i'm getting really tired of new revisions and restrictions coming in. i can honestly say i will just continue to fly a far if it's imperative to get the shot i need and use my controller screen to look around if its a speck in the sky or not even visible. there's nothing wrong with the old method and this new rule just isn't practical in some environments. i will always keep it safe but the nanny state can jog on here. imagine having to do this out in the countryside with nothing but trees and fields so zero risk to anything or anyone, what a joke.
@@Geeksvana of course buddy...just that the mini 3 is so damn small i can lose it easily now and then in twilight times etc. even been just 200-250 meters out ive lost sight when i glance back up and had to focus very hard to spot it again.
I have been flying model aircraft since the age of 12, I am now aged 85 & still flying model aircraft & now, drones. I do not need some third party telling me how I can safely fly my drone, I already know. I shall continue as before.
@@Iridiumwins the problem is the availability of drones now. Many people buy drones and don’t know there are laws to do with their use, they just buy them and fly them wherever they feel like including residential areas and over crowds. They don’t think about safety at all.
@@Iridiumwins that is not a good idea. That would maybe work with DJI drones but what about all the other brands? Should we just require every drone to connect to the CAA and check you have a valid ID? What happens to home built drones then or kits or common fpv drones? How would they comply with those rules? What you are suggesting would make drones a lot harder for people to use, if not impossible outside of using off the shelf drones like DJI ones. It would be easy enough to get your permit and input it into a drone designed for it but what about all other drones? Would all older drones suddenly be illegal to fly since they don’t have that feature? About the only thing they can do is to increase awareness and make sure that everyone buying a drone knows they need to take the test and get a permit. Are the CAA actually trying to reduce accidents or are they just making rules for the sake of it?
As I've said from day 1 Sean, when the requirement to register and the whole DMARES kerfuffle was first introduced, I stated the rules would get even more restrictive, over regulating and overbearing. I was firmly against going down this route because I've seen it all before in other areas concerning ever increasing, over regulatory restrictions. We've gone from a very basic set of common sense drone code rules that were perfectly effective, fair and safe. Where the VLOS guideline was purely to keep your drone in visual sight. Then later they changed all the rules and specified 500m as the 'effective' VLOS range, whatever the size of your drone. Obviously a larger drone you could see much further out and a smaller one far less, there are a multitude of variations and other factors which affect VLOS, such as sky colour, cloud cover, ambient light, sun strength, direction of sun light, colour of drone, size and shape of drone etc etc There is no 'one size' fits all. My definition of VLOS has always been the furthest point I can see with my own eyes unaided, so if I can see a church steeple on the horizon with nothing in between, that's my effective visual line of sight in that area. That church steeple could be 3km away but I can still see it and there is nothing between me and that steeple as it is in my clear unobstructed view. We've had so many rule changes since, I think this is causing much confusion and also confusing police a lot. I've seen many interactions online between a drone pilot and police who are referring to some older CAA drone related rules they've just googled, yet the pilot is flying perfectly legally according to a later set of rules. Each time they change the rules it creates another level of confusion. These latest rule changes mean flying a small mini drone sub 250g much further than 80-100m is pretty much not feasible with average eyesight⚠️🤔😲 and so it will go on.....and on.....and on......until none of us can fly anything, where even throwing a stick in the park without the appropriate training and correct license, insurance, permission from the land owner etc is illegal. Luckily I have the eyesight of a hawk and can count the hairs on a gnats back at a 1000ft, so seeing my Mavic Mini out to 1000m or more and it's orientation is perfectly fine. I'm all for sensible rules as long as they are fully based on risk assessment and are shown to improve safety, as we do all the time with road traffic regulations etc Making the rules ever more restrictive just for the sake of it, without improving safety is just pointless in my opinion.
Have to agree with you, I can only see my Mini 2 drone and its orientation at most up to 50m forward and maybe 120m if directly overhead. I agree that if we can see it very far ahead and also to the side to prevent helicopters etc flying sideways into us that should be sufficient I.E open fields. Unfortunately, some UA-camrs delight in flying long distances in a less-than-safe manner, I have seen some fly over trees, losing the loss of sight and wondering why they started to get bad video and connection. People like this do not help the hobby. I do not think that the distance between being able to see the orientation of a Mini 2 and a much larger drone will make much difference to VLOS as in reality the visibility of the orientation will be virtually the same after a very short distance without being able to use telemetry as a guide. Pilots can use it why can't we :)
@@woodydroneson Like I mentioned it's a deliberate attempt to restrict and stifle the hobby, for zero improvement in safety! So manned aircraft can use their instruments and telemetry but UAV pilots cannot?🤔😳 What's that all about? Surely you fly a UAV with a combination of visual line of sight AND using the telemetry and on screen FPV view. Not sure about anyone else but I fly my drone using that method perfectly safety. If I can't see my drones orientation by visual, I check my onscreen view to see where I'm pointing and also keep a constant check on my drones position, altitude and other critical data like battery level etc Surely if we just fly VLOS only and don't take our eyes off our drones, it's difficult to triangulate from ground level, where it is in relation to landmarks around it, while it's up in the air. The whole point of flying my drone is it's an extention of my visual awareness of the area from it's current position and cameras perspective. I agree flying long distances well beyond a tree line well out of VLOS, is a very dangerous and stupid thing to do but flying out 1000m in a wide open area with no obstructions, obstacles or dangers, where I can clearly see for 3km or more into the distance, I don't see an issue, I can hear any approaching aircraft long before I see them anyway, plus I'm flying at like 35m altitude, if an aircraft is flying that low, they have a lot more to worry about than crashing into my drone! 😲⚠️😳
It’s all bollo##! So, all these remote drones i.e. Amazon and all the other remote companies thats gonna do long distance deliveries way out of VLOS will they get “permission” from the CAA? Of course they will! The CAA are a lot of pratts!!!!🤬🤬🤬🤬 Pisses me off we have to suffer because of ‘their’ interpretation of our enjoyment! Tossers!🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬😡 just want to shut down everybody’s enjoyment in our hobby!
Hawk eye you are missing the point. Technically almost every drone flight could be deemed in breach of regulations. Looking down at the controller, reading the telemetry,,, well at those points your drone is BVLOS. It's like telling car drivers not to look at their speedometer! It looks like the authorities are edging towards no-small nano drones. Camera drone flights above your head only. Commercial inspections of things like the underneath of a bridge - impossible unless you can get people without visual aids to inspect the underside of the bridge without a drone. No sending a drone to save lives in the water at sea, no sending a drone down a tunnel to inspect a mine-collapse without sending a human into the danger area. It all makes perfect sense. This is Great Britain, a forward thinking, liberal country embracing technology and remaining competitive on the world stage.
I bought a fully manual drone (no camera, no GPS, no sensors, no hovering, etc) about 10ish years ago. I stuck my GoPro to it and vaguely pointed it in the direction I wanted to capture whilst trying to keep it from crashing, now those drones were dangerous and as a result I barely flew it. But I recently bought a Mini 3 Pro and it's like going from your first time on a unicycle to an experienced trike handler! Given the other much more real dangers we have in this country that are killing or injuring people right now, we seem to be going away over the top with these drone laws given how safe modern drones are in responsible people's handles. IMO, the law should be something like your drone has to comply with this specification: it can hover in one spot unaided, it has a GPS active at all times, up-to-date geo fencing, has a reliable return to home function, you are full control of the drone at all times with strong video signal being fed back to your controller and you do not fly recklessly or endanger people or animals. I would keep the Flyer and Operator ID rules we have and putting your ID on the drone, I might even say you need insurance too. So instead of the Operator ID being £10 it's maybe £20 and this is also a basic public liability insurance. But anyway, my point is there are so many more dangerous things out there than small, light, easy to fly drones which are generally flown very carefully and sensibly not least because they are so damn expensive these days!
Just to let you know if you’re unaware that you aren’t required to have a flyer ID with a sub 250 drone and as you mentioned having the mini 3 pro, you lucky bugger (it’s definitely on my shopping list) I currently have the mini 2 and the footage just from that is outstanding alone. Both these drones obviously fit into that category, so no flyer ID required … yet!! Happy flying.
US pilot here checking in on the state of drone flight across the Atlantic. As a life long vocal performer, I must acknowledge the excellence of your speaking voice. It's a pleasure to hear you speak with such deliberation while remaining anchored to understanding. Ie reading or quoting in a manner demonstrating understanding of the intent of the content. ✌️💚
When drones first became available, I made many interesting videos that were unique and fun. I invested a vast amount of money. I knew that laws would become far more restrictive and knew that my new amazing hobby would one day, become impossible. I haven't flown for over a year now and will never be flying a drone again. As a law-abiding citizen (to the letter), new restrictions make it all but impossible to use a drone other than a few feet in front of you. If you take off, fly away into the sky then look down at the camera display, it can take a considerable period of time to relocate the drone 'live' in the sky again - even if it is not far away, If you follow it the whole time, then it is fairly easy but the whole point is to use it to film things and therefore to look at the screen. For a single person RP, I fail to see how you can comply with the new VLOS rules and use the device for any meaningful purpose. It is also VERY subjective for a law enforcement operative or member of public to prove your compliance or not. Future legislation can only make things more restrictive. Couple this with confusion amongst people and police as to the existing rules and general bad feeling towards drones by the public, annual license costs and the potential for new rules to make expensive equipment obsolete and unsaleable in the future... there simply isn't any fun or incentive any more.
Have you considered ar glasses - something like the nreal airs - you can look through the glasses at your drone and your screen is in your eyeline at the same time.
