CAA vs VLOS: How far they REALLY want you to fly your drone!? CAA Interview
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Hey everyone! Following up from our first interview with Callum Holland from the UK CAA, we tackle our next topic, VLOS. Just how far do the CAA think you should be flying your drone? What is the AMC & GM, (Acceptable Means of Compliance and Guidance Material), and where does it sit within the regulatory framework. Get the interpretation from the CAA directly. Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!
________________________________________________
Watch our UK Drone Rules playlist here:
• New UK Drone Rules - 5...
________________________________________________
⏩ Subscribe to Geeksvana for more content like this! Click here:
/ geeksvana
________________________________________________
📱 Follow Geeksvana on social media:
Twitter: / geeksvana
Instagram: / geeksvana
Facebook: / geeksvana
________________________________________________
📄 ABOUT GEEKSVANA:
Geeksvana is a RUclips channel focused on drones, or as you might call them UAS, (Uncrewed Aerial Systems). We cover all types of drones from hobbyist to commercial, with a focus on drone rules and future flight. Primarily a news channel looking to bring our audience the latest news, leaks and information on the drone world - we also provide how to guides and reviews on products. Geeksvana is an independent source of news and guidance.
Sean Hickey, founder of Geeksvana and main channel presenter is a UK registered journalist who seeks to provide accurate information on what is an often misquoted and misrepresented industry and hobby. Sean currently holds certificates from the UK Civil Aviation Authority, including both the A2 Certificate of Competency (A2 CofC) and the General Visual Line of Sight Certificate (GVC). Flying all sizes of multirotor aircraft from the small DJI Mini 2 to larger aircraft including the DJI Inspire series for both hobby flights and commercial work.
________________________________________________
♣️ BECOME A MEMBER!
You can become a channel member and enjoy a range of benefits including custom emojis in live chat and comments. You can also join regular video meetups exclusively available to members. Find out how you can show your direct support of the Geeksvana channel from just 0.99p/c per month! Click here:
/ @geeksvana
________________________________________________
👔 SPONSORSHIP AND BRAND DEALS
Would you like your brand to work with Geeksvana? We have a range of sponsorship and collaboration opportunities open to companies. If your brand offers something to the drone hobby or commercial sector, then contact us for a chat on brand@geeksvana.com.
________________________________________________
👖 GEEKSVANA MERCH!!
Check out our range of merch available via the merch shelf below every video or click here:
geeksvana.mysp...
Got merch? Send us a picture of you wearing your Geeksvana merch and we will share it out on our social media and give you and your channel a shout out!! Email a link to your post or the pic to email@geeksvana.com.
________________________________________________
📹 GEEKSVANA STUDIOS
We work with clients to produce a range of high-quality video content for their own social media accounts. From training videos and internal support content to RUclips content and live streaming events, Geeksvana Studios can provide a cost-effective solution. With studio space available we also have a team of male and female presenters available if required. Find out more here: www.geeksvanas....
________________________________________________
🛩️ DRONE SERVICES
Geeksvana Studios can also offer you a range of drone services. From data capture to videography or event coverage, we have a range of aircraft and A2 CofC and GVC qualified operators to complete the task. For more information, visit: www.geeksvanas....
________________________________________________
📰 GOT A STORY?
Have a news story you would like to send us? Something you want to discuss? Email sean@geeksvana.com
________________________________________________
©️ Geeksvana 2022. This content is subject to copyright and represents original work. No permission to copy, rebroadcast or otherwise distribute is provided. For more please visit: www.geeksvana.com
I commend Callum for going on your show and presenting face for the CAA. BUT, this is all working to erase the reasons I wanted to get qualified to fly a drone in the first place. To experience the joy of flying without having to qualify as a light aircraft pilot and all the expense that involves. Now there's no reason to have 70% of the functionality of a modern drone, because thanks to the CAA we are not allowed to use it.
Exactly the reason I fly UAS, because I now cannot finish my PPL due to health reasons and a bloomin' wheelchair. It gives me some freedom. I understand completely why this has been done, but its feels very short sighted (pun intended). It's being implemented poorly and without any critical thought processes.
Lol...'enforcement done by the police'. They generally have no idea about done laws and guidance anyway. This is all so subjective. If I am out flying an automated mapping mission and some ignorant plod comes up to me, they will be responding to an exaggerated call from a curtain twitcher and can bet my house they would not know about this latest bit of legislation change. I would just hit the rth button anyway if I saw them coming towards me. I think it's another thing great on paper but technically very difficult to enforceme in the field. I will do my best to abide but will not lose sleep over this tbh.
@@allanwilson8642 the police is NOT going to do any thing (manpower) will not be good the police going to say i'm not going to look for some one flying a dam toy drone come on get a grip.
Hi there ,i enjoy your programmes very much ,but as a novice flyer I find it very difficult some times to follow the topic.as the use of anachronisms which are frequently used and never followed by the correct title of the subject, the last couple of discussion on the new
C.a.a documents has been full of them. This is not a comlait as I know thousands have found this topic very useful. So please continue to broadcast your excellent service. But please please spare a thought for us novices 👍
@steve and drones but they do already. And treat you as a criminal as soon as they confront you with there zero knowledge of the law or codes. How many times they have said "you could be committing an offence under the air navigation order", but clearly have no further knowledge beyond the title. At which point they start making stuff up to save face. And that's just flying in an open area (usually after a report by householder who must be 300+ meters away).
Sorry. With the best of intentions, this will simply make more people dismiss proper guidance and rules, promoting the thoughts that the rules are so unfeasiblly restrictive that everyone can just ignore them. This undermines everything. I do not understand why we're being told that you can rely on the remote and screen to control the drone, but not the telemetry. We can make use of Active Track but can't make use of the manually instigated automatic RTH? The truth is that we can see the entire airspace around our drone without having to see the orientation of the aircraft. This guidance is complicating an issue that simply doesn't exist. And as said at around 11.00 , it's actually just a convenient way to throw the book at some one. This will only alienate people even more against the CAA. He mentions helping understanding regulations. This simply reduces their legitimacy and helps no one.
Yep I agree but what's the plan to overturn this 'vlos orientation' nonsense rule, any ideas?
How about this: If I see something in the airspace (air ambulance or whatever) I don't actually have to know the orientation of my drone or even be able to get it back. I just need to see that my "dot" is going down really close to the ground and out of the way of whatever it is. Also, there is a balance of risks. Statistically how likely is it that my screen with fail (a few seconds during hours of flight in my experience on an old analogue drone) while there is something near my drone in the air (actually never - light aircraft well above me a couple of times but never anything low while I've been flying.) Also, how much airspace is there? How astronomically small are the chances that a 20cm wide drone in 120m high, say 300m radius cylinder will actually come into contact with anything else even if it's in the same volume of space?
Well said. Your comment absolutely sums up the problem with CAA regulations. They always seem to assume worst case scenarios without including any kind of reference to the statistical probability of an scenario actually happening, let alone the risk of said scenario to life & limb. Nothing is quantified in terms of frequency of incidents, types of incidents, number of injuries (if any), etc. In real world organisations, if no statistical data is made available to perform a quantifiable analysis of an area of interest then logical decisions cannot be made about subsequent business processes or legislation. CAA need to show us the data to illustrate that the revised (or even existing) VLOS rules will actually have any significant impact on recordable incidents. This type of information sharing could improve help public engagement, as opposed to the scaremongering spouted from Callum. Implying that our airspace is getting busier as more people hobbyists use drones is total hyperbole. It was like listening to a politician on Question Time and it really got my back up, particularly when he spoke about not killing the hobby but trying to help people! CAA - GET A SENSE OF PERSPECTIVE!!
Lets all stay indoors in case we are struck by a meteorite!!!!!
@@kernowradio Solve two problems in one by disguising your drone as a seagull. CAA can't see it, gulls don't attack it. 😁
They are just making it up to justify their job
@@grahambutlin8835 or crashing planes that happens every month
I think as a community we need to push back against this visual orientation thing and it's incredibly frustrating seeing the CAA come on your channel and not get any real push back. Whilst of course it's important that we can see our drones and have awareness of direction that doesn't require vlos of orientation at all times. If I'm flying away from me I know the direction I'm flying in, if I turn left I still know the direction I'm flying in. At all times I can react according to any safety concerns because I'm visually aware of the drones position and know it's orientation. Applying this ridiculous added requirement to be able to visually see the orientation of the drone is unworkable and the UK is quickly becoming the most restrictive place to fly a drone in Europe.
If we have guests like the CAA on the channel and turn it into a shock jock reaction style take down, then we get far less information. With these interviews I am trying to get the information out to show how the CAA interpret their rules. Then through comments here, direct communication with the CAA and future public consultations the hobby and industry can express how they feel.
