geofox784 Posted at 2017-4-14 13:43
For you to be exempt from 107 you must be following the rules set by congress in 2012 (public law 112-95 Section 336). Noted in the definition of "Model Aircraft" is "...is flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft". Thus in order for you to avoid the rules set by the FAA under part 107 you must  be following definition of "Model Aircraft" set by congress and thus you must be flying within VLOS.

There is no legal way to fly outside of VLOS unless you have some kind of special waiver from the FAA (think companies like google, amazon, and UPS).

He's right that 107 pilots can use a Visual Observer (VO) to comply with the VLOS rule, but you're correct that VLOS is required for recreational flights.

There is no legal way to fly outside of VLOS unless you have some kind of special waiver from the FAA (think companies like google, amazon, and UPS).

Even those companies are out of luck. The FAA has issued a small number of waivers for the VLOS rule, but the waiver form specifically mentions that "No waiver of [the VLOS] provision will be issued to allow the carriage of property of another by aircraft for compensation or hire." In other words, no package (or pizza) delivery . . . at least not yet.

geofox784 Posted at 2017-3-25 06:01
I am surprised by the results. Nearly every video that you see posted here or elsewhere involves flying further than you would be able to see the small mavic with the naked eye... probably not much further than 1000'.

I've noticed that as well plus the fact people are very quick to criticise drone videos where the drone is flying in an area it shouldn't as they're ruining drones for everyone but flying completely out of VLOS is absolutely fine despite the fact it's not legal in the US, the UK and I'm sure other countries.  I've been told on another forum that flying within VLOS is boring and is a waste of a Mavic, it's an odd contradiction that one type of illegal flying is harshly criticised but another type of illegal flying isn't and at times is actively encouraged.

I do - very often. Lots of trees around and I often fly the drone past them. I'm such a bad person, if my drone falls, it's likely to KILL A TREE !!! OMG !!

Rather than answer directly, I'll just say that I think DJI's software imposed altitude limits suck!

Skold Posted at 2017-5-15 08:04
Rather than answer directly, I'll just say that I think DJI's software imposed altitude limits suck!

Why would you want to fly higher than 500meters, and I think you will find a greater restriction imposed by FAA than dji.

Well, I can't maintain VLOS all the time, but it isn't due to being long range.  It is due to being too hard to see in the bright sun-lit sky, even under a half mile away!

I also use a spotter with binos if I'm flying a little further away but never go that far

hallmark007 Posted at 2017-5-15 08:39
Why would you want to fly higher than 500meters, and I think you will find a greater restriction imposed by FAA than dji.

I live in the middle of nowhere and it'd be nice to be able to fly higher if I want.

Skold Posted at 2017-5-16 05:40
I live in the middle of nowhere and it'd be nice to be able to fly higher if I want.

Then buy a helicopter, and be on the lookout for people like yourself who want to fly at same heights as manned aircraft, remember if you are up as high as manned aircraft you can no longer see your aircraft and put all manned aircraft in danger.

hallmark007 Posted at 2017-5-16 06:02
Then buy a helicopter, and be on the lookout for people like yourself who want to fly at same heights as manned aircraft, remember if you are up as high as manned aircraft you can no longer see your aircraft and put all manned aircraft in danger.

I know where my quad is when I am flying and I would not fly that high and far to where I could not handle a situation of a manned aircraft coming near.  I would see it well in advance and be able to take action, which is more than I could say for pilots in helicopters who might not see an aircraft coming up on them, etc.

Where's the hysteria/outrage over ultralight pilots, or skydivers, etc.?  They don't really have altitude restrictions (for the most part) and they can't even really control themselves in the event a manned aircraft wants to share their airspace.  

Skold Posted at 2017-5-17 00:01
I know where my quad is when I am flying and I would not fly that high and far to where I could not handle a situation of a manned aircraft coming near.  I would see it well in advance and be able to take action, which is more than I could say for pilots in helicopters who might not see an aircraft coming up on them, etc.