@@reecechadwick8504 so you’re probably the sort of bloke that uses his phone behind the wheel and takes out motorcycles with sad regularity… Nice to see your selfishness writ large for everyone to see
same as anything here in the uk it will get Taxed and charged until the rules are too strict to even do your chosen hobby. Be it motocross, Jet skiing, sailing, motorsports, mountain biking in local wooded area, rideing any type of electric scooter....ETC ETC. The uk is no longer a fun place be or live.... No hobbys apart from drinking.....all they want is workers who are monkeys.
@@SnaxMuppet 2018 Leicester helicopter crash 2013 Vauxhall helicopter crash 2013 Farage Plane crash 3 recent ones off the top of my head, not a single aircraft brought down by a drone worldwide ever
@@SnaxMuppet aren't there a lot more birds than drones? Like thousands of times more? By the instances of bird strike you sometimes hear of they are way more likely to get in the path of an aircraft and fly at higher altitudes. If we applied the logic of zero risk you appear to advocate we'd ground all aircraft due to the risk of birds, or we'd ground all the birds.. also a drone pilot will spot a plane or helicopter easily and is almost never going to be at the same altitude. Even a psycho drone enthusiast would avoid any likelihood of being anywhere near a plane or helicopter. To me this is the confusion of anticipating a highly unlikely scenario and trying to remove ALL risk, like that's possible. If we took that approach with cars, or bikes or ironing boards we'd ban all of them. If alcohol was reviewed for introduction in the modern day it wouldn't be legalised. I'm sure the laws will get more restrictive over time as that's what bureaucracy does. At what point would you find it too restrictive or would you just shrug your shoulders and say, 'well, it's a rule now and rules must be followed"?
@@SnaxMuppet ok thanks for clarifying. I would argue though that airports already are restricted for drone use so that removes that risk. And VLOS that includes drone orientation is too prohibitive. For a mini drone that is literally a few metres visually. Given you can understand orientation on display at a glance this deems that specific requirement unreasonable in my eyes. It's this creep of criteria that I object to. I personally keep line of sight and rely on that just as good practise. However orientation is far better gauged on screen even at relatively close proximity as your inputs correspond to what you are seeing. Taken literally these regulations are not clear either. How do you gauge a distance that allows for judging orientation? What if any time can be taken looking at the display? Wouldn't this infringe on a person knowing if they can still judge orientation? I'd actually prefer having to be certified more stringently and pass free to take exams then adhere to incoherent and vague rules.
This is exactly how it starts. Bring in legislation first, fairly relaxed so that everyone thinks "oh, that's not too bad", and then, over a period of time gradually alter and tighten the previous regulation until we drone pilots are regulated out of the sky altogether (which I believe IS the ultimate goal). When you want to boil a frog, you don't drop it straight into a pan of boiling water, you put it into a pot of cold water, then gradually bring it to the boil until it's too late for the frog! That's how it works.
@@SnaxMuppet Why would the authorities want to remove drones altogether? Because they don't make the authorities any money. The CAA would be better off if drones didn't exist, there is no benefit to them.
@@SnaxMuppet You obviously aren't aware, so I will spell it out. Big corporations like Amazon etc have made it clear THEY want the lower airspace for their delivery drones. It has been reported on many times, and are prepared to throw BIG money at the CAA to make sure this happens, and hobby drones would be a major obstacle to this business plan.
Time to sell my mini 2 now, no fun in the honey anymore , I’ve always complied with all the rules but it’s getting very hard to follow and basically left feeling as if your doing something illegal
I rely entirely on the camera and telemetry on my drone for positional awareness which is far more accurate than any visual - plus being aware at all times of the surroundings and any other aircraft in the vicinity - by which I mean that if a manned aircraft appears nearby I immediately drop to below the tree/building line, or land completely if appropriate. I fail to understand why this capability is not recognized by the CAA. After all, manned aircraft are permitted to follow IFR rules once appropriately trained. UPDATE March 23rd Following all the comments to my original post, for which I thank you all, I must add that I never fly BVLOS. Irrespective of using telemetry most of the time I always keep my drone in visual line of sight. This doesn’t not mean that I can actually see the drone (it is after all a DJI Mini 3 Pro, though it does now have reflective strips attached which help a lot) but I can see (and hear) all of the area around the drone. If a manned aircraft came into the airspace I would first of all HEAR it from afar, and then see it visually by which time it will have returned to home and landed. This is even more so with a helicopter which, in my experience, can be heard from a considerable distance away, especially when lower to the ground. At the end of the day, safety is paramount - but there is no need to go to extremes, especially with a sub 250 drone. Note that in over 10 years of drone flying, there has been no recorded death from the recreational use of multi rotor drones. Over regulation is killing the hobby. (Thanks to Xjet for those last two sentences!)
Moira - you are right that the camera and telemetry give more accurate and reliable data than anything visual - if we all rely purely on VLOS fot that then its so much less safe.
This entirely... So long as you have a clear unobstructed view of the airspace in which you are flying... And thereby anything else entering into it, using the built in suite of safety features and visual tools is far far safer than trying to ascertain the orientation of a near symmetrical and relatively tiny object zipping around in 3D open space at speeds of 40mph that has no fixed points of reference within that space.
You are absolutely correct, but I will go ahead and tell you that in the aviation world having only one set of sensors is not sufficient for instrument flight rules. IFR certification is expensive, too. Expensive-expensive. It took a long time, quite a long time, before there were any GPS units that were rated for instrument flight. They were easier to use and showed more information than the legacy navigation aids, but it takes a long time for laws to catch up with technology. People flying visual rules could use GPS all day but if you flew Instrument rules the GPS unit wasn't included. Sure you could still use it for info, but you couldn't base your flight around the fact that you had a GPS. There had to be older, certified navigation aids as well.
Well if you can see a dji mini from 500m I hope your in the special forces #sniper eye The law has always been that you have to see the drone clearly so many people have not understood the meaning if vlos its in the wording VISUAL LOSS thats the key part visual separation must be maintained more legislation will come because of idiots making silly judgement calls and making the hobby have a negative impact on the uninvolved public soon it will be just as it was before when in commercial use We have 65+Yr old people and younger flying well outside of the law and hate me for not praising there stupidity but it just going to soon ruin it for everyone Such a shame 😞
Even at 30m I don’t think it would be to the letter of the law….. try 10m…. Just think how far away an old fashioned rc heli pilot would be flying away from controller ! Rc planes a little further, but not much. The caa seems to forget the main reason for drones these days… to capture imagery Having airspace awareness is far more important. As aircraft fly at 80kts at the very least The caa seem to have lost the plot !
It would help if Manufacturers made the OEM strobes a bit brighter, Not sure why you cannot use the telemetry as a confirmation of direction though. Don't Understand the collision with other aircraft unless it is another drone as manned aircraft should be above the 120m, Whats the problem with hitting the ground in the middle of nowhere ?
Great news for me. I have fantastic vision and can clearly see my drone and it’s orientation at 1000 meters away. Thank you CAA for more super guidance and support to this industry.
So nothing has changed then, you still have to keep it in sight. And if they use this ‘new’ law after a crash, how are they going to prove whether or not you could see the drone? I always keep it in VLOS so nothing has changed.
@@Mart.F exactly. That’s what makes it complete nonsense. How do they know what a person can see and can’t see! I’m amazed that they seem to be trying to just make things more confusing for people to fly.
Please do remember that this is the CAA compliance. The legislation itself says you must keep drone in sight and be able to avoid collisions. It is still a great hobby and you purchased a great drone.
So if you have decent strobes red and green it's safe to fly at 1000m at night as you will be able to tell the orientation that's a good thing but I think in daylight it will be a lot harder to tell the orientation
Thanks for the video Sean. But, I'll be ignoring the new rule about VLoS. It seems very unnecessary when the drone is packed with safety features. (Well that's my polite response).
The regulations themselves haven't changed. We just have legal definitions now for many parts of the operation. The safety features of a drone will not stop issues when flown out of sight.
@@Geeksvana what issues with a sub 250 drone? I wanna see some proof a mini 2/3 could seriously cause any damage at all to a chopper/glider let alone loss of life
@@gmivisualsjason3729 Even a Mini 2 can cause harm/injury when falling out of the sky. It can cause distraction to motorists. If it becomes in conflict with other aircraft, they will need to stop their flight - including air ambulances and fire support drones. There are good reasons why they do not permit BVLOS flights. This is something even Bruce xjet supports and has done so on Geeksvana!
For commercial survey work it's really important to be able to fly 500m away to get a decent survey area in a flight e.g. forestry or farmland, often the uav is pretty small at that distance. These new rules will mean having to transition to bvlos to make surveying practical.
@@crispinengineer this new interpretation/clarification applies to anyone that already has certifications as those are 99.9% reliant on VLOS operations
@@amwphotos I read it the same way you and as a commercial pilot this is just another way for the CAA to screw over responsible pilots. Oh and pretty much outlaw FPV in the UK.
I've recently purchased my first drone, a DJI Mini 3 Pro. I'm very pleased with it, but find this announcement very disappointing. Thank you so much to your channel. It's been a very useful resource to make sure I keep everything legal and above board. I do have one question though. How do I go about getting third party liability insurance? I'm not interested in full insurance for the drone but that is all companies seem to offer. Is there another way I can get this liability insurance? I get it for my bike as part of British cycling membership. Is there a similar thing for drones?
Sean, Could you ask the CAA to increase the 250 gram limit to 333 grams? Altering this figure wouldn't affect the drone manufacturers, as they'd have to comply with 250 gram worldwide limits. But it would allow the Mini 3 Pro etc to be fitted with the Plus battery, prop guards, lights etc and still be able to fly where it current can. 250 gram seems like a figure plucked from the air, because it's easily divisible from 1kg, so why not divide 1kg by 3 and get 333 grams? Another point, what about now adopting FCC "power" instead of CE, in the UK?