The hobby and industry are made up of many types of operator, some will support this type of guidance, some will hate it. My job is to present it impartially with just the facts and allow the community the chance to express their thoughts in the comments etc. Trust me, every comment and all feedback is read by the CAA.
@@Geeksvana I understand that Sean but if you see a politician on the news they don't generally get to push their agenda without the interviewer politely pushing back and asking them to answer questions that the general public would expect to be asked. I'm not saying you should be doing that, it's your channel and you do what you like, I'm just saying it's frustrating watching people like Callum slowly eroding our ability to utilise this technology and not seeing them put under any pressure to defend their position.
I get that, and as you say, everyone has their own style. For me, I feel getting the truth in the interviewee eyes and perception is far more powerful. No matter how hard I pushed, they would not have given me data on safety or anything else frankly.
The style of interview where you see politicians taken to task are what I call 'interview porn' where the anchor is merely satisfying a desire we all have in us to see people taken to task who we perceive are wrong. However, this rarely gets any actual answers. It only serves to tick a pleasure box in the brain of the audience.
With this series, we have found out what the CAA actually mean behind their AMC guidance, and then the community as a whole can react either in these comments or to the CAA.
That way you are not getting only my opinion but the information presented in a way that can benefit everyone. Because it should also be kept in mind that some will support this guidance etc. So an impartial approach is my style for this type of interview.
Sorry that's probably more information than anyone needs about my 'style' 😂.
@@Geeksvana I wanted to add a case in point. I help out with a facebook group that uses drones to help find lost dogs, by far the most popular drones for this are small ones. If you can only fly a mini 80m from you then you can only fly straight up, t becomes far less useful for that job. The solution is to start flying an Inspire, they are much easier to see right out to 500m and beyond. But is it really safer to have Inspires flying around looking for dogs than Mini's just because it's easier to see them? I'd say the safety benefit of using smaller lighter drones far outweighs the safety benefit of being able to see which way the drone is facing.
@PaulJoy I have a video coming next week with my advice and thoughts on vlos so I won't preempt that too much. My view is a little too complex to put in a comment sadly.
However, I would say that the smaller drones being used are the issue as vlos has been a legal requirement for a long time.
Of course it was the regulators of the world who pushed us towards sub 250g, so it becomes a bit of a nasty circle.
Thanks, Sean and the Callum from the CAA, Well at least that confirms that My Mini 2 cannot be flown much further than the end of my nose. At the end of a very wet holiday, I took the Mini 2 out to fly over the harbour and along the seafront, I stuck to about 80ft and flew along the coast, I flew about 120m away and even with my glasses on I was relying on VLOS as I understood it (I could see it) but I definitely could not see which way it was facing. My RTH height was set to 60ft just in case anything went wrong with my RC connection and in my view, this was a perfectly safe flight. I believe that I was safe and the chances of winning the lottery were higher than having an accident on the day. The CAA in my view should put together a set of scenarios that take into account common sense and give proper guidance for certain types of drones. My Toy drone without a camera and no need to register with the CAA is potentially far more dangerous than my Mini 2 and I have crashed the Toy Drone in the park, retrieving from trees became a speciality, so I do not fly it anymore! My Mini 2 I do not crash. Going back to my beach flight I would have been able to see a manned aircraft coming towards me giving me plenty of time to move the drone out to safety, the failsafe of ditching it into the sea would never need to be used unless a military aircraft came in at 80ft at high speed and was about to crash anyway into the hillside. VLOS should be about whether can you see your drone, what safety features are there and whether is it likely to get hit by low-flying aircraft. I still maintain that with the new guidance a capable drone like the Mini 2 should be given fewer restrictions that allow me to fly further than about 30m (One Press of the joystick and it has already gone out of VLOS if seeing if the drone is pointing left or right is what classifies that). I understand the guidance for Toy Drones that have a poor RC connection and no camera but not for more sophisticated drones. I only hope that the likes of Amazon with unmanned drone deliveries have to follow the same set of rules, they will need a distribution depot on the end of each street corner with full VLOS of the drone at all times. Safety and Education are key, not guidance that is in my view irrelevant to a drone with the capabilities of a Mini 2 vs a Toy
Amazon will only be flying those super safe drones. You know, the ones they pay lots of money to the government to be able to use them.
Government has vast experience in every problem can be solved with a tax, even the safety of drones apparently!
I've made this point on a number of other people's comments here because it is something that the CAA will not be addressing until such time as we've all been cleared out of their airspace. Nonetheless it's true!
Very well said. 100% agree with everything you say.
Well said. I was about to make a comment asking whether the CAA will apply the same (or tougher) draconian rules to Amazon's fleet. If I was a betting man I'd say that money will win and the CAA will somehow manufacture a loophole in legislation to allow special dispensation for this type of delivery activity. Watch out for Amazon drones blocking the sun on the next Black Friday ;)
Jesus Christ Woody mate what kind of toy do you have that’s more dangerous than yer mavic? 😅
if you are expecting the CAA to think logical you will be waiting a long time, under there new safer rules it is safer to fly a sub250 helicopter with a 14 inch carbon prop on at park over people then a 50 gram FPV drone, also if we are all flying at tree level FPV we should not be thinking about plains in small parks, everyone should be accounted when taking flight i get that but logic also need to play a factor, CAA clearly have no idea and keep proving this yet we are told to follow them, CAA need to be also told that we cannot follow there BS
While i understand the argument for safety being made by the CAA, I think its worth mentioning that a drone under 250g is already seen by them as an exceptionally low risk RPAS. If thats how they view it, why does it suddenly become more dangerous outside VLOS.... A 250g RPAS has already been shown not to put general aviation at risk ( its too small), even crashing into a moving vehicle its smaller / lighter than most bird strikes and they do nothing either except possibly make a mess. Their limitations on use around the general public are already seen and legislated as extremely low risk, so I have to ask why legislate against them further? Surely using a 250g or less RPAS at 500m using the screen if needs be to monitor orientation is safer than an operator pulling out their 25kg drone to do the same job just because its bigger and easier to see?... If you were to risk assess it that way, surely they'd question your logic?
There's no logic to it is there? You're OK to fly a sub-250g drone over people and as long as you can see which way it is facing, there's no problem with it exploding a prop and falling onto the people. Yet if you want to fly it 500m away over open fields where you could execute a zero-consequence emergency landing, no sorry that's no good.
*** How likely are you to be hit by a drone dropping out of the sky? ***
I roughed out some figures for chances of being hit by a "fail and drop out of the sky" drone. [Feel free to check my maths]
Flying location 1: Over a soccer match with 23 people on the pitch. Assumptions: Each player has a generous 1m² box that counts as a hit if a drone falls in that box. Pitch size 105mx68m. Area = 7410m². Of that, 23m² are occupied by players and ref. Chance of someone being hit: 23/7410 = 0.32%. But, how often will a drone just drop out of the sky? I'm sure the manufacturers have some figures but lets be really generous to the CAA and say once every 50 hours of flying. So one flight of 30mins over a match has a 30/3000 (1%) chance of dropping out of the sky. Combine the two: If you fly for 30mins over a soccer match, what are the chances of your drone failing out of the sky and hitting someone? 0.32%x1% = 0.00322% or (1 in 31,000.) Now what are the chances of being hit by a football (which weighs almost twice that of a mini drone and could be travelling 60-70mph in penalty kicks)....
Flying location 2: Fields and woods in the countryside with a couple of footpaths going across it. Assuming a 500mx500m flying area and 5 people walking somewhere in that area. Using the same maths, I now calculate a 1 in 5,000,000 (That's 1 in 5 million) chance of hitting someone during a 30min flight. That's getting into "winning the jackpot in the lottery / being struck by lightning" territory. For reference, there is a 1 in 50,000 chance of dying in a car accident each year. I really think the CAA have to give us some figures and really think about the relative risks. If the rules are sensible and achievable (don't fly above 120m for example), people will follow them. Too tight and some people will think - well if I'm going to be breaking them just by putting my drone in the air - I'm already breaking some so why bother following any of them.
Yep exactly this, the attitude by some will be 'if I'm breaking one there's no point abiding by the rest of the regs either so I'll fly where I damn well please including higher altitudes.
There seems to be a real lack of understanding of general human nature here..