Helicopters should not be looking out for drones, this is why we have rules, manned aircraft can see each other in the sky by radar, they are also under the control of ATC, drones are not recognised by radar again why we have rules.
If you want to fly higher than 500 meters , one is you most likely will loose sight of your aircraft and this will leave you and anything else in the sky at risk.
However you are probably now aware of all of this now, if you choose to fly at those heights or modify your aircraft to fly higher then that's up to you,

hallmark007 Posted at 2017-5-17 01:43
Helicopters should not be looking out for drones, this is why we have rules, manned aircraft can see each other in the sky by radar, they are also under the control of ATC, drones are not recognised by radar again why we have rules.
If you want to fly higher than 500 meters , one is you most likely will loose sight of your aircraft and this will leave you and anything else in the sky at risk.
However you are probably now aware of all of this now, if you choose to fly at those heights or modify your aircraft to fly higher then that's up to you,

I've maxed out the 500m limit a number of times, and wish it was not there. This is because the terrain changes. When flying up mountains or around the deep canyons of Colorado, many of them are much higher than 500m.

geofox784 Posted at 2017-5-17 05:46
I've maxed out the 500m limit a number of times, and wish it was not there. This is because the terrain changes. When flying up mountains or around the deep canyons of Colorado, many of them are much higher than 500m.

I'm not entirely sure what your point is. But many manned aircraft fly below height of mountains but above regulated MSL , so you are still at risk of being in manned airspace.

hallmark007 Posted at 2017-5-17 06:01
I'm not entirely sure what your point is. But many manned aircraft fly below height of mountains but above regulated MSL , so you are still at risk of being in manned airspace.

What he means is...if he launches at the bottom of a mountain in CO, he could easily reach the 500m limit before getting to the top, and that sucks because you might not even be 400ft. AGL at that point.

We can agree to disagree hallmark007 but you can stop trying to ram your opinion down our throats at anytime now.  We can dispute this and debate until the cows come home and neither of us will win the argument because they are both just opinions.

Thank you and have a nice day!

Skold Posted at 2017-5-17 07:05
What he means is...if he launches at the bottom of a mountain in CO, he could easily reach the 500m limit before getting to the top, and that sucks because you might not even be 400ft. AGL at that point.

We can agree to disagree hallmark007 but you can stop trying to ram your opinion down our throats at anytime now.  We can dispute this and debate until the cows come home and neither of us will win the argument because they are both just opinions.

If the poster flys 500 meters straight up from where he took off he is now 500 meters AGL, if the poster climbs to the top of the mountain he can fly 500 meters above that he is still at 500 meters AGL.

I'm not trying to push anything down your throats just pointing out if you fly above 500 meters you are now in manned airspace, you want dji to allow you to fly above 500 meters but this is against laws and regulations of aviation, so do you really think they're going to allow you to do this.

The only difference in our opinions is you want to fly around in manned airspace, and I think this is a risk to far.

hallmark007 Posted at 2017-5-17 07:35
If the poster flys 500 meters straight up from where he took off he is now 500 meters AGL, if the poster climbs to the top of the mountain he can fly 500 meters above that he is still at 500 meters AGL.

I'm not trying to push anything down your throats just pointing out if you fly above 500 meters you are now in manned airspace, you want dji to allow you to fly above 500 meters but this is against laws and regulations of aviation, so do you really think they're going to allow you to do this.

climbs to the top of the mountain he can fly 500 meters above that he is still at 500 meters AGL.

Not if the terrain changes.... AGL = Above Ground Level. I will be 500m "ATP" (Above Takeoff Point), but if I climb the side of a mountain or a cliff I can still be within 400' AGL..... which by the way is only a recommendation for those flying recreationally, not a rule as long as you are within LOS.

For example, here you can see that the 500m prevents me from flying up on top of the ridge of this canyon.