That’s a good point. Someone must have done some kinect energy calculations to come up with this weight category and then rounded down. I wonder what the actual weight was 🤔
This would also be a good thing for my DJI Spark paperweight. I got my id when it all came out, did all the training but decided quite quickly that the laws on it were devised to kill off the hobbyist fliers. It’s a real shame because, as a disabled flier, it got me out and about. ☹️
I used to be a keen amateur photographer, so bought a dji mavic drone which literally opened up my photographic horizons, but I have stopped using it due to the ever increasing rules brought in (due in part to the often unfounded reports of near misses etc. that the media in this country delight in reporting). However I recently considered getting a dji mini 2/3 until I then found out about the new VLOS definition, although not a model plane flyer I had joined the BMFA for the public liability insurance included in the membership (this insurance now seems worthless due to these new VLOS definitions). I can console myself with how much money I am going to save by not buying a new drone, not renewing my membership of the BMFA which is due for renewal and not renewing my CAA registration !!! I might go back to flying a kite with a camera hanging beneath it !!!🪁
Verging on insanity! If I am in a field in Scotland with nobody and nothing around and I take off with my DJI Mini 3 Pro on an all-too-common dreich afternoon I'd be lucky to see it even 50M straight above my head as the gray drone blends with the gray sky. If the gray sky is bright I won't even be able to see the lights although it appears that depending on the lights is also forbidden. Forget about visually knowing orientation etc. If strictly enforced this could very well be used to ban almost any hobbyist drone flight. I went through the CAA process with my 249g drone so that I could fly legally on my recent hiking holiday in Wales and eastern England but now it looks as though many of my flights there could now be considered criminal offenses.
Does anyone else think this all started with the "Gatwick" incident? There wasn't a single photo/video of the alleged "drone" blocking the flightpath - not even a dot. Anyone else suspect the government acted it all out as an excuse to bring in registration? You know what'll happen next: MI5 or someone will deliberately crash a few drones into people - probably with coincidental: "we were just filming another news item" camera crew in the area. I personally think if you can see the area the drone is in with your eyes (to check for aircraft) and you can see the telemetry which is far more accurate than visual estimates, you're good to go. If the telemetry fails, it's likely the drone had failed and is going to drop to the ground whether you can see its orientation or not.
Another great, clear, concise video Sean @Geeksvana. Well done. Similar to @MoiraOBrien 's comments earlier though, I cannot understand why telemetry isn't recognised & allowed by the CAA for checking flight data, direction, distances, & orientation. No one seems to have mentioned the difficulty of judging PERSPECTIVE, even when totally within VLOS. The only drone crash I have ever had (& it led to the loss of my original Mavic 2) was when circling a subject, absolutely fully within VLOS. I managed to fly into a tree, as I perceived the drone's distance from it incorrectly, using my own sight, even though I was probably within 50 meters of it, with a clear view. Had I been using the telemetry & camera view, IN ADDITION to maintaining VLOS, this would never have happened. I would imagine that if you were ever to be convicted, the telemetry data from your flight would be used against you, so if the data / info is good enough for a conviction, why is it not good enough to be used in flight? There's a place for permanent VLOS, & a place for using the screen & telemetry, but in my opinion, 99% of the time, the correct & safest flight is using a combination of the two.
Thanks Jeremy! Appreciate it. We have a lot of public consultations coming up and I think the debate on vlos and combining it with telemetry should be something we all raise for open discussion. There has to be a way to make it work.
Is getting ridiculous now 🤦🏼♂️ most of us got certain drones because we wanted to use them as tools to be creative with taking photographs and making videos. If it’s anymore restricted it’s pointless having them which is what they want really. I have the A1,A2,A3 just so I can take some creative shots. I haven’t flown in a year because of life pressures with my mum passing recently and when I came back to renew my flyer ID I found out I had to retake yet again another test to last me 5 years (and yet the one I took last year was supposed to last 5 years) so it seems they can change it all whenever they like. Control! control! control!
It would make sense wouldn't it? Simple way to inform people. You can sign up for the skywise drone updates, which is a service run by the CAA but I agree they should automatically email ID holders.
Or advised of the consultation in good time in order to respond. Nowadays the Govt "publishes" consultations on all manner of subjects but never advertises that consultation as they don't want your comments, they have already decided what they are gonna do.
Wow Sean I wonder how many sub 250 Rps can honestly say that they will stay within this legislation as anything further than about 300metersits a makes the mini’s hard to distinguish as a drone let alone its orientation especially on those overcast days soon we will have to tether our drones on a lead as part of regulation requirements to fly
I guess in couple of years we’ll probably need to get a university pilot degree to be able fly around the bush in the park and register the drone straightway on manufacturer/ government to be “activated” when purchased as a safety feature plus insurance of course and tax from using airspace 😂
Would that be such a bad thing though? I would not mind being able to say I am a trained pilot as opposed to not being able to say so. It is just mad credit to be honest.
Hey! I would agree with the 100metres, especially depending on the sky colour at the time. The rare time the screen doesn't work is why the regulator feels they cannot allow us to count on it. Sometimes it feels like technology has taken over regs.
Well that's it then with these laws they want to stop hobby flying apart from at clubs in huge open fields. I have just got into FPV and have spent loads on a new Iflight FPV drone, I won't be stopping flying FPV just be more careful where i fly. Line of sight makes flying a drone more like flying a kite now, taking all the fun out of the hobby. I always fly in line of sight before but up to 500m with flashing strobe lights. Sad day for recreational drone pilots. R.I.P 😥
You know my thoughts on this Sean, I’m glad there is a bit more clarity however I still think it should have been a hard limit and that’s then black and white. Low light flying with a couple of incredibly bright strobes will actually be the solution here for flying away from people but I feel these may just hinder those flying in built up areas as the use of strobes will take the mini series over 249g. In short the mini 2 just became a lot more attractive as you can add strobes and stay in 249g
Hey Gavin! Clarity is always a good thing. I think this is reasonably fair in that it gives us more flexibility depending on the drone type and conditions etc. A hard line would have ended up being very close and once we have one, they can always keep reducing it!
@@gmivisualsjason3729 i certainly do not want a hard limit by any stretch, I’m purely meaning it would stop all the discussion regarding vlos and especially the constant negativity on social media.
So they've effectively made the Mini Pro 3 not much better than a toy... Send it 50m up and most people north of 40 are going to have difficulty seeing proper orientation and direction at distances of 50m horizontal. Even more so against busy background or when trying to re-aquire after looking at the screen or otherwise distracted. Ok so you can add dayglo skins or powerful nav strobe LEDs that will certainly help but that will run you foul of the weight limits.
I've been doing my research, watching videos, reading articles and already to jump into a new hobby by trying to get the Mavic Mini 3 Pro in Boxing Day sales. Oh well!! After seeing this video, I guess it's time to look for a different new hobby.
In short the CAA just don't want any drones anywhere. They have tightened the rules so much there is hardly any point owning a friggin drone. Obviously these rules are broken every time, just look at all the videos posted on UA-cam or FB and most, don't even know where their drone is :) Good job we have people like you to explain all this crap from the CAA, I wonder if they will compensate me for my drone that I can only fly in my garden!!!!
Cant fly in my garden as its in the flight zone of two local airfields, doesnt seem to stop my idiot neighbour flying his and doing punch out vertical climbs bringing him well into the range of light aircraft.
Shaun, thanks for the heads up as usual👍 I'll be limiting mine to 3 foot as my glasses steam up and being blind as a bat is something I've considered🤣🤣🤣🤣 All these rule changes good that we all keep up with them, I feel for new hobby flyers that won't read up on the latest changes for, the CAA.
Hey Sean! As you say, probably overdue with the ever-shrinking models, but "sigh"..... Orientation? Apart from the onboard lights, you can't make that the orientation more than 20 - 40 metres away. So in truth, this becomes another rule that instead of reinforcing and building proper regulation and guidance, just becomes another rule that everyone will ignore and instead just be used to prosecute when something goes wrong. It seems a little stupid to discredit telemetry when that telemetry is displayed on the very unit used to control the aircraft, so it goes hand in hand! Why discount it? Pointless restriction and very disappointing....
Hey Ian! Ironically, the orientation part was already in the guidance from the CAA previously. I think the confusion came from the 500m guidance, subject to aircraft size. People read that and took it as all drones. I cannot see how effective enforcement will happen and as I said in the video, I personally only expect it to come up when someone is already in trouble etc. Unless we will be given sight tests at the side of the road 🤣. I think this will be one of the most important parts of the upcoming review. We need to change the thinking on how vlos is interpreted by government and the CAA. The current thinking doesn't match. Especially when it was their sub 250g push that moved us all to small drones 🤷♂️.
@@Geeksvana Just running my ageing brain over this. It sounds a bit silly. If a Police officer was to ask "Which way your drone is pointing"... A guess would be right 50% of the time. And then the other 50 percent of the time, How is an officer going to be able to prove which way it was facing. I think the same as you, there is no point in pursuing a conviction unless something bad has happened. Non of this makes any sense to me. The 500m was fine. Even if they reduced it to 250 you are dealing with something objective that can be seen on a screen. Which way is your drone pointing ?? Nonsense.
@@thewhitbyphotographer Have they placed a time limit on the pilots assessment, or restrictions on how visual orientation is confirmed? At any time it would take literally a second or two to nudge a stick and be able to give an accurate answer.. unless you really don't have vlos. It cant be continuous constant vlos otherwise it would be an effective ban on screens, which would leave DJI and co in tatters with no product range. I hate rule / gov overreach and this feels like it but are we making too much of this if establishing orientation only takes a few seconds?