What this really means is:
1) as someone suggested 'disguise your controller as a lunch box'
2) pretend to be a disinterested party enjoying the outdoors
3) don't put your videos on the internet
4) carefully edit your videos to not show yourself or any identifying material
5) don't do any distance testing videos (for those that do)
6) delete flight logs immediately unless you really need them
Yeah, that's what I have been saying for about a year now. Be stealthy...not seen, not heard, and NOT around people...also DO NOT post videos. If you fly something small enough, you might not be able to even see it at 100m, but neither will anyone else. A small craft at 90-100m often can not be seen nor heard. By the way, go somewhere, fly a pack, then leave quickly. Now, it is less about being legal and more about getting caught. Catch me if you can. 🙂
@@tikibear3332 Wear a visible jacket with 'CAA Testing Unit' wording -)
Get used to flying your drone with your controller behind your back, controller hidden underneath a mackintosh, wandering around aimlessly, as if in deep thought solving a crime, looking at the ground and wearing spectacles containing an OLED screen. That should do it.
@@ScarboroughTourist 😂😆😅 legendary mate 🤝
Actual pilots use their instruments to determine the orientation of the plane, engine speed etc This is during bad weather. Even during clear whether pilots use their instruments. This is what our drone controllers have they provide information such as altitude speed orientation, distance etc. This can’t be ignored.
Great point and if they should have any rules then maybe minimum battery on mobile screens and have apps such as dji block calls while on the app most drones have the same technology as planes
I hear you, but manned aircraft have very solid instruments with built-in redundancy with no single point of failure. If the digital ones fail, the analogue dials are there and the pilot is trained for that...etc.
If you are using a mobile phone connected to a little mass produced controller, subject to all kinds of interference not to mention phone calls, I guess they do have a point in terms of 'what could go wrong ' and plan for that. It does suck a bit but it is what it is, unfortunately.
@@allanwilson8642Those circumstances of things going wrong are why the world has the concept of insurance ... One of the most benevolent life enhancing ideas of all time.
@@jonnysmyth1011Insurance is the biggest scam of all time!
The CAA argument would be that your instruments can fail. However I do not accept that as a reason for the guidance they have come up with. Any aircraft can have critical systems fail at any time but they are not restricted from (for example) flying over cities. The common sense approach in my opinion, is to guide people to fly such that they can always execute an emergency landing without endangering people or property. This stupid guideline about having to be able to see your drone's orientation is just broken. No-one would be able to fly outside a 50m bubble and for some drones it is an effective ban on taking off at all. Some drones are just not designed to be flown line-of-sight and it is rather dangerous to attempt to do so.
I never need to “wiggle” my drone to see which way it’s oriented because I am driving it. I know exactly which way it’s oriented because I put it there. Do these people at the CAA wiggle the car steering wheel to see which way their car is facing? This is madness.
Are you dense, sir? You know exactly what the speaker meant when he used the word “wiggle” and it damn sure isn’t referring to a car steering wheel! And maybe you know the orientation of your drone at all times but that damn sure doesn’t apply to a lot of these other idiots.
@@Alvin.Prather the point I am making is if you are driving a vehicle then you know which way the thing is pointing. These regulations are stupid and are only there to make people loose interest in the hobby so Amazon has a clear airspace. And no I am not dense but if you didn’t understand the analogy then I suggest you might be.
"Where's the evidence/data?"
"Lots of reports... Let me deflect and tell you about my drone."
A clear answer indeed.
Give them a bit of power and they'll take it all. These jobsworths create problems to stay relevant, otherwise, their positions suddenly become near useless.
Watch out Golf players, best not lose VLOS on your ball down the fairway. I bet more people have been hit by golf balls that by drones, so why isn’t there more regulation on Golf as a hobby? Just making a whimsical point!
The guy is on a power trip. Legislation BY DEFINITION needs to be written in a way that REMOVES ALL ambiguity. THAT is the over riding issue with these revised/updated regulations. This is a step on the way to banning private drones. The same strategy was adopted by the government when they wanted to ban firearms. They started with a few regulations that were confusing and basically nonsensical, introduced more control when they ‘clarified’ the nonsense and in 2-3 more steps banned them outright. I hope I’m wrong…
Brother you know you are right! I expect the young to not see this but seeing grown assed blokes after all these years still thinking any Govt gives a flying fk about them is utterly mind boggling! 😞
I'm sure this has been said before but if I was in an emergency situation e.g. sudden appearance of manned flight, the only direction I will be going is down, irrespective of which way I was facing. The danger to what's below me (including the potential loss of my own aircraft) is utterly inconsequential to that of hitting or distracting manned flight, imho.
same here.. i once flew around a church filming it from above (furthest away from me that the multiror was probably 70 meters away).. heard a helicopter far away from me.. i didnt land but this church was surrounded by tall trees.. so i got under the treeline and flew around it and landed.. this was before they went nuts with the rules.. it was just common sense to me.. land asap
This has to be a JOKE! I might as well just use a GoPro on a long stick now. Drones are so over-regulated it's not even funny!
Whilst I understand that people were going beyond VLOS and using the 500m as a limit, the orientation requirement is unworkable. What the CAA have actually done is made it more likely that their own legislation will not be complied with, which is counter productive for any regulation. This chap in his position is an absolute nightmare for the Drone community.
He sure is, a wolf in sheep's clothing
It was never a 500ft limit horizontally, it was a 400ft limit vertically and 500metres horizontally. What it feels like this is calling for is a dedicated/experienced spotter at all times for smaller form drones. Totally agree that people will disregard this as it is yet another contradiction and step backwards by the CAA
@@spikiest I see this ruling turning many law abiding pilots into cowboys. Then there will be an introduction of compulsory range detecting electronics into drones. Then the criminals start offering services to "chip" your drones to bypass the electronics. The Daily Mail will go nuts! And there will be a fear campaign against drones again - not sure it ever went away in the first place to be honest lol!
@@rhavatarseven7831 Couldn’t. Agree. More!
Agreed, Callum didn't really endear me to the CAA; he spoke like a lawyer rather than a hobbyist. He just reinforced my perceptions of the lack of real-world perspective within the CAA as an organisation. The fact that he was surprised by the community reaction showed how out of touch he is with the hobby! The flowchart of the regulations he presented was the last straw. How can Joe Public relate to that?
Saying you have to have orientation vlos of the drone and not rely on the technology in case it fails is like saying the max speed of any car should be 5mph in case the brakes fail
What if your speedometer fails, you should therefore never drive your car just incase you cant tell its speed
This was bound to happen. The CAA and the Government just want to shut the hobby down.
Good luck with that. Smoking pot is illegal but people still do it.
@@testpilotian3188 yes we do 😅
cannot agree more
Ignore the rules that are rediculous
Tend to agree. Unfortunately it is the people doing the wrong thing that is causing the tightening up. It won't be long before the sub 250g drones are banned in urban areas
I'm sorry but Callum has completely lost any credibility with his comments and more pilots will now just start to ignore more and more rules. Look at the comments here and it's clear that very few if any can make sense of the VLOS rule and will not comply. All this does is make the hobby LESS safe because you are losing any support of the community that may have been there. The arguments that Callum puts forward for VLOS are just utter nonsense and not from the real 'practical' and very safe world of drone flying. SEAN, we appreciate everything you do and enjoy your content but seriously, read all the comments, you need to up the ante and question these arguments from the CAA more robustly to force a better response - where is the data to back it up, where are all the accidents and safety incidents taking place? It's just not happening is it otherwise it would be well documented in Social media and the Press. You are in a very unique position to challenge these views but Callum was allowed to get away with little justification for the VLOS arguments when everyone here clearly sees it for what it is.
'SEAN, we appreciate everything you do and enjoy your content but seriously, read all the comments, you need to up the ante and question these arguments from the CAA more robustly...' 100%! Could take a leaf from Andrew Neil's book, grill them, hit them with facts of your own...👍
2024 CAA new rule is, the pilot must sing songs at all times so that others know your location if you cannot sing your spotter would be required to sing for you, also you or your spotter must also point your finger at your drone at all times
I don't get phone calls when flying on my smart phone for the controller, because I don't have a sim in the phone that I use. How many dangerous mishaps have happened that they're basing their rules on? They are imagining all sorts of nonsense that is not happening and making the hobby impossible for the hobbyist.
Exactly this, I have a phone specifically for my mini 2 and will not receive calls on it, and I set the controller to charge the phone also.
even if you get a call the drone is not going to drift
VLOS: Just another law to ignore.
The drone has enough tech onboard to keep it safe. If there wasn't a screen to look at, I'd understand this nanny state BS. But it does. The manufacturers have spent X amount of £'s on safety and testing. If it wasn't safe, surely they wouldn't be allowed to sale it?
The bloke with his head on upside down, seems to be clutching at straws., with GPS failures and receiving phone calls etc.
I found many of his points rather unconvincing. The rules and guidance don't even make sense on a common sense level. A critical systems failure results in a forced landing, not a safe flight home. In truth, FPV is MUCH SAFER in this respect because you have excellent contextual awareness of where the drone is at all times. VLOS is a false idol.