DJISenord Posted at 2017-4-4 03:55
You can not fly beyond line of sight in US.   You (you the pilot) must be able to see the drone without unassisted vision.  Meaning seeing the drone only with your eyes, eyeglasses are of course allowed, but no telescopes, binoculars, or digital zoom cameras.    Idiots on YouTube repetitively post illegal content showing where they are flying well beyond line of sight.  The most amazing thing is how many people don't even know the rules.  I read a stat the other day that suggested over 90% of the people who own drones in the US don't even know the rules.  For me, if I see it, I report it as I am sick of seeing it.  I personally, have issue with some of the rules, but they are the rules and many would not be in place if idiots would get knowledgeable and follow the rules.

The rules are over the top overly restrictive. As mentioned in other post I would say the vast majority of YT videos are technically breaking some rule. Any video with houses where you can see the back yard is breaking rule against privacy. Never mind that even a private pilot in the USA can fly within 500 feet of a any building vessel or vehicle taking all the pictures they want and thats okay (sparsley populated areas only).

geofox784 Posted at 2017-5-17 16:37
climbs to the top of the mountain he can fly 500 meters above that he is still at 500 meters AGL.

Not if the terrain changes.... AGL = Above Ground Level. I will be 500m "ATP" (Above Takeoff Point), but if I climb the side of a mountain or a cliff I can still be within 400' AGL..... which by the way is only a recommendation for those flying recreationally, not a rule as long as you are within LOS.

That was exactly my point you  are allowed to fly 400 AGL so what ever the height from the drone to ground underneath, but it is possible with Mavic to fly 500meters from any ground underneath, it's not something I would recommend.

Parkker Posted at 2017-5-17 18:14
The rules are over the top overly restrictive. As mentioned in other post I would say the vast majority of YT videos are technically breaking some rule. Any video with houses where you can see the back yard is breaking rule against privacy. Never mind that even a private pilot in the USA can fly within 500 feet of a any building vessel or vehicle taking all the pictures they want and thats okay (sparsley populated areas only).

Rules regarding flying over people's property are there for people's privacy and are protected by data privacy law they are not FAA rules. You shouldn't need to fly over people's property with your drone and if you do you could always ask permission.
Yes laws are restrictive for drone flyers, there are ways around some of them like doing your commercial license, but even when you pass this exam you will still restricted by red tape in getting permission and approval. That's just the way it is.
The problem with flying drones out of VLOS is you can never be sure what might be in your airspace and other aircraft can't see you on radar they don't have you on notams and ATC have no idea your in an area or who you are.
So the rules are there to protect you and others, yes many of us break the rules from time to time as we do speeding cars, but that's a choice you make and something you alone are responsible for.
I do believe if we get to a stage that drone flyers are continually breaking the rules then the appropriate bodies will have to act on this.
It's my opinion that if everyone who is flying a drone with such capabilities as Mavic or similar should go through a testing program, and with more safety features being added all the time to these drones, then we will get more freedom to fly.

Sorry if this has been covered but without searching and reading through posts,
''how does wearing goggles comply with the los regulation"  I don't understand how goggle could be legal if you need to be able to see your drone, cheers

Parkker Posted at 2017-5-17 18:14
The rules are over the top overly restrictive. As mentioned in other post I would say the vast majority of YT videos are technically breaking some rule. Any video with houses where you can see the back yard is breaking rule against privacy. Never mind that even a private pilot in the USA can fly within 500 feet of a any building vessel or vehicle taking all the pictures they want and thats okay (sparsley populated areas only).

Any video with houses where you can see the back yard is breaking rule against privacy.

Could you sight such rule? Unless there is some specific county, city, or state code against it (very rare), there are no privacy laws pertaining to drones.

hallmark007 Posted at 2017-5-18 02:28
Rules regarding flying over people's property are there for people's privacy and are protected by data privacy law they are not FAA rules. You shouldn't need to fly over people's property with your drone and if you do you could always ask permission.
Yes laws are restrictive for drone flyers, there are ways around some of them like doing your commercial license, but even when you pass this exam you will still restricted by red tape in getting permission and approval. That's just the way it is.
The problem with flying drones out of VLOS is you can never be sure what might be in your airspace and other aircraft can't see you on radar they don't have you on notams and ATC have no idea your in an area or who you are.