A little bit difficult is to fly mini 2 or any small drone and keep in view. I fully understand to not fly miles away to the limits of the range but as far it is an open space, not city like mountains, lake, fields there should ease it a bit.
As someone who has been a secretary of many legislative committees in the UK, these committees always include many representatives of the manufacturers to which the legislation will concern. Who is representing our interests as UAV pilots? I can imagine a DJI rep is on the panels, but I can imagine we could do with someone like Geeksvana sitting on this panel to directly represent our interests.
Well that's just killed it for me. As a Mini 2 flyer I am often unable to see which way it is pointing when only 20m away due to the colour blending with the sky. I can tell at a glance from the controller but not from vlos observation. There's nothing wrong with my eyesight... I'm an HGV driver an have to have excellent eyesight to pass the medical. So I guess that it's time to quit the hobby.
Just stick a red and a green sticker on either side of the drone, and your problem is likely solved (who cares about aesthetics over practicality? We do not fly drones because they look pretty, but because of their functionality and output anyways). If you do not care about keeping under 250 grams, you can also stick a green and red LED strobe on the sides, and that way, you see it even more clearly.
Thanks for this update. I don’t feel this is realistic. I’ve been able to fly at a distance no problem, knowing where my drone is. I’ve always made a mission plan before flights in London and never had a problem. Drones are very reliable. The only issue I can see if an outside factor impacted the flight. I will carry on flying as I have been and improve where possible.
in Australia we have that you must be able to see the drone with your own eyes, so a dji mini 3 is about 200m max depending on the sky/ clouds on the day. i have a mavic 3 and i have a neon orange skin to help keep vlos
good job i just upgraded my mini to the mini pro 3 with its built in strobes then.. so i can see the green / red and know which orientation my drone is on by visual aid :) Good to see the CAA finally getting a detailed doc out...
I'm afraid that if I have read it correctly you cannot define orientation of the drone by lights alone, you MUST be able to see with your eyes the drones position without any kind of visual aid.
@@LRSTUDIOCREATIONS i never let drone out of my sight anyway when i fly.. i can always see it clearly.. its just the orientation i get confused with when i have been watching my screen and then look back at the drone
We had a speedboat loved wakeboarding, Windermere got a speed limit so sold it. We bought a 4 x 4 to go off-roading then they closed 90% of green lanes, I buy a drone, now this. Anyone know what hobbies I can do that won’t get ruined?
So upgrading your lights with far stronger lights seems like the way to go, super vivid green for the front, vivid red for the back. Superstrobes might do the trick as well.
I believe that there should be a new PDRA available to GVC holders to revert to the previous rules of 500m horizontal separation distance for VLOS. Especially considering the latest technologies we have in consumer/prosumer level UAS and the 'actions on' for telemetry lost which have been signed off by the CAA for previously certified GVC holders. These latest round of operational restriction adjustments (I do not disagree that some are completely necessary!) are becoming very restrictive. Queue thousands of GVC pilots preparing Operational Safety Cases to revert back to the older 500m separation distance to be reviewed by an already overburdened CAA...
I met you at Netelham Police HQ near Lincoln and the information you gave was sensational. Is the letter explained in this VLOS video available to download?
CAA don’t think telemetry on screen is adequate, but I bet they want us to use it so that we don’t fly over 120m, ok then, isn’t it. This means my new mini 3 pro fly more combo at £945 is now worthless. Thanks for that. But Sean@ Geeksvana seems ok with it. As long as he gets an exemption, so he can make money from his mapping, fk the recreation flyers.
Just another rule to stop our fun and enjoyment I’ve just upgraded to the mini 3 pro and at 100m it’s impossible to tell it’s flight path but the remote and the compass in the bottom left is a great help, but as others have said it’s as though they want to kill this enjoyment of ours.
I've already given up on the Committee Against Aviation CAA and now ignore any rules that aren't grounded in common sense. Whilst I don't go out of my way to fly illegally and I respect person and property I regard these laws as null and void. Frankly it's a mess and as most point out it is to ban hobbyists from the sky.
Clear as mud! Too many words confuse the RP and do little to define the visual lines of sight. When does suitable and acceptable change to unsuitable or unacceptable? The next step will be for a politician to decide what is reasonable and acceptable and put an actual distance limit on it. Does a national-wide speed limit of 30 kph sound familiar?
Pretty much what I've been doing. I reckon for the Mavic Mini that 300 metres is the absolute limit, but I would attach nav lights for that range (so no deliberate overflight of people), and I'd need landmarks to be able to reacquire it after looking at the controller screen, and it would have to be flown close to the horizon. Yellow specs essential too.
@@petesig93 I've put it to the test: I put three lights on it, red, green and white. I can see the general heading by which lights are visible: White strobe - away Red and green - towards Red - leftwards Green - rightwards At constant altitude above me, away looks like descent, towards looks like ascent - due to parallax. Without lights, about 150 metres - but by no means always: Fly too far above the horizon, and you can lose sight of it at about 75 metres without lights. Flying with trees as the background, as little as 30 metres. Into the sun, 10 metres. It is almost impossible then to reacquire it by eye alone, and many a ruzzkiy has been taught that acquisition of a drone above you by sound is very unreliable. Acquisition by eye is easy if you know where it is relative to some horizonal landmark - just to the right of the bushy-topped tree, or "below" the pink building on the distant hill, for example. BUT I did some tests with flying ○s 8s and □s around a row of five posts, standing five metres from the end if the row and close to the line - 10 metres apart and flying at eye level with distant trees in the background - to test the limits of my ability to judge distance. The foreground was plain grass. Although I can fly these figures very well when the drone is above me (as confirmed by the track on the map), it proved impossible to navigate them at eye level without extremely high risk of crashing the drone. I don't recommend anyone else to try it. Similarly, I tested my ability to describe the same figures in strong wind, upwind and across wind from me, at eye level. Impossible. Pilots need to be realistic about the limitations of VLOS. So does the CAA. The value of PoV should not be discounted, after all, it works for manned aircraft.
It’s not going to make that much difference the people that fly within the rules will still fly within the rules. Those that fly outside the rules aren’t going to change.
On the contrary, people were flying within the rules with a perfectly reasonable and safe interpretation which has now been outlawed. If the line you draw makes sensible flying against the rules then people will ignore it as unreasonable. And then why step over a little and not as much as you like? If they continue with nonsense like this I can see a lot more people start to totally ignore the rules and do what they want, just like the situation with escooters.
Have they placed a time limit on the pilots assessment, or restrictions on how visual orientation is confirmed? At any time it would take literally a second or two to nudge a stick and be able to give an accurate answer.. unless you really don't have vlos. It cant be continuous constant vlos otherwise it would be an effective ban on screens, which would leave DJI and co in tatters with no product range. I hate rule / gov overreach and this feels like it but are we making too much of this if establishing orientation only takes a few seconds?
Oh well, I was looking at getting a Mini 3 just after Christmas. Guess I won't bother now, seems over the top.. are many people being injured by these tiny drones?
Most of the time I use my screen. When flying around filming stuff. I could fly my mini 3 to around 100-150m visually, but beyond that, I would need to look at my remote screen so that I am filming the shot. But from my experience, I usually plan my flight so I know where my done will be even if I have lost sight of it. For example, If I am flying my Mini 3 pro over Natural Trust house I usually have to fly a couple of hundred meters. Also, I like to keep the drone high up over 100m as It's so quiet people don't ever none it there. I guess I will have to be more careful not to crash my drone when flying close to VLOS.
There is no way that any RP can determine orientation of a small drone using VLOS beyond a very short distance away, especially with something as small and light coloured as the DJI Mini 3 in a daylight sky. It should be a mixture of the VLOS and Telemetry together which is way safer and more reliable. What the authorities should be concentrating on is making sure every flyer does some basic studies and tests to make sure they know how to fly a drone safely rather than allowing just anyone to fly just because the drone is sub 250g. It's not expensive and takes virtually no time at all to get a FLYER ID - this should be a basic requirement for ALL pilots.
@@Historic-Flight-UK but RTH is not perceived by the CAA as a controlled flight when the operator doesn’t know its location. How can you avoid obstacles/air users if you don’t know the location of one of the objects. That’s the point of VLOS.
@@eyeup Good point but in reality how often does that ever happen? I've been flying over 2 years and it's never happened once, my flights remain safe because I use VLOS and Telemetry / Camera to ensure I always know position and orientation. It's surely safer to utilise all the technology in place rather than VLOS which for many people isnt always easy to judge distance and orientation - mixing both makes things safer IMO.
@@horizonairscapes so far, never. But a RA with the severity as catastrophic (bringing an aircraft down) but likelihood of extremely unlikely will still register as “review” rather than “low” on a standard heat map risk assessment as used by the CAA. So that’s the basis of it. As long as folk understand that, then the risks they take are their own...it’s big boy pants time. I just hate people doing stuff without understanding the basis of the risks.
@@eyeup And being A2 CofC certified, I am fully aware of the risks and how to assess them and manage situations that may or may not arise. My original point was that it's highly unlikely any RP can know orientation at all times without the use of Telemetry unless they remain within a very close distance and even then many will find it hard to judge a true distance, so using both VLOS and Telemetry is, in my humble opinion, a safer way to fly. The technology available on these drones is way better than human judgement in most cases so it should be used to assist VLOS.
The CAA can introduce whatever new rules they want, but I question first of all how many drone pilots are actually going to be aware of them (how many even have a Flyer/Operator ID or know that they need one, the other or both?), and even if they are aware of them, how many are going to observe them? Had I not stumbled across this video this evening I would remain blissfully unaware of the VLOS update, whether or not the onus is on me to remain fully up to date - y'know, sometimes life is full and keeping my car insurance up to date is hassle enough, checking CAA legislation in case it's been updated probably isn't going to happen very often.