Tell me how many incidents have been caused by people flying sub 250 gram drones with gps and auto return to home at a distsnce under 500 meters and a height under 100 metrrs.. Virtually zero is ny guess!! Most of his arguments are disingenuous based on the actual risk!
A clear case of "safetyism culture" leading to poor over-regulation based on presumption and ignorance.
The only accidents I am aware of from UAS are commercial ones where, in one case in particular, the pilot was in control of a Matrice that lost GPS and he had never flown a drone in Acro mode before an promptly crashed it into a house, then to make matters worse, because he was qualified and knew how to fly, he put up another Matrice and promptly crashed that one in the same manner.
But he was qualified of course, so it was ok.
@@timlong7289 yep.. Not long ago I was flying legally and a policeman tried to tell me i was flying dangerously because if the wind caught my drone it could blow it off into the distance and hit something.. This was on a day where i purposely flew because there was not breath of wind in the air and non was forecast either.. They just make shit up and then hope that their uniform is enough for you to bow to authority. The same applies to the crap arguments the guy in this Video is making. Trying to make out they are just trying to help when in fact they are really trying to make it not worth fking flying at all!
He rather handwaved away the where's the evidence question. He also dismissed the idea that the flying location makes any difference.
and sadly Sean, you let him get away without answering it 😞
So how can commercial BVLOS be allowed? Will drones need onboard radar, or be controlled by six pilots with a camera on every side?!!😲
So in a nutshell, the CAA have effectively reduced VLOS to about 50m then! The argument of "what if your GPS fails?" is a bit weak, if the GPS network fails, we will have a LOT more to worry about than a few drones going AWOL. Most DJI drones are hard programmed so that if all command communication between it and the pilot is lost, it will automatically make it's way back to the point of take off without any input from external sources and land safely.
Also, the chances of a drone hitting a manned aircraft are so remote as to be discounted, unless the pilot is deliberately flouting the laws of "lower than 400ft/120m altitude" or "within an airfield FRZ".
Don't forget, big businesses like Amazon etc want the lower airspace for their delivery drones, and are prepared to throw BIG money at the CAA/Government to make sure this happens. Hobby drones will have no place in the skies, period!
Just point out that you can get Geomagnetic storms which can affect GPS next work. This is listed as a KP-level index of 0-9. But I have not had any problem yet with this.
@neilfoster Spot on!
No, no, sub 400ft airspace is "much busier than you think"!
@@timlong7289 In the last 6 months I have only had 3 people flying their drones when I was flying my drone.
A DJI drone is programmed to land slowly if it looses GPS and remote control, or sometimes hover in space until either are reconnected. But your sentiment I completely agree with, if the GPS network goes down we’ve got a lot more important things 5 worry about than a few drones drifting across the sky for a few minutes until their batteries run out.
I am often filming large buildings over 100m inside or area. Which means I go into VLOS every time orbit it.
Usually when I fly my drone and I look at my controller screen.
I can switch off the screen in flight and only use my eye up to 130m maximum with my mini. I would probably have to be 60m to know that the drone camera is in the right position to film something.
I could lift my drone up above 100m. Take some nice snappy photos instead.
The Problem here is that I want to film things and going to need to look a the controller screen.
And I will be flying more than the distance that I can know the orientation just by looking at the drone which is more than 130m.
Therefore I will be breaking compliance.
Given the mistakes made by the CAA recently, I would say that drones are over-regulated at the moment. And the regulations need to be simplified.
CAA said NO that it is unsafe, wait for a test that cost money that then lets you do this safe
@@andrewmaudsley7692 I did one online test which did not cost anything.
And I have managed to not hit a crash or kill anyone with my drone in the last 6 months of reckless flying.
@@photonatureengland8895 you made me giggle 6 months of reckless flying, also not one crash, guessing not FPV also i stopped calling mine crashes, now just call them controlled emergency landings
It has not been clarified yet, but I expect the VLOS rules for non-FPV to be applied verbatum to VLOS for an FPV observer. I would however argue that as long as an FPV pilot has a visual feed, the observer is really a back up to check for other aircraft in the sky and people on the ground. The actual direction the RC aircraft is flying in is not that critical to the observer... because the pilot already knows which direction it is going in... he can see it in his goggles. Now that these new VLOS specifics are coming into play, I think it would another nail in the FPV coffin. I think the CAA have a five year plan to wind recreational drone use down.
I agree totally but it's my view that it's a 3 year plan and it will be interesting to see how few hobbyists are still flying in 3 years.
There's no way the hobby can thrive with these ridiculous regulations and once there's been a few test cases with large fines and people are shown how easy it is to be fined, the majority will give up or not start in the first place.
If anyone says they can see orientation of a Mini 3 further than about 80-100M in a grey sky, they are not being honest. It's impossible. I have great sight and I've tested it multiple times and beyond 100M it's just not practical. No Mini 3 operator is going to follow these VLOS rules. These VLOS rules are being based on flying in potentially dangerous airspace and of course in those areas pilots should be taking extra care. What about flying miles from any airport or airstrip and zero risk of aircraft, middle of absolutely nowhere. VLOS should mean the area around the drone so they you can react to any risk of other aircraft or people coming into that zone in which case any operator would DESCEND, so orientation is of no consequence then. We may as well all give up now because this hobby is being killed by uncessary rules for those pilots who are competent and trained to fly safetly and manage situations accordingly.
I recon most people, if they were completely honest, "fly by screen" a lot of the time - especially if you are flying over deserted fields or over the sea etc. As long as you know the patch of sky where it is - enough to know if it is anywhere near some random low-flying military aircraft that magically came out of nowhere, I think the chances of you causing an incident is so astronomically low, it will be below the chance of you accidentally killing someone while driving your car home after flying.
@@oryxis There is not a single drone pilot that will fly 100% by VLOS - it's just not workable or practical. No-one spends the best part of £1k or more to stick a drone in the air and fly it around in circles 50 - 80 metres away - it's pointless. The CAA say....what if THIS...or what if THAT or what if SOMETHING ELSE.... they are just coming up with unlikely scenarios to fit the rules, and not rules to fit the likely scenarios. No evidence is shown of all the supposed crashes and issues being caused by drones. I fly in the middle of nowhere most of the time and nowhere near any 'random' aircraft - the risks of my drone hitting anything or falling out of the sky is so low, people are more at risk being hit by a drunk pidgeon. If the rules are farcical then they may as well not be there because no-one will follow them.
I think the final 3 minutes of this video was all I needed to hear. If you have a sub-250g "platform" then your hobby will consist of flying in circles of, at best 90-100 metres. I'm not sure that sort of "recreational flight" is worth the £1000 plus price-point of owning such a drone. 10 minutes of that and you're probably done with it. You'll probably get more fun out of a Scalextric set for about a 10th of the price.
Interestingly it's mentioned the use of navigational lights or strobes are NOT an acceptable means of VLOS compliance!
Also noted was moving your drone side to side to determine orientation is also NOT an acceptable means of VLOS compliance.
So if we can't even use our telemetry to determine orientation either, this basically means any Mini drone sub 250g is basically unusable beyond 50-80m⚠️😲
Yet this same weight class of drones enjoys the least restrictive regulations in terms of flying over uninvolved people and built up areas etc
Edit- as a side note, I'm not sure what device Callum uses as his FPV display but it sounds like it has often let him down, frozen, crashed or just died?
Most likely an Apple product? ⚠️😲
I can honestly say in all my years of flying drones, thousands and thousands of hours flight time and thousands of km, I've never experienced a failure of my FPV display screen.
Not even run out of power as I ensure it is fully charged prior to flight and my controller charges my device anyway!
I think that's the point. If you're attempting to shut down drone flying and you have an issue where the legislation would simply convert everyone to flying dub 250g, you need a means of making sub 250g so useless that no one will bother.
@@MrVideowill I see a glaring 'loophole' in the being able to see the orientation of my Mini drone!
Just fly straight out without putting in any yaw control.....100m out yep that's the back of my drone, 200m out yeah that's the back still......800m out I can still see the back.......1km that little tiny dot is just about visible and yes I can still see it is pointing away from me! ⚠️😁
I'll be able to prove I can tell which way it is pointing just by pulling the drone straight back. 👌
Sorted....😁👍
@@pdtech4524 Quality! Best reply of the day!
@@MrVideowill There's always a work around 👍😁
@@pdtech4524 I often fly my Mini 2 like that to get a specific type of shot!! I think it's actually possible to yaw the Mini 2 when flying back home when RTH is activated ... gets some smooth fooage:)
Why didn’t you push Calum to justify the safety case for the regs given there has been no official risk assessment.
