a Spark flies up at that location, I can see my Phantom, but I'm not going to be able to see the Spark, yet the UK rules require that I can see both aircraft.  The Spark owner has the same issue since there are drones a lot smaller than a Spark.   With drone technology allowing smaller and smaller drones, it's not really possible to be certain you are complying with the regulations however close you keep it.

As far as I know, the USA rules don't require that you can see the smaller aircraft?

That is a good point about the Spark which I had not considered. If 2 drones crashed in to each other, who would be at fault? But in the case with manned aircraft if they ignore the rules and fly at or under 400 feet and collide with our drone, even if we were doing everything we could to avoid the plane, it would still be our fault.

Hellsgate Posted at 2018-1-30 13:57
So your comment .... the smaller it gets the closer it should be is absolutely correct.

So if my AC is 50 meters away, and I fly my AC 100 meters away, my AC should be closer.  Absolutely closer.  

Got it.  Thanks

Mark The Droner Posted at 2018-1-30 13:10
Not in the USA.  VLOS isn't good enough at night.  See my post above...

I'm a proud Canadian, but I will be watching the Donald, Trump tell some lies tonight... Haha


His first state of the Union, might be his last...

We are fortunate here, to have www.ercha.ca
Private property, with padlock gated fence. Chuckles
One day last spring, I had one of our police helicopters hovering over me while flying around Muttart Conservatory. That's our pyramid shaped greenhouses. I packed up, and headed to ercha, only to have the popo follow me out there. Once I had started flying my Phantom 3 Pro' there, he flew away. ;-)


RedHotPoker

Haha

BTW is CA CE or FCC?  Just curious...

Thanks

fansb1fe1104 Posted at 2018-1-30 13:04
That's the problem its not just military planes...Where I live is considered rural-semi urban...when I moved here 20 years ago there was pretty much nothing but grass fields and trees in the area, now its very hard to find a place to fly around here without involving the flight plan to include flying over other peoples houses, except at the local parks. As I stated earlier the nearest airport around here is a towerless small grass field with ultralights and small planes. That is 4.7 miles from my house...I am constantly seeing small planes that appear to be flying at or below 400 feet often.

Unfortunately I am not surprised to hear that...and I suspect you are correct.
Ultralights are a cross between a kite and a propeller airplane and that is putting it nicely, and too many of those operators are one control input away from a crash or stall or both as they don't have a complete understanding or appreciation for manned powered flight.  Enough of my soapbox, indeed ultralights tend to fly lower as for one they have less distance to fall or land if there is trouble and is easier to climb to a lower altitude than climb higher.  
Technically, if they are below 500 for other than approach and departure they are not following FAA regs.

RedHotPoker Posted at 2018-1-30 15:35
I'm a proud Canadian, but I will be watching the Donald, Trump tell some lies tonight... Haha

Oh, I see. You are living in one of Her Majesty's "colonies". haha

Air/America Posted at 2018-1-30 17:13
Oh, I see. You are living in one of Her Majesty's "colonies". haha

Yes, it's also the oil capital.

We have a long list of RC flying regulations, but we also have huge tracts of wilderness, in and around the  Alberta capital city.  ;-)
Come & try to find me... Chuckles

They said it's a free world, so let's all enjoy our freedoms.


RedHotPoker

Nebuchadnezzar Posted at 2018-1-29 11:03
yes if you have a clon of yourself in the opposite side

Not to poke fun at you, but what is a clon?

Surely you meant clone.. Ha


RedHotPoker

Genghis9 Posted at 2018-1-30 10:45
Yup that'll do it...operational missions are that one exception and since 911 they happen a lot more often.

I find the noise not nearly as interesting as feeling the shockwave from it, it is quite a thump.

Trying not to laugh, reading your comments about 911, which we both know too well, was an inside job, done by the American Gov. Just throwing this thought out there.


No need for debate or rebuttal. ;-)


RedHotPoker

Mark The Droner Posted at 2018-1-30 14:24
So if my AC is 50 meters away, and I fly my AC 100 meters away, my AC should be closer.  Absolutely closer.  

Got it.  Thanks

No thats not what im saying at all if you read and understand the op first question you will understand my answer.Basically if your drone is so far away you can hardly see it then its too far away bring it closer

I believe the point the op was trying to make and that im trying to answer..

If a drone must be kept within line of sight, is it reasonable to assume the smaller it is the nearer it should be?

Looking at the question .. is it reasonable to assume the smaller it is the nearer it should be?

This is a true assumption in many ways depending on your point of view.
The smaller physically the drone is the harder it is to see at longer distances so therefore the drone should be flown nearer to the pilot.
Even a larger drone has limitation as we all know on how far away they can be seen thus the same rule applies.
I stand by my answer that the op is 100% correct in his assumption.