How will this effect the auditors channels? Most of them count on drone footage as part of there video and also to get a reaction. Now that they have to be able to not only see it, but actully be able to see its orientation, they won't be getting as many interesting videos
I can’t see it making much difference. Most police stations are fairly small, so they’d never need to go beyond VLOS. Those flying over warehouses would have more of an issue, but it’s still doable to keep oriented if you fly a simple flight path.
I think we need to stop sitting on the fence and start saying to these authorities stop play with the rules.This continued altering will harm the hobby and not help it.Please Sean if you have any clout with the CAA start saying ''enough is enough''.And keep reminding them our hobby is one of the safest in the world.
All this will do will make less people follow the rules, I fly sensibly, but how are we supposed to work out orientation at even just 150mtrs? Whereas the ones who don’t care about the drone code will continue, like the DJI phantom flyer that can often be seen flying over my town way beyond visual line of sight
It’s like having a car that can do more than 70mph and don’t know any current models that can’t, even some small drones can still be in radio contact at 5 miles or more.
A radical question: Don't the VLOS rules everywhere impose much stricter requirements on UAV's than there are on crewed aircraft? And is this really sensible and warranted in any way? We have cameras that offer a good view to the front (where most crewed aircraft pilots are also looking), and as long as we don't fly backward or sideways, that should pretty much make sure we see every possible obstacle or other aircraft. On top of that, we have a maximum altitude restriction that also separates UAV's from crewed aircraft, and we have no fly zones that also make things safe. The whole VLOS mindset seems to stem from RC aicraft that do not have a camera, where it is kind of logical that you wouldn't want it to be beyond your VLOS. Somehow, drones inherited that rule. And it strikes me as completely implausible that this should actually make the skies safer in any significant way, while greatly restricting usefulness of drones despite the technology being able to support so much more.
The regulation is also open to disagreement with RP on whether something is LOS or not. Regulations need to be proportionate to the risk and reasonable this AMC is not.
I bought a secondhand drone the other week and haven’t even flown it yet, there are so many rules and regulations that I don’t know where to start. I bought a spark so read that I couldn’t fly within 150m of a house, then I was told I could fly up to 30m but would have to join fpvuk. Did that, now I’m not even convinced if that’s true. So confused with this whole Drone thing.
Hey Neil! As the Spark is over 250g, you do not get a lot of the freedom of sub 250g. That means flying in the A3 subcategory category 150m from residential, etc with 50m from uninvolved people. You can take the A2 CofC, which would give you a lot of freedom with the Spark as you can fly sub 500g in the A1 sub category, close to people. This includes congested areas with no separation from uninvolved people, just no intentional flight over people. The FPVUK membership gives you access to the Article 16 Authorisation. This allows you to fly drones in areas primarily used for leisure. So parks, beaches etc. It reduces the separation from 50m to 30m, (15m when taking off with further mitigation), and it can be used in congested areas but only in the volume of airspace of the park etc. Personally, I would find a cheap A2 CofC course and take that. Then you will have almost the same freedoms as sub 250g drones with the DJI Spark.
@@Geeksvana thanks for taking the time to reply. I read about the A2 CofC and was told I wouldn’t need it if joining the FPVuk. Guess it comes down to where I want to fly really. As a total beginner open fields are probably my best option until familiar with flying. There are open fields near me but working resedential areas and some with a few houses scattered so thought the FPV would allow me a little more freedom until I’m not too much of a “beginner” I’ll have a look into the course though. Thanks again.
This seems to me, to be based on risks involved with automated 'delivery drones' rather than general safety issues, as there have been zero incidents, (that I'm aware of), that would initiate such changes to the regulations.. 🤷🏻♂️
So, basically put, you're relegated to flying within 50 or so metres of yourself, which essentially removes half of the reason you'd fly GPS drone, you know, to get good shots in cool areas... What I hope will happen here is that the rule will just be so widely NOT adhered to by flyers (with next-to-zero or zero incidents) to such a point that the rules will just be scrapped. A victimless crime, along with stupid rules surround such 'crime' is a recipe for people to just ignore the rules. This stuff is just madness. What do these rule makers think they are 'fixing' with these rules? This is just so frustrating. Thanks for your continued efforts Sean.
So imagine you want to take a picture or video, do you a, break the VLOS and fly it where you can't see because of the sun needs to be behind the drone to light the subject area up or b, have a crappy video/picture because of sun glare in it... The m2/3 can get lost pretty quickly when trying to get the best images on the screen if you are like 200ft away and 350ft high, it's not bad if it's quiet area you can pic out the buzzing but if you're in a loud environment like next to a road etc you may not be able to hear the buzz
Is there any point buying a drone as a hobbyist? It seems like you'll only be able to fly it within a few feet of yourself in your own back garden....if your back garden is in the middle of an empty field
It sounds like very little, if any change to me. The 500m was only an advisory anyway and assumed that VLOS meant so that you could see the orientation of the drone to be able to keep control in an emergency, so no real difference. It would be great to be able to fly without VLOS, especially with the tech on drones nowadays, is there a way to legally do this? It would be amazing to set off and fly the drone 4 miles away, do you think that this will ever happen in the UK? Are there any countries that this is allowed? (If not, why can DJI drones fly this far away?)
To be honest, this is pretty much how I interpreted the original guidance. If you can't see the drone orientation and you lose video/telemetry feed, then things can go south pretty quickly!
I feel the CCA are changing laws too quickly and unnecessarily for recreational pilots to keep up, which will be the bulk of fliers in the UK. After spending hours studying and doing the A2 CoC and GVC they are changing laws at the drop of the hat. Have they had events where a mini has taken a helicopter down 200m from the remote pilot? Or even a near miss?
The definition of vlos from the CAA already included the requirement to be able to see the orientation of the drone. However, the inclusion of a 500m general advice note was included prior to the sub 250g drone became popular. This in itself created a lot of confusion even though the CAA did state it depended on the size of the drone being flown. This new legal definition of vlos is not a law change but a refinement of advice already in place. It is not as if you were able to fly bvlos with a Mini drone prior to this. This was put through public consultation but did not receive the level of responses that other more popular consultations such as the legacy extension gained. Sadly, therefore, this clarification was always coming. As much as anyone might not agree with it.
So moving from a defined and provable definition of limit, to one open to interpretation and argument, of which the only relevant outcome is ultimately decided by a judge... Same with motoring where lack of proper signage per regulations is no longer a defence as long as there's enough information for "a careful and competent motorist" to understand.
So glad I found your channel 👍. I'm thinking of gerting a "drone" soon (likely a DJI Mini 2) but I want to do my homework first. Obviously, reading reviews etc for the device, but probably (and more importantly) the rules and legal requirements for it's use. Looking at UA-cam, depending on where the drone is being used there seems to be an awful lot of conflict with public, security staff and police etc and this has actually prevented me making my purchase thus far. For a lot of UA-cam content I can see that "common sense" (an old and maybe unacceptable term these days) would have that the drone pilot should expect to be challenged. I will certainly make sure that I carry with me a copy of the necessary guidance and CAA legislation at all times.
A lot of people calling Auditors. But they will one the ones to watch in the coming weeks to see how enforceable this is. Be interesting to see how it all pans out.
Hi new subscriber. Can you please confirm that if I buy a done under 250g .all I have to do is register the done not take a test . I am getting very confused with the new CAA regulations and regulations.kind regards Eugene
Hey Eugene! Welcome to drones! You have correct. For sub 250g drones in the UK you only need an Operator ID and display it on the drone. The Flyer ID is nor required, (but it is free and useful info). Good luck and thanks for the sub!
If you blink then you are not vlos, if you look around at your surrounding area to make sure it's safe are you not vlos? 🤷 do you get more flexibility with a drone in headless mode as you know it's front is away from you
I must say as a UAV pilot since the start of all this that I believe we as drone pilots do have to be wholly responsible for our aircraft and its operation. We should demonstrate dual redundancy in our batteries(this has saved me more than once) and propulsion redundancy. When you lose one motor as I have in the past, you are then fully reliant on your skills as a pilot, to land the aircraft safely. My thoughts on using telemetry to give accurate information are very limited as I have experienced telemetry failure many times. Even when using backup telemetry. I believe the CAA are correct in making us demonstrate safe operation. These UAVs are extremely safe when operated according to very strict rules and regulations. I have seen drones fly out of control and nearly kill people on a few occasions, and not just in this country. Most accidents are caused by pilot error. If you are at one with your aircraft, do regular testing and work within the rules of your operations manual you are at least acting in the safest possible way.
So does this mean flyers of large drones now have to fly in such a way that they can spot a Mini about to hit their drone? This would suggest we are all now restricted to 200-300m tops?
One orher point..they keep changing all the shit.but they do not write or email me with the crap.even tho i paid them to register and have all the needed "cert"
i'm getting really tired of new revisions and restrictions coming in. i can honestly say i will just continue to fly a far if it's imperative to get the shot i need and use my controller screen to look around if its a speck in the sky or not even visible. there's nothing wrong with the old method and this new rule just isn't practical in some environments. i will always keep it safe but the nanny state can jog on here. imagine having to do this out in the countryside with nothing but trees and fields so zero risk to anything or anyone, what a joke.
Hey denaco! The old method did not allow you to fly your drone beyond visual line of sight? This change only brings a legal definition of VLOS.
@@Geeksvana of course buddy...just that the mini 3 is so damn small i can lose it easily now and then in twilight times etc. even been just 200-250 meters out ive lost sight when i glance back up and had to focus very hard to spot it again.
I agree. With the right conditions the Mini 3 is gone very quickly for me.