It's very good of him to say that if we want to fly drones further than what we can throw a go-pro then we should perhaps get a bigger drone. Incidentally why aren't there limits on how high/far I can hit a cricket ball or shoot an arrow from my compound bow?
But anyway back to getting a bigger drone to fly further... Marvelous idea, is the CAA going to buy one for me, or reimburse the £1000+ I've spent on the M3P so I can put it towards a bigger drone? We're not all paid fortunes by some taxpayer funded quango for cranking out asinine legislation.. (or 'guidance').
The fact that he was so caught off guard by the overwhelming reaction of the grassroots just shows how much he and by extension the CAA are out of touch.
I’d like to see the CAA risk assessment (if there is one) including one specific to sub-250g drones.
There isn’t one. Never has been, like social distancing 250g was a figure picked out of someone’s arse.
@@testpilotian3188 I wasn’t referring to the background as to why 250g was chosen as a threshold. I want to see the probability and consequence of perceived risks and who the stakeholders were that participated. Oh, by the way, we are a major stakeholder. A risk assessment is standard practice in the aerospace industry. The CAA must have one, surely!
@@rooftop5854 surely indeed!!!!!!!!
@@rooftop5854 exactly mate but you know damn well they haven’t as it would already be a blocker for the drones they are clearing the skies for 👍🤝
@@bugsy742 👍🏻
The received wisdom I have gained, from this channel, is that if any conflicting aircraft appears where you are flying in uncontrolled airspace the drill is to hover, re-assess and then descend or land. Since all evasive movement will be in the vertical plane the orientation of the drone is immaterial.
Keep it high. If you can't see it neither can the police.
Disguise your RC as a lunch box and if the police turn up, just pull a sandwich out and start munching 😂
I struggle to understand how you can have high level VLOS when flying a drone, specifically as so many do flying and doing video fir smooth , glossy footage for videos etc. For model helicopters and planes this works but not for drone photography or videography as you need both to set and monitor the shot via the screen and of course monitor satellites, battery power, height, distance etc.. absolutely mad if you ask me!
I want to thank everyone who has/is engaging this interview series in the comments. It is important that everyone has their voice heard and I have been told that the CAA does review your comments in feedback.
I will be reading all of the comments as well but with this level of response I cannot respond to everyone.
This series is intended to present the real world thinking of the CAA in terms of drones across hobby and industry. So your response is important.
I would also like to stress it is vital that as many people engage in public consultations as possible. This new VLOS guidance was in fact part of the previous consultation.
We will keep everyone informed of when the next one starts in 2023.
Sean, an off topic question: Is it law that you have to set your app (using a phone, not the controller with inbuilt screen) to record your flight logs, or is it just assumed practice that you should do this? If it is law, can you delete them when you wish? Nothing nefarious in my questions, just asked out of curiosity, as a few months I checked my app's flight logs, but nothing had been recorded. I clean install of the app, allowing all settings (location, phone's photo library, contact list blah blah etc) fixed the issue.
Thank you.
Wow if this is what they come up with after consulting... It begs the question who did they consult with? Or what they'd have come up with it they 'went in blind'?
I can't believe anybody would have said 'oh yeah what I'd really like to see forced on us by the CAA is a really onerous and arbitrary set of limitations that makes owning a small drone basically pointless'.
Sean, thanks for your comment. The problem I have is that if the CAA have already read our comments and spent months consulting drone users, yet still come out with these rules that are not realistic, what is the point in anyone giving their views? They are clearly not interested in taking on board common-sense thinking. Just the attitude of the guy you interviewed and how confused he acted with how some drone users think, tells me that he just doesn't get it at all. Get a bigger drone so we can see it, he says? I don't think I need to give my feelings on that as they are obvious to everyone. I'm quite new here Sean and have found your channel very helpful and I appreciate your videos very much. I'm just sorry to be so negative, but I'm becoming quite frustrated with the direction I feel things are going. I'm using my new M3P as much as possible while I can before it becomes virtually unusable, which I think will happen soon for those of us who prefer to stick to the rules.
Oh it’s definitely shown the Real world thinking of the CAA 👍
Listening to Callum talk I realised that he actually believes what he was saying! 😅 perfect shill 😂 the man’s literally feathering his own nest!
Thanks for making another great video mate 🤝
love your video content, sadly cannot say the same about the CAA, i just do not understand how a sub250 helicopter with 14 inch carbon props flying at a busy park would be considered safe when a 50 gram FPV drone would be illegal and deemed unsafe as a spotter will not be able to keep the orientation at all times, this has just pushed more people to just take the CAA as a joke and for people to not take what ever they see as trustworthy, over the years they have just gotten worst and worst, would love them to make a video showing how someone can fly a 50gram FPV drone safe at a busy park and also following there rules and i don't mean just hovering, flying acro, again thank you for your content just disappointed in CAA
A real pleasure to see such knowledgeable and informed content from an authoritative source. Thanks for the update and experience.
This caa guy seems to be on a different planet !
I have no planes or helicopters flying where I live and only 2-4 police officers in my town at any given day so I’m not going to worry about the new rules as I’m in open grounds with no one about when I fly!
Rather than tighten the regulations, these changes have the potential to drive usage in the opposite direction… welcome to the Wild West. So many sub 250g drones have been sold over the last few years… the genie won’t go back into the bottle. 500m is acceptable.
Just another thought. This surely means that from now on, all night flights are illegal?
Callum specifically mentioned that strobes won't be permitted to identify orientation and you certainly won't be able to see your drone at night from more than a few feet away.
Personally I think it's easier to see the drone position at night.
@briangbwyld2440 only because of the strobes and I agree with you. But Callum says strobes don't count.....
@MrVideowill Even without a strobe. Fit a scribe and the Mini 3 is over 250g. Can't win either way
Seems quite apparent that the CAA is now Caring for Amazon's Airspace. If Amazon have bunged UK Gov a pile of cash to get that airspace, the UK Gov will of course oblige, after all they sell off anything they can.
I lose VLOS every time I look at my screen because when I look back up I can’t see the drone & it takes several seconds to see it again even at just 50 metres away. The instruments and RTH are there to help us fly safely. I often use the map to point my direction home because RTH is for emergency only really. You have to constantly look at the screen to get the right settings for that photo.
Sean...... All I can say is WTF!!!!!
Edit: And now after some thought I'll add ... WTF! WTF! WTF!!!!!
Just me or did he say red right green left ? 👍.
Fastest way to avoid something is down .
Down is down no matter what way you are facing .
? Using the monitor/phone screen is a requirement if you are wanting to record or take pictures , does this mean we are back to the phantom days with 2 controllers or using a spotter .
You are correct. seems he doesn’t know his left hand from his right. these are the people making the rules. unbelievable.
the problem with the orientation specification is the fact that it is so much more difficult to with natural eyesight even at very close ranges. I've had it at a distance of under 50 meters and had difficulty identifying it's orientation.
It's just screaming for people to stop complying with the regulations.
So what do we all do when we lose orientation... look at the screen - simple. If the screen doesn't work (the thing they're worried about - which hasn't happened to me and I am sure is a pretty rare thing otherwise people would be complaining all the time) press RTH - now you know which way its pointing. As I said above, it really doesn't matter which way it's pointing to get it out of trouble if the hypothetical air ambulance scenario occurs, just lower it to just above the ground. I suspect most of us will operate along the lines of "if you can see the dot and see there is nothing near it - that's good enough." - especially if you are flying over empty fields/ the sea etc
@@oryxis Yes but the CAA will argue that won't work if you lose GPS reception, playing devils advocate here, I certainly don't agree with the orientation requirement.
@@oryxis with a fixed wing RC aircraft you roll left/right if you’re not sure which direction it’s flying, takes about 2 seconds to establish orientation.
@@testpilotian3188 Same with a drone, that why this is silly. A simple “have an understanding of the orientation of the drone” would make a lot more sense, this is way too specific.
@@PaulJoy quite - it's absolutely bizarre that they've decided that a movement of about 25 centimetres (maybe less) "doesn't count" to establish orientation.
and this really bizarre notion that our instrumentation doesn't count because there's a chance it wont work.
I mean the rule really should be:
1) Must maintain telemetry and VLOS
2) If telemetry is lost (or does not exist) the drone must be returned to operating in these conditions - ideally returned to home.
So will amazon have to stick to the vlos rule with there delivery drones?
Not once they own all our lower airspace, but they will still sell you a drone though, delivered by some flying hulk of a thing. The new hobby will be viewing the video tracking of the delivery drone and no doubt try and charge you extra to login to see it!
Listing/ watching this very interesting topic on VLOS, as a photographer who flies a drone for the purpose of taking a "photo" , every time I look at my screen to make sure I have got what I want- I break the law as for those few seconds I do not have VLOS.