Rules regarding flying over people's property are there for people's privacy and are protected by data privacy law they are not FAA rules.

Could you sight such rule?

You shouldn't need to fly over people's property with your drone and if you do you could always ask permission.

Unless you want to just sit within a box that is as wide as your property, you will. It would be rude to fly at 100' AGL over someone's property, but  for me to go look at something of interest or getting moving video shots, flying above others property is required. Just like how other aircraft do it all the time.


Yes laws are restrictive for drone flyers, there are ways around some of them like doing your commercial license, but even when you pass this exam you will still restricted by red tape in getting permission and approval. That's just the way it is.

Other than being able to be slightly closer to an airport w/o notifying them, the regulations for those operating commercially are actually much more restrictive.

DroningOn Posted at 2017-5-18 02:52
Sorry if this has been covered but without searching and reading through posts,
''how does wearing goggles comply with the los regulation"  I don't understand how goggle could be legal if you need to be able to see your drone, cheers

Technically it breaks them by moving you out of the 103 exemption. However, the FAA has said they will not enforce it as long as you have a spotter or are at a drone racing event, usually the kind that is netted.

hallmark007 Posted at 2017-5-18 02:28
Rules regarding flying over people's property are there for people's privacy and are protected by data privacy law they are not FAA rules. You shouldn't need to fly over people's property with your drone and if you do you could always ask permission.
Yes laws are restrictive for drone flyers, there are ways around some of them like doing your commercial license, but even when you pass this exam you will still restricted by red tape in getting permission and approval. That's just the way it is.
The problem with flying drones out of VLOS is you can never be sure what might be in your airspace and other aircraft can't see you on radar they don't have you on notams and ATC have no idea your in an area or who you are.

Is there a way to block/ignore people on this forum?  Seriously, your arguments are nauseating.  Why are you even here?  Talk about buzzkill.

Skold Posted at 2017-5-18 05:45
Is there a way to block/ignore people on this forum?  Seriously, your arguments are nauseating.  Why are you even here?  Talk about buzzkill.

You can ignore I don think that's a problem, you don't make much contribution to this forum except showing the height of ignorance.

Your on one thread telling someone they shouldn't fly without reading the manual, then your on this thread saying you should be allowed to fly over 500 meters what a joke you are, good luck and stay away from me...

geofox784 Posted at 2017-5-18 05:33
Rules regarding flying over people's property are there for people's privacy and are protected by data privacy law they are not FAA rules.

Could you sight such rule?

You have the fourth amendment in your country try that, also take a look at this article. https://www.wsj.com/articles/sho ... roperty-1463968981.
I didn't say you shouldn't fly over somebody's property I said you should ask permission, I think you showed earlier that you were flying in the mountains how many properties did you have to fly over to get there.
Many commercial pilots are allowed to fly in cities in controlled airspace, and lots of other places that hobbyists can't fly, with a proper SOP , when they are not flying commercially they are under the same restrictions as those who don't fly commercially,

You may not want to ask permission to fly over people's property that's very much up to you.

hallmark007 Posted at 2017-5-18 02:28
Rules regarding flying over people's property are there for people's privacy and are protected by data privacy law they are not FAA rules. You shouldn't need to fly over people's property with your drone and if you do you could always ask permission.
Yes laws are restrictive for drone flyers, there are ways around some of them like doing your commercial license, but even when you pass this exam you will still restricted by red tape in getting permission and approval. That's just the way it is.
The problem with flying drones out of VLOS is you can never be sure what might be in your airspace and other aircraft can't see you on radar they don't have you on notams and ATC have no idea your in an area or who you are.