I agree with this comment 100%. 👍🏽
@@denaco if you wear sunglasses you can still see the drone as it helps by preventing the brightness from effecting your vision.
I have been flying model aircraft since the age of 12, I am now aged 85 & still flying model aircraft & now, drones. I do not need some third party telling me how I can safely fly my drone, I already know. I shall continue as before.
This could push people who do fly with due care and attention into losing respect for the CAA.
@@Iridiumwins the problem is the availability of drones now. Many people buy drones and don’t know there are laws to do with their use, they just buy them and fly them wherever they feel like including residential areas and over crowds.
They don’t think about safety at all.
@@Iridiumwins that is not a good idea. That would maybe work with DJI drones but what about all the other brands? Should we just require every drone to connect to the CAA and check you have a valid ID? What happens to home built drones then or kits or common fpv drones? How would they comply with those rules?
What you are suggesting would make drones a lot harder for people to use, if not impossible outside of using off the shelf drones like DJI ones. It would be easy enough to get your permit and input it into a drone designed for it but what about all other drones? Would all older drones suddenly be illegal to fly since they don’t have that feature?
About the only thing they can do is to increase awareness and make sure that everyone buying a drone knows they need to take the test and get a permit.
Are the CAA actually trying to reduce accidents or are they just making rules for the sake of it?
@@Iridiumwins you haven’t bothered to pay whatever it is to renew? It isn’t much and you don’t need to retake any tests or anything.
But it’s law mate. You don’t over power the law. But I really understand you. It’s getting frustrating with the new laws
As I've said from day 1 Sean, when the requirement to register and the whole DMARES kerfuffle was first introduced, I stated the rules would get even more restrictive, over regulating and overbearing.
I was firmly against going down this route because I've seen it all before in other areas concerning ever increasing, over regulatory restrictions.
We've gone from a very basic set of common sense drone code rules that were perfectly effective, fair and safe.
Where the VLOS guideline was purely to keep your drone in visual sight.
Then later they changed all the rules and specified 500m as the 'effective' VLOS range, whatever the size of your drone.
Obviously a larger drone you could see much further out and a smaller one far less, there are a multitude of variations and other factors which affect VLOS, such as sky colour, cloud cover, ambient light, sun strength, direction of sun light, colour of drone, size and shape of drone etc etc
There is no 'one size' fits all.
My definition of VLOS has always been the furthest point I can see with my own eyes unaided, so if I can see a church steeple on the horizon with nothing in between, that's my effective visual line of sight in that area.
That church steeple could be 3km away but I can still see it and there is nothing between me and that steeple as it is in my clear unobstructed view.
We've had so many rule changes since, I think this is causing much confusion and also confusing police a lot.
I've seen many interactions online between a drone pilot and police who are referring to some older CAA drone related rules they've just googled, yet the pilot is flying perfectly legally according to a later set of rules.
Each time they change the rules it creates another level of confusion.
These latest rule changes mean flying a small mini drone sub 250g much further than 80-100m is pretty much not feasible with average eyesight⚠️🤔😲
and so it will go on.....and on.....and on......until none of us can fly anything, where even throwing a stick in the park without the appropriate training and correct license, insurance, permission from the land owner etc is illegal.
Luckily I have the eyesight of a hawk and can count the hairs on a gnats back at a 1000ft, so seeing my Mavic Mini out to 1000m or more and it's orientation is perfectly fine.
I'm all for sensible rules as long as they are fully based on risk assessment and are shown to improve safety, as we do all the time with road traffic regulations etc
Making the rules ever more restrictive just for the sake of it, without improving safety is just pointless in my opinion.
Have to agree with you, I can only see my Mini 2 drone and its orientation at most up to 50m forward and maybe 120m if directly overhead. I agree that if we can see it very far ahead and also to the side to prevent helicopters etc flying sideways into us that should be sufficient I.E open fields. Unfortunately, some UA-camrs delight in flying long distances in a less-than-safe manner, I have seen some fly over trees, losing the loss of sight and wondering why they started to get bad video and connection. People like this do not help the hobby. I do not think that the distance between being able to see the orientation of a Mini 2 and a much larger drone will make much difference to VLOS as in reality the visibility of the orientation will be virtually the same after a very short distance without being able to use telemetry as a guide. Pilots can use it why can't we :)
Yup...quite so !!
@@woodydroneson Like I mentioned it's a deliberate attempt to restrict and stifle the hobby, for zero improvement in safety!
So manned aircraft can use their instruments and telemetry but UAV pilots cannot?🤔😳
What's that all about?
Surely you fly a UAV with a combination of visual line of sight AND using the telemetry and on screen FPV view.
Not sure about anyone else but I fly my drone using that method perfectly safety.
If I can't see my drones orientation by visual, I check my onscreen view to see where I'm pointing and also keep a constant check on my drones position, altitude and other critical data like battery level etc
Surely if we just fly VLOS only and don't take our eyes off our drones, it's difficult to triangulate from ground level, where it is in relation to landmarks around it, while it's up in the air.
The whole point of flying my drone is it's an extention of my visual awareness of the area from it's current position and cameras perspective.
I agree flying long distances well beyond a tree line well out of VLOS, is a very dangerous and stupid thing to do but flying out 1000m in a wide open area with no obstructions, obstacles or dangers, where I can clearly see for 3km or more into the distance, I don't see an issue, I can hear any approaching aircraft long before I see them anyway, plus I'm flying at like 35m altitude, if an aircraft is flying that low, they have a lot more to worry about than crashing into my drone! 😲⚠️😳
It’s all bollo##! So, all these remote drones i.e. Amazon and all the other remote companies thats gonna do long distance deliveries way out of VLOS will they get “permission” from the CAA? Of course they will! The CAA are a lot of pratts!!!!🤬🤬🤬🤬 Pisses me off we have to suffer because of ‘their’ interpretation of our enjoyment! Tossers!🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬😡 just want to shut down everybody’s enjoyment in our hobby!
Hawk eye you are missing the point. Technically almost every drone flight could be deemed in breach of regulations. Looking down at the controller, reading the telemetry,,, well at those points your drone is BVLOS. It's like telling car drivers not to look at their speedometer!
It looks like the authorities are edging towards no-small nano drones. Camera drone flights above your head only. Commercial inspections of things like the underneath of a bridge - impossible unless you can get people without visual aids to inspect the underside of the bridge without a drone. No sending a drone to save lives in the water at sea, no sending a drone down a tunnel to inspect a mine-collapse without sending a human into the danger area.
It all makes perfect sense. This is Great Britain, a forward thinking, liberal country embracing technology and remaining competitive on the world stage.
I bought a fully manual drone (no camera, no GPS, no sensors, no hovering, etc) about 10ish years ago. I stuck my GoPro to it and vaguely pointed it in the direction I wanted to capture whilst trying to keep it from crashing, now those drones were dangerous and as a result I barely flew it. But I recently bought a Mini 3 Pro and it's like going from your first time on a unicycle to an experienced trike handler!
Given the other much more real dangers we have in this country that are killing or injuring people right now, we seem to be going away over the top with these drone laws given how safe modern drones are in responsible people's handles.
IMO, the law should be something like your drone has to comply with this specification: it can hover in one spot unaided, it has a GPS active at all times, up-to-date geo fencing, has a reliable return to home function, you are full control of the drone at all times with strong video signal being fed back to your controller and you do not fly recklessly or endanger people or animals. I would keep the Flyer and Operator ID rules we have and putting your ID on the drone, I might even say you need insurance too. So instead of the Operator ID being £10 it's maybe £20 and this is also a basic public liability insurance.
But anyway, my point is there are so many more dangerous things out there than small, light, easy to fly drones which are generally flown very carefully and sensibly not least because they are so damn expensive these days!
Just to let you know if you’re unaware that you aren’t required to have a flyer ID with a sub 250 drone and as you mentioned having the mini 3 pro, you lucky bugger (it’s definitely on my shopping list)
I currently have the mini 2 and the footage just from that is outstanding alone. Both these drones obviously fit into that category, so no flyer ID required … yet!! Happy flying.
US pilot here checking in on the state of drone flight across the Atlantic.
As a life long vocal performer, I must acknowledge the excellence of your speaking voice.
It's a pleasure to hear you speak with such deliberation while remaining anchored to understanding. Ie reading or quoting in a manner demonstrating understanding of the intent of the content.
✌️💚
When drones first became available, I made many interesting videos that were unique and fun. I invested a vast amount of money.
I knew that laws would become far more restrictive and knew that my new amazing hobby would one day, become impossible.
I haven't flown for over a year now and will never be flying a drone again. As a law-abiding citizen (to the letter), new restrictions make it all but impossible to use a drone other than a few feet in front of you.
If you take off, fly away into the sky then look down at the camera display, it can take a considerable period of time to relocate the drone 'live' in the sky again - even if it is not far away, If you follow it the whole time, then it is fairly easy but the whole point is to use it to film things and therefore to look at the screen.
For a single person RP, I fail to see how you can comply with the new VLOS rules and use the device for any meaningful purpose. It is also VERY subjective for a law enforcement operative or member of public to prove your compliance or not.
Future legislation can only make things more restrictive. Couple this with confusion amongst people and police as to the existing rules and general bad feeling towards drones by the public, annual license costs and the potential for new rules to make expensive equipment obsolete and unsaleable in the future... there simply isn't any fun or incentive any more.
Have you considered ar glasses - something like the nreal airs - you can look through the glasses at your drone and your screen is in your eyeline at the same time.
I won't abide by laws that is an obvious overstretch of legislative power as well as non-sensical.
@@reecechadwick8504 so you’re probably the sort of bloke that uses his phone behind the wheel and takes out motorcycles with sad regularity…
Nice to see your selfishness writ large for everyone to see
same as anything here in the uk it will get Taxed and charged until the rules are too strict to even do your chosen hobby.