Using the national speed limit as evidence to support his view of the CAA’s position on VLOS is the classic straw man fallacy argument. He lost what little credibility he had from that point forward.
A lot of smaller drones had a 'headless mode' would that work provided you could see that spec in the sky you would have no problems with orientation.
Callum Holland says the CAA doesn’t want to spoil the hobby. They just have! It is that simple. If I can fly out to 300-400m, it’s worth flying. With the new rules limiting me to less than 100m, it isn’t. Flying a drone for me is all about taking photographs from positions I couldn’t reach with a DSLR. Well over 50% of the time that involves the drone being 200-400m away which I can no longer achieve legally. As I don’t particularly enjoy just pottering around within a small area just for the sake of flying, this hobby has just been killed for me because I have no intention of spending vastly more money on a much larger drone and the qualifications I need to use it when my Minis have always been the perfect and safe platform before.
I've said this before, but I really don't get the direction stuff in relation to conflict with other airspace users. I have a PPL, so am aware of light aircraft, military etc and the ONLY * initial * direction I am likely to be going if I spot even a remote chance of conflict... is DOWN! I rarely go above 60m though as that also reduces my chances of conflict.
I thought this also, if I'm nowhere near a runway(which i should always be) an aircraft flying below 200ft has bigger problems than a 250g bit of plastic
@@nxsynjs Rooks (300g), Wood Pigeons (500g) are now restricted to flying within 30m of their nests. No nest-building allowed within 3km of an airport, no overflying of people.
@@clearairflying 😂😅😆🤝
I'm colour blind, I can see my drone at distance but I won't be flying until I can find a way to work out the orientation beyond 20-50 feet, because the drone merges in to one colour.
Also if I need a bigger drone I CAN'T FLY WHERE I WANT TO FLY and have to go out in to the middle of nowhere where there's nothing I want to take shots of and this completely defeats the object of my drone!
I'll NOT be renewing my Operator ID until this is rectified and I'll just stop flying altogether!
I think that is the eventual end point - fully intended end point
I think this is what they're hoping to hear and your summary is exactly what the regulations are intended to achieve.
We'll all be able film grass, provided it's close to us but very little else!
Just carry on what you’re doing, if you’re sensible the chances of getting caught are not much higher than nil, Police won’t even come out to burglary nowadays, let alone someone flying a drone further than 50 feet away unless you’re camped out at the end of the runway. And if you are challenged, just say wait while I fly it back, fly it back, land at your feet, then when PC Karen or Kevin asks how you knew which orientation the aircraft was when it was in the air, simply point down and say “we’ll I flew it back to my feet so erm you tell me….”.
Putting things into perspective, there have been thousands of reports for fixed and rotor aircraft. A humble DJI drone like the mini 3 pro weighs in at under 250 grams. I have been flying drones since 2018 and NEVER has a GPS failure. Also not mentioned many of us have smart controllers not phones. In my opinion the CAA are attempting to kill off the drone hobby. Education like taking the A2CofC certainly helps with flying to understand perspective during flights. Also not mentioned by the CAA is to listen for any manned aircraft during flights. I'm 100% happy to bring a drone back if manned aircraft are in the area. So my main question is how many serious reports have there been reported with Manned aircraft against hobby drone fliers. Where are the CAA reports of all these dangerous hobby drone crashes?
They don’t exist is why brother 👍
I recently left the military and the location of my final draft is just down the road from me, I routinely have helicopters outside of their own corridors and under 400ft in my area, all the military ones that do it also have ECM ( Electronic Counter Measures ) either turned on or on reactively - something I know to be illegal outside of Ops!
Here’s my issue, proof! the hoops you have to jump through are ridiculous to report and if an incident or accident hasn’t happened then it’s already dead in the water, no one is going to get black box data from the military without an incident 1st, no one will ever be prosecuted, it’s going to be a similar story for civi aircraft no doubt, the difference is that jo public sees ALL helicopters as absolutely necessary and all quadcopters as absolutely unnecessary 😞
@@bugsy742 thats whats wrong it should be why are you using a 5 ton helicopter to film that sports event rather than a 500kg drone we have seen what happens when a helo and a pub meet (12 dead) the system is wrong in the first place.
@@jamesi100 exactly mate, that’s a bloody good point 🤝✊
Frankly these people are either just being silly or want it all shut down. You can’t see what’s the back or front of a Mini from 50 feet away.
Idiotic rules lead to people simply ignoring them all and giving it no further thought. This is what the CAA is driving ‘Joe Public’ to with these rules.
If someone breaks into your house or assaults you, you have problems getting law enforcement to properly investigate. We need to leave sub 250 drones alone, how many serious accidents have there been- none! I once made a mistake and crashed mine into me, when landing and it just bounced off. Whereas I’ve just been injured when a fella lost control of his mobility scooter and drove it into my leg.
Totally overkill, drones are capable of being equipped with adsb to warn of other aircraft/drones etc and safely avoid incursions, also the use of obstacle avoidance will help stop issues, if there were to be a gps error then a failsafe could be implemented whereby the drone would autoland. I think Evlos should be allowed with the use of adbs and collision avoidance compulsary when flying Evlos.
Overkill because there is still no requirement for a light aircraft to have ADSB - Yet RC models ( at least in the US, ROW later no doubt ) will shortly HAVE to have Remote ID
More Nanny state control!
The drone using auditors are not helping in my opinion.
I agree. This will damage their channels & it was only a matter of time before the complaints generated by their style of operation had a negative impact!
nothing to do with auditors, if those channels never existed we would still be in the same, place, the caa has the task of clearing the airways to make way for bvlos cos theres money to be made
So it's better to sell my FIMI X8 SE 2022 and my DJI MINI 2, buy a £120 drone and keep the rest of the money because from now on my "beloved and super intelligent" drones with the super capabilities are useless and redundant
In a word... Exactly
yep
Your man hit the nail on its head “UNRESTRICTED AIR SPACE” need I say anymore.
Why has nobody asked for a freedom of information request on the data to back it up
Good idea. Off you go. (you probably now have your answer).
They have and have constantly been ignored / footbed off under national security concerns,
The CAA have absolutely ruined this hobby!
CAa new Drone String law
1,Place your drone on a flat surface at a distance for visual orientation 2. Secure one end of string to Tx 3. Layout and secure other end of string to your drone 4 Await next rule change.
What about very large company's its been mentioned they hope at some point make delivery by drones how will that work, by using technology, and have they been trying this delivery by drone on the isle of wight I'm sure it was to the hospital correct me if I'm wrong
Those drones are super safe though, because they open the potential to bring lots of money into the government. Well, they do if the government can get rid of those pesky drone hobbyists using up their valuable airspace!
In the name of transparency can they provide detailed up to date statistics on all drone and preferably bird related aerial incidents so we can see just how terrible this problem is that they are trying to solve?
I am submitting a freedom of information request for that very thing buddy 👍🤞🤝
And sub 250? None.
Happy New Year! Thanks Sean for taking the time to chat to Callum & to him coming on to give his view. Sadly when you asked him for the data backing up the CAA VLOS guidance, he just referred to reports, which suggested the evidence of dangers to the public are perhaps exaggerated. Apparently, not all airspace users are equal, as drone fliers (hobby rather than commercial) have to keep their drones close to avoid other manned aircraft and the latter can fly & check their instruments, ignoring drones, birds, etc. With my tongue firmly in my cheek, I wonder what the CAA think of people launching small objects through the air, at a speed sufficient to cause injury, or death, sometimes beyond their VLOS. Of course, I am speaking about golfers, a dangerous tribe and I suspect not keen on drones. Perhaps the CAA should seek to reduce dangers, rather than eliminate them altogether! Ran5 over! Phew! Keep up the good work😊
It’s getting to point where I can piss further than I can fly
The argument for maintaining orientation seems to me to based on the assumption that a drone is a basic rc aircraft.. Where if you loose orientation the chances are its going in.. What this rule is not accounting for is the ability for drones to hover without being controlled. So if orientation is lost, then you can let the sticks go and think about it. Or consult the screen with a big huge arrow pointing at home. Or press rth or any number of other options.. Most if not all of these mitigations are not available to someone flying an rc aircraft and it serves to underline why rc aircraft and drones need to be handled differently.. Most of the aircraft you need to maintain orientation with are operating under Part16? Anyway. It also feels I bit like a swipe at the drone manufacturers for daring to exploit the under 250g rule. I agree with many that it is an underhanded attempt to give law enforcement a way to pick up auditors who routinely fly out of orientation range and to drive ppl out of the hobby. I'll be interested to learn how the delivery companies buy their way out of complying with this rule.