@hallmark007, i seriously think you should create a special thread for yourself and anyone else who wants to read your thoughts, your opinions, citations of rules and laws, and your personal philosophy on life. A special designated area for you to be free to rant and express all your feelings and knowledge on any subject you want!

That way all the other threads in here won't get overloaded by your exhaustive comments.

jamesw Posted at 2017-5-18 07:13
@hallmark007, i seriously think you should create a special thread for yourself and anyone else who wants to read your thoughts, your opinions, citations of rules and laws, and your personal philosophy on life. A special designated area for you to be free to rant and express all your feelings and knowledge on any subject you want!

That way all the other threads in here won't get overloaded by your exhaustive comments.

Do you mean like , starting the 100th thread to find out what is the best filter to use on your Mavic , you don't think that's exhausting.
Your contribution around here seems to try to attack me every chance you get, so if your feel you are making a contribution to the forum keep it up...

geofox784 Posted at 2017-5-18 05:27
Any video with houses where you can see the back yard is breaking rule against privacy.

Could you sight such rule? Unless there is some specific county, city, or state code against it (very rare), there are no privacy laws pertaining to drones.

Your clarification is correct. Covered under definition and execution of existing "reasonable expectation of privacy" which can vary greatly in interpretation etc. depending on locality. Not specifically by FAA rules.

hallmark007 Posted at 2017-5-18 06:26
You have the fourth amendment in your country try that, also take a look at this article. https://www.wsj.com/articles/should-you-be-allowed-to-prevent-drones-from-flying-over-your-property-1463968981.
I didn't say you shouldn't fly over somebody's property I said you should ask permission, I think you showed earlier that you were flying in the mountains how many properties did you have to fly over to get there.
Many commercial pilots are allowed to fly in cities in controlled airspace, and lots of other places that hobbyists can't fly, with a proper SOP , when they are not flying commercially they are under the same restrictions as those who don't fly commercially,

You have the fourth amendment in your country try that


That's not how the constitution works.

For the 4th amendment to be broken, ALL of the following must take place:
  - An intrusion must occur.
- GOVERNMENT must be doing the searching / seizure.
- Must be within in area that an individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

The question of "Does flying a drone above someone's property go against reasonable expectation of privacy" is certainly up for debate and depends on the circumstances such as the height and what you were doing. However, as I am not functioning as the government, there is clearly no violation of the 4th amendment.

Also, the constitution is not designed to be used against the people. You can't be given a citation or arrested for "Broke the 4th amendment". It is designed to limit the laws against the people. What would pertain to you is if there was a specific statute or code that said that flying over others property is illegal. As of now, there is none.

You may not want to ask permission to fly over people's property that's very much up to you.

If I planned on hovering or flying low multiple times I'd ask / let them know what I am doing. However, whenever I am flying over others property (every flight because I don't fly in a small box above my apartment) I am flying at 400' at 30 mph going from place to place near interesting locations.

Parkker Posted at 2017-5-18 17:07
Your clarification is correct. Covered under definition and execution of existing "reasonable expectation of privacy" which can vary greatly in interpretation etc. depending on locality. Not specifically by FAA rules.

Your clarification is correct.

He wasn't clarifying but quoting what someone else wrote -- but that isn't correct. In most jurisdictions it isn't illegal to photograph or video someone's back yard, and (assuming you aren't violating other regulations) there's no jurisdiction where you're guilty of wrongdoing just because you don't have their permission / approval to fly over it.

Covered under definition and execution of existing "reasonable expectation of privacy" which can vary greatly in interpretation etc. depending on locality. Not specifically by FAA rules.