Be it motocross, Jet skiing, sailing, motorsports, mountain biking in local wooded area, rideing any type of electric scooter....ETC ETC.
The uk is no longer a fun place be or live....
No hobbys apart from drinking.....all they want is workers who are monkeys.
Those bureaucrats are only encouraging civil disobedience on a wide scale!
I would love to see the CAA stats on accidents of any significant consequence with sub 250g drones caused be being BVLOS. I expect it is miniscule
There’s no accidents involving
@@SnaxMuppet because even if one fell on your head it would bounce off. Can you tell me of a single incident reported anywhere? Nope.
@@SnaxMuppet 2018 Leicester helicopter crash
2013 Vauxhall helicopter crash
2013 Farage Plane crash
3 recent ones off the top of my head, not a single aircraft brought down by a drone worldwide ever
@@SnaxMuppet aren't there a lot more birds than drones? Like thousands of times more? By the instances of bird strike you sometimes hear of they are way more likely to get in the path of an aircraft and fly at higher altitudes. If we applied the logic of zero risk you appear to advocate we'd ground all aircraft due to the risk of birds, or we'd ground all the birds.. also a drone pilot will spot a plane or helicopter easily and is almost never going to be at the same altitude. Even a psycho drone enthusiast would avoid any likelihood of being anywhere near a plane or helicopter. To me this is the confusion of anticipating a highly unlikely scenario and trying to remove ALL risk, like that's possible. If we took that approach with cars, or bikes or ironing boards we'd ban all of them. If alcohol was reviewed for introduction in the modern day it wouldn't be legalised. I'm sure the laws will get more restrictive over time as that's what bureaucracy does. At what point would you find it too restrictive or would you just shrug your shoulders and say, 'well, it's a rule now and rules must be followed"?
@@SnaxMuppet ok thanks for clarifying. I would argue though that airports already are restricted for drone use so that removes that risk. And VLOS that includes drone orientation is too prohibitive. For a mini drone that is literally a few metres visually. Given you can understand orientation on display at a glance this deems that specific requirement unreasonable in my eyes. It's this creep of criteria that I object to. I personally keep line of sight and rely on that just as good practise. However orientation is far better gauged on screen even at relatively close proximity as your inputs correspond to what you are seeing. Taken literally these regulations are not clear either. How do you gauge a distance that allows for judging orientation? What if any time can be taken looking at the display? Wouldn't this infringe on a person knowing if they can still judge orientation? I'd actually prefer having to be certified more stringently and pass free to take exams then adhere to incoherent and vague rules.
This is exactly how it starts. Bring in legislation first, fairly relaxed so that everyone thinks "oh, that's not too bad", and then, over a period of time gradually alter and tighten the previous regulation until we drone pilots are regulated out of the sky altogether (which I believe IS the ultimate goal).
When you want to boil a frog, you don't drop it straight into a pan of boiling water, you put it into a pot of cold water, then gradually bring it to the boil until it's too late for the frog! That's how it works.
Bingo! Sadly, being British one learns this
@@SnaxMuppet Why would the authorities want to remove drones altogether? Because they don't make the authorities any money. The CAA would be better off if drones didn't exist, there is no benefit to them.
Can't say I've boiled many frogs so I'll have to take your word for it
@@SnaxMuppet You obviously aren't aware, so I will spell it out. Big corporations like Amazon etc have made it clear THEY want the lower airspace for their delivery drones. It has been reported on many times, and are prepared to throw BIG money at the CAA to make sure this happens, and hobby drones would be a major obstacle to this business plan.
@@MianCowell Making way for Amazon drones, bet there will be some money involved there.
Time to sell my mini 2 now, no fun in the honey anymore , I’ve always complied with all the rules but it’s getting very hard to follow and basically left feeling as if your doing something illegal
I rely entirely on the camera and telemetry on my drone for positional awareness which is far more accurate than any visual - plus being aware at all times of the surroundings and any other aircraft in the vicinity - by which I mean that if a manned aircraft appears nearby I immediately drop to below the tree/building line, or land completely if appropriate. I fail to understand why this capability is not recognized by the CAA. After all, manned aircraft are permitted to follow IFR rules once appropriately trained.
UPDATE March 23rd
Following all the comments to my original post, for which I thank you all, I must add that I never fly BVLOS. Irrespective of using telemetry most of the time I always keep my drone in visual line of sight. This doesn’t not mean that I can actually see the drone (it is after all a DJI Mini 3 Pro, though it does now have reflective strips attached which help a lot) but I can see (and hear) all of the area around the drone. If a manned aircraft came into the airspace I would first of all HEAR it from afar, and then see it visually by which time it will have returned to home and landed. This is even more so with a helicopter which, in my experience, can be heard from a considerable distance away, especially when lower to the ground. At the end of the day, safety is paramount - but there is no need to go to extremes, especially with a sub 250 drone. Note that in over 10 years of drone flying, there has been no recorded death from the recreational use of multi rotor drones. Over regulation is killing the hobby. (Thanks to Xjet for those last two sentences!)
Moira - you are right that the camera and telemetry give more accurate and reliable data than anything visual - if we all rely purely on VLOS fot that then its so much less safe.
This entirely... So long as you have a clear unobstructed view of the airspace in which you are flying... And thereby anything else entering into it, using the built in suite of safety features and visual tools is far far safer than trying to ascertain the orientation of a near symmetrical and relatively tiny object zipping around in 3D open space at speeds of 40mph that has no fixed points of reference within that space.
Well said, how would a pilot of a small aircraft know his position or height without some form of telemetry?
You are absolutely correct, but I will go ahead and tell you that in the aviation world having only one set of sensors is not sufficient for instrument flight rules. IFR certification is expensive, too. Expensive-expensive. It took a long time, quite a long time, before there were any GPS units that were rated for instrument flight. They were easier to use and showed more information than the legacy navigation aids, but it takes a long time for laws to catch up with technology. People flying visual rules could use GPS all day but if you flew Instrument rules the GPS unit wasn't included. Sure you could still use it for info, but you couldn't base your flight around the fact that you had a GPS. There had to be older, certified navigation aids as well.
@@Seerwealth I fail to understand your question.
So basically they changed VLOS from about 500m to about 50m.
Exactly, absolutely trash.
Well if you can see a dji mini from 500m I hope your in the special forces #sniper eye
The law has always been that you have to see the drone clearly so many people have not understood the meaning if vlos its in the wording
VISUAL LOSS thats the key part visual separation must be maintained more legislation will come because of idiots making silly judgement calls and making the hobby have a negative impact on the uninvolved public soon it will be just as it was before when in commercial use
We have 65+Yr old people and younger flying well outside of the law and hate me for not praising there stupidity but it just going to soon ruin it for everyone
Such a shame 😞
Unless you have a DJI Avata and you're now effectively down to around 30m at most. 🤔😲⚠️
@@pdtech4524 it's always been limited to visual line of sight though for most the uav is spec in the distance and they view that as fine.... its not
Even at 30m I don’t think it would be to the letter of the law….. try 10m…. Just think how far away an old fashioned rc heli pilot would be flying away from controller ! Rc planes a little further, but not much. The caa seems to forget the main reason for drones these days… to capture imagery
Having airspace awareness is far more important. As aircraft fly at 80kts at the very least
The caa seem to have lost the plot !
It would help if Manufacturers made the OEM strobes a bit brighter, Not sure why you cannot use the telemetry as a confirmation of direction though. Don't Understand the collision with other aircraft unless it is another drone as manned aircraft should be above the 120m, Whats the problem with hitting the ground in the middle of nowhere ?
Great news for me. I have fantastic vision and can clearly see my drone and it’s orientation at 1000 meters away. Thank you CAA for more super guidance and support to this industry.
Yeah my eyes work great too from inside the goggles while I fly it!
yep agree , my eyes can see my drones orientation at 1000m 👍👍👍
So nothing has changed then, you still have to keep it in sight. And if they use this ‘new’ law after a crash, how are they going to prove whether or not you could see the drone? I always keep it in VLOS so nothing has changed.
@@Mart.F it got better for the ones that can see further
@@Mart.F exactly. That’s what makes it complete nonsense. How do they know what a person can see and can’t see! I’m amazed that they seem to be trying to just make things more confusing for people to fly.
I’ve literally just purchased a mini 3 pro today and seen your video pop up in my feed. Looks like I came into the hobby at the wrong time
Please do remember that this is the CAA compliance. The legislation itself says you must keep drone in sight and be able to avoid collisions. It is still a great hobby and you purchased a great drone.
So if you have decent strobes red and green it's safe to fly at 1000m at night as you will be able to tell the orientation that's a good thing but I think in daylight it will be a lot harder to tell the orientation
Thanks for the video Sean. But, I'll be ignoring the new rule about VLoS.
It seems very unnecessary when the drone is packed with safety features.
(Well that's my polite response).
The regulations themselves haven't changed. We just have legal definitions now for many parts of the operation. The safety features of a drone will not stop issues when flown out of sight.
@@Geeksvana neither will following the regulations as written,.
@@Geeksvana what issues with a sub 250 drone? I wanna see some proof a mini 2/3 could seriously cause any damage at all to a chopper/glider let alone loss of life
@@testpilotian3188 Which makes even more reason not to fly it out of line of sight...
@@gmivisualsjason3729 Even a Mini 2 can cause harm/injury when falling out of the sky. It can cause distraction to motorists. If it becomes in conflict with other aircraft, they will need to stop their flight - including air ambulances and fire support drones. There are good reasons why they do not permit BVLOS flights. This is something even Bruce xjet supports and has done so on Geeksvana!