Their^
I don't get vlos on drones like the mavic mini they vanish at about 100m
Regarding my comment in chat about how are people supposed to know this guidance (if it changes so frequently) what worries me is you do the exam for your flyer id, assuming you pass and have that knowledge you have that ID now for 5 years! other than maybe checking the drone code say a few times a year as your pretty responsiable how the heck are you supposed to keep abreast of these changes! The CAA needs a notification service that a. provides upfront notice of changes to guidance/regulation etc. before its about to happen and b. when that change does happen informs you of the changes.
I do still find the orientation thing a mystery, if you cant rely on giving directions to determine it, which calums counter being you it might be unexpected is answered by having a CoC that covers that case then how does that really differ to 10m away with a sub 250 drone expecially. If i loose control at 10m the damage wouldnt really be any different to at 100m and id argue that at 100m you would be flying more cautiously around something that you may cause and incidient with anyway?
You can get notifications from the CAA SkyWise service. As a GVC qualified operator, the company I used for my training included signing up a part of the course. I received notification of the CAP722 update earlier on today. If you like, I can find you the link, although you should be able to find the service quite easily
@@chicofrostie yeah I was pointed towards it in the comments in the last video, thanks!
I think it still needs to integrated into the more public information and the drone code alongside the flyer id exam. It it was for likeminded people helping you out you would have no idea.
Yeah, I totally agree that it should be in the information you’re given when you get your flyer/operator ID. It’s a useful service for all kinds of things, not just CAP updates. The NOTAMS, for example, are useful for making sure you don’t accidentally fly somewhere during temporary restrictions.
Sean @geeksvana wansnt the mini’s pit into the sub 250 group due to their minimal impact on collision and minimal risk of injury so why the massive concern all of a sudden with a visual sight of orientation for something that was deemed to have a minimal risk? I’m sure there are other drone “pilots” that are starting to feel the goal posts are being moved closer together with every word spoken by the CAA rule writers
He says it’s about making the hobby more popular; but this is clearly about getting rid of our hobby. I wish you’d be a bit more ‘assertive’ though; you’re representing all of us flyers, and I fear the ‘powers that be’ just see us as week people who will accept anything they tell us. This VLOS will instantly kill ‘legal’ tiny whoop flying other than a few feet away.
Spot on! To suggest this is about making the hobby more popular is, at best, disingenuous.
Sean isn't representing anyone but himself. All he's doing is giving the CAA rope with which to hang themselves. If we want to push back on this, two things have to happen. We (pilots) need to form a lobby group and we need to go after MPs, not the CAA. We need to find the right person to lead this initiative. Someone like Bruce/xjet but from the UK.
Getting rid of the hobby is whet they want. They more or less killed off the RC model Aircraft hobby, most of those I used to fly with have packed it in competently and the clubs finished after flying since the 1960's. We are over regulated now , its just a way to keep us down. Glad i'm an old and not a youngster.
Slowly but surely they drew there plans against us, war of the whirls has begun!!! to me it seems the squeeze is on soon you will not be able to fly outside your own garden then there will be an authorisation charge to fly outside in the open topped of by a new type of licence costing hundreds of pounds the hobby will become a business model not a pleasure I get safety but isn’t it getting a bit to much ?
So if visual orientation of the drone is a requirement without the use of lights, this renders all Night Flights with any drone outside the rules yet CAP722 states that 'There are no specific prohibitions to VLOS operations during nighttime'. That does not make sense!
Yes, there isn't too much sense as most people would apply it! I do have a video coming very soon with a deeper explanation which includes night flight...
These new regulations will mean I can't continue making the videos I've been doing. For over a year I've been documenting the progress of HS2 in my area which means shooting long distance footage. It needs to be that long because of the area covered. Now I won't be able to do that. It's a nonsense. I'm in complete control of the drone at all times and know where it is as I'm paying attention. I fly a Mini 3 Pro and, as everyone on here is saying, it is impossible to see it after maybe 100 metres. To be compliant I would have to fly the drone 100 metres, return it to home, cycle further on about 100 metres, take off, fly another 100 metres, return to home again, etc, etc. I can't see any other way.
Why don't the caa just grow some balls and ban drones altogether? That seems to be the end game anyway, to make flying a drone such a ball ache that we all just pack it in.
Becuae the government would then have to pay us all compensation for our drones in exactly the same way they had to pay firearm owners when they were banned.
They like bringing in tasty little fees but not so keen on paying out.
Sometimes I can only just see which way the mini-2 is facing when it's on the bl**dy ground, let alone 50m up. Requiring visual on orientation is absurd.
I feel like Callum is creating reasons to fit the regulation, rather than creating regulations to fit the reasons. I completely disagree with flying under 400ft in uncontrolled airspace being less safe than flying within class G controlled airspace for instance. That's nonsense - for starters you cannot guarantee that all drone users will have called up the controller so there could be aircraft flying that you don't know about anyway. Manned aircraft should be above 500 feet, leaving
You're absolutely right about there being an agenda IMO. As a former helicopter pilot though, we can land pretty much anywhere.
As a helicopter pilot though pretty much all of my landings were at airports/airfields, pubs or hotels.
I've never known a helicopter to land randomly in the middle of a street, or on a shopping centre, the top of a butchers shop, etc etc.
When we did land at private sites, I always did a recce first at 500ft, even at sites I'd been in to before giving a drone operator ample opportunity to get out of the way.
@@MrVideowill Also, onlookers (and presumably drone pilots) will be able to hear and see you coming a mile away. Its not as if incoming aircraft arrive unannounced.
@timlong7289 Correct! Hence the reason we are trained to do a recce and not just come straight in. Safety!
If we are already in A3 airspace then we are not over people or property and have flown in such a way that we can always execute a forced landing in the event of a critical system failure without endangering people or property. We also have RTH that we can activate at will or in the event of a comms or video failure. Therefore there is no need to be able to physically see the drone's orientation in space as long as it can be flown, landed safely or commanded to return-to-home.
so basically you can now fly your mini 2/3 about 30mtrs away 👎🤬
In effect, yes (if we are being brutally honest). You may as well tie a string on it and fly it like a kite.
God! I hope CAA actually read this comments. Almost 500 and I would say 99% are negative.
Either all those people are wrong or the rules are broken!
years ago I wouldn't dream of letting a drone I was flying to out of sight. but these days with drones like the level of technology like DJI that I fly now. these are very safe you always now where it is and feel always in control. like the Cars of old with a red flag going before them, they have gone beyond that, so has many of the drones now when it comes to VLOS. I fully understand why the CAA have done this I can understand it .But I am coming to the point that I will eventually have to stop flying drones altogether, which you would think the authorities wish we all would do.
I can only imagine the delight of the DfT and the CAA seeing so many of us getting ready to give up flying our drones.
It got me thinking about the ever decreasing need for VLOS in today's environment ....
1) NASA flew a successful unmanned mission to the moon and back in recent weeks. Well beyond VLOS!
2) Military drones have been flown by remote pilots with zero LOS (from bunkers in other parts of the world).
3) The DJI Mini range can be flown a couple of km beyond LOS (and some can be flown autonomously via waypoints) and all have built-in RTH / Failsafe.
Why on earth do the CAA insist that we need to physically see the orientation of a DJI style drone when we have all the compass/orientation/map data and telemetry info on screen? If a dirty great military aircraft swoops down in the vicinity I'm going to hear it well before it arrives so I simply lower the throttle to get out of the way and hover safely until it passes. CAA overkill!
It'll be interesting to see the legislation that the DfT implement when we start seeing autonomous EVs on the UK roads. There's a big difference between a 250g Mini 2 crashing into a tree and a heavyweight EV mounting the kerb in a busy city centre. More food for thought on proportionate legislation based on statistical risks to the public.
There is a lot of thought gone into this that is why we contradict ourself through out this. If we use this logic with cars as he does we would be driving at 10mph in 70mph zones cause we can’t be sure what will happen if something goes wrong like if your breaks were to fail could you stop safely. The police would have to look at all the evidence and consult the cp to see if they were following the rules cause the police are always good at doing the right thing aren’t they. This is just going to kill drone flying by people that follow the rules leaving people flying illegally so making it less safe
With a smile he's submitting reasons which can be mitigated. We live in an age of much electronics in our cars; electronics can fail he says !! We are apparently seeing self-drive cars as a reality; also pilotless commercial planes/taxis. My 249g drone is a minuscule risk in comparison. Electronic telemetry is much safer than our eyes. When was the last time electronics failed at a vital time for you?
He says using a smartphone and getting a calls/messages will interrupt a flight. Make sure batteries are 100% charged before flight. I use an old smartphone without a SIM card/WiFi disabled.