That, on the other hand, is correct. Florida, for example, seems to have essentially outlawed photography and video of private property from the air without prior permission. However, even there the law is essentially unenforceable unless the video / photo is posted online, because just flying over property isn't proof that it was captured on video or photo. But Florida is the exception and not the rule: in most jurisdictions there's no expectation of privacy if you're outside in your back yard.

geofox784 Posted at 2017-5-18 18:51
You have the fourth amendment in your country try that

The question of "Does flying a drone above someone's property go against reasonable expectation of privacy" is certainly up for debate

Just flying over someone's property without their permission is as legal for your drone as it is for a hot air balloon, helicopter, or airplane. The FAA says it's allowed and that its authority supercedes any attempts -- and there have been some -- by state and local governments to say otherwise. As Parkker pointed out, the FAA does defer to other government entities on things like what you can capture in photos or on videos while you're flying over those places, but just flying over someone's property without their permission is perfectly legal in the U.S.

DroneFlying Posted at 2017-5-20 04:40
The question of "Does flying a drone above someone's property go against reasonable expectation of privacy" is certainly up for debate

Just flying over someone's property without their permission is as legal for your drone as it is for a hot air balloon, helicopter, or airplane. The FAA says it's allowed and that its authority supercedes any attempts -- and there have been some -- by state and local governments to say otherwise. As Parkker pointed out, the FAA does defer to other government entities on things like what you can capture in photos or on videos while you're flying over those places, but just flying over someone's property without their permission is perfectly legal in the U.S.

Totally agree with you. I was pointing out that even if it goes against "reasonable expectation of privacy" that it does not apply to you. Only to government entities.

geofox784 Posted at 2017-5-20 05:07
Totally agree with you. I was pointing out that even if it goes against "reasonable expectation of privacy" that it does not apply to you. Only to government entities.

I thought you did (agree) but just wanted to confirm that you're correct. And the get-all-your-neighbors'-approval suggestion, while a nice thought, isn't practical for many pilots who live in an urban or suburban area and want to fly from their own back yard.

DroneFlying Posted at 2017-5-20 04:40
The question of "Does flying a drone above someone's property go against reasonable expectation of privacy" is certainly up for debate

Just flying over someone's property without their permission is as legal for your drone as it is for a hot air balloon, helicopter, or airplane. The FAA says it's allowed and that its authority supercedes any attempts -- and there have been some -- by state and local governments to say otherwise. As Parkker pointed out, the FAA does defer to other government entities on things like what you can capture in photos or on videos while you're flying over those places, but just flying over someone's property without their permission is perfectly legal in the U.S.

While the FAA say its allowed to fly over someone's property, it doesn't just because they tell you , you can do cannot not challenged surely if property owners can prove you are in breach of any of below.

The drones are causing a nuisance
They are being flown recklessly
They are violating the state privacy law

And I'm sure property owners could also challenge on other grounds.

hallmark007 Posted at 2017-5-20 06:08
While the FAA say its allowed to fly over someone's property, it doesn't just because they tell you , you can do cannot not challenged surely if property owners can prove you are in breach of any of below.

The drones are causing a nuisance

The drones are causing a nuisance

Just annoying someone isn't grounds for prosecution in any jurisdiction.

They are being flown recklessly

That would be the FAA's call and not at the discretion of local or state law enforcement, much less that of the property owner.

They are violating the state privacy law

I already addressed this: you'd have to be in a jurisdiction where it's illegal and you'd have to provide evidence that photos or video were taken, so this isn't enforceable unless the photo or video is published online and discovered by someone who cares.

DroneFlying Posted at 2017-5-20 06:26
The drones are causing a nuisance

Just annoying someone isn't grounds for prosecution in any jurisdiction.

How would FAA know if drone was flying recklessly?

hallmark007 Posted at 2017-5-20 06:40
How would FAA know if drone was flying recklessly?

Based on a police report or other evidence such as video. The FAA specifically instructs local and state law enforcement to not try to enforce FAA guidelines but to collect information and turn it over to them.

DroneFlying Posted at 2017-5-20 06:43
Based on a police report or other evidence such as video. The FAA specifically instructs local and state law enforcement to not try to enforce FAA guidelines but to collect information and turn it over to them.

Ok so law enforcement could also gain access to drone flying over somebody's property taking video and photos.
And surely disturbing someone's peace is also a law in the us. (I.e. The noise of drone flying over someone's property) ?