This might happen, that might happen, the other might happen .... we are setting rules for the lowest common denominator.
Where is the data supporting any of these incidents; you asked and he didn't give an answer except 'we get it from many sources' ... so name the top half dozen sources and incidents; and is my 249g drone in any of them with statistics.
I have a Mini 3 Pro and fly slow ... what about FPV flyers flying at higher speeds; is that sport doomed?
It sounds like prosecution is a possibility for any flight 'automation', including RTH, if a 'well trained' police officer thinks the drone is out of operator control.
We need a legal 'cross examination' to challenge the CAA on some of their assertions using statistics as justification.
I think there used to be a mode which when you pulled the stick towards yourself the drone would fly towards the set Home Point irrespective of the drones orientation.
FPV? haha, it doesn't exist in the CAA's mind. Otherwise they'd have to acknowledge that flying FPV is MUCH SAFER than VLOS.
I suspect the regs are written to cater for the lowest common denominator. I.e drones without proper RTH, cameras and real time telemetry. So instead of creating a "basic" category, they included more advanced drones in the same way as 10 quid Chinese toys from ebay.
Hi, so how do we stand with regard to active track now, given that the controller screen is no longer considered acceptable? I use my Mini 3 to record my bike rides, and to my mind this now makes the drone unusable for my purpose.
You can use the controller screen but you must be able to see the drone without it as well.
There is also a little known allowance for BVLOS if you are flying with active track. You are allowed to track yourself and not keep the drone in sight, i.e. behind you, if you keep the drone within 50m. You can read more on the Drone Code point 35...
@@Geeksvana I am aware of the the code and allowance, but wondered if that has now changed. Thanks
@@Geeksvana I do wonder if the active BVLOS allowance is hinting that technical functionality does have an impact here and could we maybe see more alowances for that in the future? If yove got obstacle avoidance systems, how necessary realistically is it to keep orientation in as part of VLOS in the future, is the pilot really going to be able to react as fast as those systems? Feels like the guidance is probably still playing catchup to technology due to the general "one size fits all" of drone categories of varying capabilities?
We do have a sizable public consultation coming up next year on the Open Category, so it will be important we all engage and have our views heard. They have listened to the community on previous consultations.
@@Geeksvana that's encouraging to know thanks for the information.
As a new flyer I sometime feel really discouraged between the guidance changes and the general pain of working out where I can fly in the first place, at times it makes me consider giving up.
I'm all for good regulation and sound guidance, saftey is a huge concern for me, as is not loosing my drone!
Hopefully that will have some positive outcomes both in terms of keeping airspace safe and allowing enough freedom to no stifle the hobby scene.
Hi Sean, I’ve watched both videos by Callum but can’t find anywhere you asking why the CAA chose to change the rules regarding the C1 classification after the DJI Classic was released, and when will their new rules be released? Can you advise if this is on a separate video, because on the live chat you did say this question was asked! Thanks 😊
Hey Lee! We have a video discussing this with Callum out on the 27th. It is the next interview to be released.
@@Geeksvana Hey Bud, phewww thought I’d missed it. Thank you 😊 have a great Christmas 🎄
This will drive the manufacturers from building the pretty safe if they hit something sub 250g drone to building massive 5m wide drones with big "Front/Back" neon signs so you can fly them further than 100m away.😂
Hmmm I see a market opening...
As for VLOS ? The blue arrow on my screen shows orientation of my drone better than I can see a few meters away !
I understand the rules but what are drones for to take stunning pictures videos and now if you say have a small drone your basically limiting the user most drones are packed with technology and return of home features I think the rules are pushing me away for the hobby 500m vlos was a ok rule now if your trying to pan around a object keeping it in centre shot how are you gonna get a great shoot looking up at the drone
I think that's the idea, to push people away from drones. They will deny that, but who in their right mind is going to pay £1,000 for a drone that can only be flown a few meters away. 50/60m is probably about the max to be able to see a mini 3 and know its orientation.
You could do that much, much further away if the drone was fitted with powerful red and green strobes yet despite the absolute fact that you could see it and know its orientation with strobes fitted apparently that's not allowed. I wonder why???
Because it has nothing to do with seeing the drone and it's orientation and everything to do with making drone flying less interesting than watching paint dry to bring these pesky drone flyers hobby to an end!
Maybe worth contacting your MP Sean to see what regulations that are being discussed in Parliament. I also keen on doing BVLOS legally if there is any plans to allow people do this? I always see my drone using my eyes if I want to take a photo I get closer to such object
Awesome video, alot of it makes kinda sense, common sense should come into it a but though
So with all these laws whats the point in me owning a Mavic pro 3 ie what does it fly 10 miles out..... ???
I think being aware of your surroundings at all times is vital. Where I wil be flying my drone is a nice area well out of the way of anything, its also in the area that the local Air ambulance flys when its going from PRH hospital back to its base at RAF Cosford. As a rule of thumb I tend to keep my drone lower than the surrounding trees.
I think the whole issue around VLOS is a tricky one. To me VLOS means an unobscured view of the drones position. If you have flown in a straight line and there are no obstructions you have line of sight. Disclaimer - I keep my drone where I CAN see it. As for orientation, yawing etc to determine trajectory of drone the quickest and most effective way to determine this is via the RTH function.. you also have a very clear understanding from the cursor in map. If, hypothetically I wished to find out very quickly this is the quickest way. I think the reliance on the VLOS rather than with the very clear position via the App is the source of much consternation for me. How many airline pilots rely on auto pilot in thick fog where they can't even see 50 feet in front of them. Just playing Devils advocate. The technology is there, so why not use it.
Why does the CAA not recognise that there are some scenarios where it is safer to pilot a drone via the RC screen? For example, if, for whatever reason, I think my Home landing point may have become compromised, I need to land manually after reaching the Home point at altitude. Currently, this is illegal.
Another good video, thank you.
The change in legislation was a shock to me initially, but this explanation is genuinely helpful. It's all about safety.
The 500m previous ruling was absolutely ambiguous and risky if people were, as you say, flying a 230g grey drone in grey weather conditions, if you don't have spectacular eyesight, you won't be able to keep track of it with even the tiniest distraction, and more importantly you wouldn't be able to see anyone else flying a similar drone in the same conditions and you'd be at risk of a near miss or mid-air collision and not even know it.
I think one important bit which hasn't been covered categorically is that VLOS is for safety, and if you are flying near the edge of VLOS by flying beyond a building near to going behind it.
In a situation where you area about to have your VLOS obscured, you are already unsafe, because you don't have any information about the airspace behind that obstruction.
I wouldn't be surprised if there is more guidance around that aspect soon. I'm honestly surprised there isn't more already.
Hi Sean watched this the other day and I want to ask you this If Im watching my mini3pro or my Air3 with vlos then Im not watching the RC which connects me to the flight of my drone. That to me is like flying blind and far more dangerous. I can see where the CAA are coming from but this is a stupid rule and I have to agree with the comments below that if we are to follow this to the letter then we might as well give up flying altogether and find a new pastime. I would like to hear your views on this please. Jon
Hi Jon! Great point. Remember that VLOS does not mean you are watching the drone at all times. There are essential reasons to view the app and the airspace around the drone. It is more important that should you look at the drone, (which you should be doing for the majority of the flight), you can see it.
@@Geeksvana thanks for that
Nanny State Nonsense! Can anyone tell me what the rules are regarding videos that were shot before 2015? Could I be prosecuted for re-uploading my old 10km plus videos, flying meet-ups etc to show how much fun the old days were, between 2011-15 ish.
In terms of uploaded videos, it is pretty tough to gain any kind of prosecution from them for a number of reasons. It would usually need to be a live streamed video to prove when and who etc.
@@Geeksvanawow! Speedy response, appreciated! I had the idea that the CAA actually did prosecute using RUclips videos as evidence. I took mine all down but if I re uploaded any, could there be any retrospective prosecution? I’m thinking about doing a few videos on the subject, interviewing some of the well known 2011 crowd using old visuals.
Most important things are not showing who is flying, when it happened etc. You could add a disclaimer in description that flights were prior to regulation changes etc.
Often, the prosecutions which start with online posts are then backed up by data from the drone such as flight logs etc. RUclips videos alone are not enough unless clear and obvious.
@@Geeksvana Thanks very much for your input. Fly safe! 👍
This new rule kills anyones creativitiy. I am a photographer and it is impossible to take a photo without looking at the screen briefly. Basically now people can only fly in a straight line. You will never be able to go up to 100m vertically as the drone is too small. I have had my drone 2 weeks. I really feel like selling it as it is impossible to make cityscapes, landscapes from lower that 50 m. Half the features on my drone are now redundant.