For commercial survey work it's really important to be able to fly 500m away to get a decent survey area in a flight e.g. forestry or farmland, often the uav is pretty small at that distance. These new rules will mean having to transition to bvlos to make surveying practical.
Unless you pay and do a license course that's what its all about
.
@@crispinengineer this new interpretation/clarification applies to anyone that already has certifications as those are 99.9% reliant on VLOS operations
@@amwphotos for now
@@amwphotos I read it the same way you and as a commercial pilot this is just another way for the CAA to screw over responsible pilots. Oh and pretty much outlaw FPV in the UK.
I bet the people who use drones to survey roofs for damage and leaks will be pleased they now have to do it from on the roof itself 😂
Was looking for further clarification of CAA's take on VLOS, this was perfect. Thank you! 😊👍
I hope they use these rules when they use predator drones overseas. I wanna see the operator walking following it to make sure it’s flown safely.
I've recently purchased my first drone, a DJI Mini 3 Pro. I'm very pleased with it, but find this announcement very disappointing.
Thank you so much to your channel. It's been a very useful resource to make sure I keep everything legal and above board.
I do have one question though. How do I go about getting third party liability insurance? I'm not interested in full insurance for the drone but that is all companies seem to offer. Is there another way I can get this liability insurance? I get it for my bike as part of British cycling membership. Is there a similar thing for drones?
Sean, Could you ask the CAA to increase the 250 gram limit to 333 grams? Altering this figure wouldn't affect the drone manufacturers, as they'd have to comply with 250 gram worldwide limits. But it would allow the Mini 3 Pro etc to be fitted with the Plus battery, prop guards, lights etc and still be able to fly where it current can. 250 gram seems like a figure plucked from the air, because it's easily divisible from 1kg, so why not divide 1kg by 3 and get 333 grams?
Another point, what about now adopting FCC "power" instead of CE, in the UK?
That’s a good point. Someone must have done some kinect energy calculations to come up with this weight category and then rounded down. I wonder what the actual weight was 🤔
This would also be a good thing for my DJI Spark paperweight.
I got my id when it all came out, did all the training but decided quite quickly that the laws on it were devised to kill off the hobbyist fliers.
It’s a real shame because, as a disabled flier, it got me out and about.
☹️
I used to be a keen amateur photographer, so bought a dji mavic drone which literally opened up my photographic horizons, but I have stopped using it due to the ever increasing rules brought in (due in part to the often unfounded reports of near misses etc. that the media in this country delight in reporting).
However I recently considered getting a dji mini 2/3 until I then found out about the new VLOS definition, although not a model plane flyer I had joined the BMFA for the public liability insurance included in the membership (this insurance now seems worthless due to these new VLOS definitions).
I can console myself with how much money I am going to save by not buying a new drone, not renewing my membership of the BMFA which is due for renewal and not renewing my CAA registration !!! I might go back to flying a kite with a camera hanging beneath it !!!🪁
Considering most drones are symmetrical it's going to be hard to identify etc. Not like a rc plane with a decent shape to reference from....
Verging on insanity! If I am in a field in Scotland with nobody and nothing around and I take off with my DJI Mini 3 Pro on an all-too-common dreich afternoon I'd be lucky to see it even 50M straight above my head as the gray drone blends with the gray sky. If the gray sky is bright I won't even be able to see the lights although it appears that depending on the lights is also forbidden. Forget about visually knowing orientation etc. If strictly enforced this could very well be used to ban almost any hobbyist drone flight. I went through the CAA process with my 249g drone so that I could fly legally on my recent hiking holiday in Wales and eastern England but now it looks as though many of my flights there could now be considered criminal offenses.
Exactly,im usually flying over the sea and theres nothing around for miles.Geeksvana is too compliant with them imposing harder rules on us.
Will this apply to the Police drones? (or will they have their own rules as usual).
Does anyone else think this all started with the "Gatwick" incident? There wasn't a single photo/video of the alleged "drone" blocking the flightpath - not even a dot. Anyone else suspect the government acted it all out as an excuse to bring in registration? You know what'll happen next: MI5 or someone will deliberately crash a few drones into people - probably with coincidental: "we were just filming another news item" camera crew in the area. I personally think if you can see the area the drone is in with your eyes (to check for aircraft) and you can see the telemetry which is far more accurate than visual estimates, you're good to go. If the telemetry fails, it's likely the drone had failed and is going to drop to the ground whether you can see its orientation or not.
Another great, clear, concise video Sean @Geeksvana. Well done. Similar to @MoiraOBrien 's comments earlier though, I cannot understand why telemetry isn't recognised & allowed by the CAA for checking flight data, direction, distances, & orientation. No one seems to have mentioned the difficulty of judging PERSPECTIVE, even when totally within VLOS. The only drone crash I have ever had (& it led to the loss of my original Mavic 2) was when circling a subject, absolutely fully within VLOS. I managed to fly into a tree, as I perceived the drone's distance from it incorrectly, using my own sight, even though I was probably within 50 meters of it, with a clear view. Had I been using the telemetry & camera view, IN ADDITION to maintaining VLOS, this would never have happened. I would imagine that if you were ever to be convicted, the telemetry data from your flight would be used against you, so if the data / info is good enough for a conviction, why is it not good enough to be used in flight? There's a place for permanent VLOS, & a place for using the screen & telemetry, but in my opinion, 99% of the time, the correct & safest flight is using a combination of the two.
Thanks Jeremy! Appreciate it. We have a lot of public consultations coming up and I think the debate on vlos and combining it with telemetry should be something we all raise for open discussion. There has to be a way to make it work.
@@Geeksvana Well said Sean!
Excellent comment!!
It's effectively a soft ban.
@@JWS1968 Very true!
Can't wait for what they have to say about flying fpv!!!
So much wisdom they have!!!!
There are no changes to guidance on FPV that I have read. But some interesting interpretations that could give some more freedom.
@@Geeksvana 😃😃
@@OPOCHKA yep I think that is an almost foregone conclusion once someone realise the stupid inconsistencies this change actually causes.
Is getting ridiculous now 🤦🏼♂️ most of us got certain drones because we wanted to use them as tools to be creative with taking photographs and making videos. If it’s anymore restricted it’s pointless having them which is what they want really. I have the A1,A2,A3 just so I can take some creative shots. I haven’t flown in a year because of life pressures with my mum passing recently and when I came back to renew my flyer ID I found out I had to retake yet again another test to last me 5 years (and yet the one I took last year was supposed to last 5 years) so it seems they can change it all whenever they like. Control! control! control!
Why the hell haven't we been emailed by the CAA informing us of rule changes? They have our registration on file?
It would make sense wouldn't it? Simple way to inform people. You can sign up for the skywise drone updates, which is a service run by the CAA but I agree they should automatically email ID holders.
Or advised of the consultation in good time in order to respond. Nowadays the Govt "publishes" consultations on all manner of subjects but never advertises that consultation as they don't want your comments, they have already decided what they are gonna do.
Wow Sean I wonder how many sub 250 Rps can honestly say that they will stay within this legislation as anything further than about 300metersits a makes the mini’s hard to distinguish as a drone let alone its orientation especially on those overcast days soon we will have to tether our drones on a lead as part of regulation requirements to fly
I guess in couple of years we’ll probably need to get a university pilot degree to be able fly around the bush in the park and register the drone straightway on manufacturer/ government to be “activated” when purchased as a safety feature plus insurance of course and tax from using airspace 😂
It certainly doesn't seem to get easier... Although at least we have clarification on the meaning of vlos!
Yes you would think a drone was as dangerous as people carrying aircraft the hoops you have to go through.
Would that be such a bad thing though? I would not mind being able to say I am a trained pilot as opposed to not being able to say so. It is just mad credit to be honest.
I have a DJI mini 2 SE . Its so small after say 100 metres its almost invisible apart from night time. The camera offers great situational awareness.
Hey! I would agree with the 100metres, especially depending on the sky colour at the time. The rare time the screen doesn't work is why the regulator feels they cannot allow us to count on it. Sometimes it feels like technology has taken over regs.
Well that's it then with these laws they want to stop hobby flying apart from at clubs in huge open fields. I have just got into FPV and have spent loads on a new Iflight FPV drone, I won't be stopping flying FPV just be more careful where i fly. Line of sight makes flying a drone more like flying a kite now, taking all the fun out of the hobby. I always fly in line of sight before but up to 500m with flashing strobe lights. Sad day for recreational drone pilots. R.I.P 😥
You know my thoughts on this Sean, I’m glad there is a bit more clarity however I still think it should have been a hard limit and that’s then black and white. Low light flying with a couple of incredibly bright strobes will actually be the solution here for flying away from people but I feel these may just hinder those flying in built up areas as the use of strobes will take the mini series over 249g. In short the mini 2 just became a lot more attractive as you can add strobes and stay in 249g
A hard limit on sub 250? Is that because of how dangerous they are?
I've seen fatter heavier pigeons than a mini 2/3
Hey Gavin! Clarity is always a good thing. I think this is reasonably fair in that it gives us more flexibility depending on the drone type and conditions etc. A hard line would have ended up being very close and once we have one, they can always keep reducing it!
@@gmivisualsjason3729 i certainly do not want a hard limit by any stretch, I’m purely meaning it would stop all the discussion regarding vlos and especially the constant negativity on social media.
Got one green and one red for the mini 2 and use strong velcro to keep it under the limit.
Brilliant to use in the day or night.
@@thedroningoflife exactly, I should have clarified that I was referring to navigation colours which will also aid with direction.
So they've effectively made the Mini Pro 3 not much better than a toy... Send it 50m up and most people north of 40 are going to have difficulty seeing proper orientation and direction at distances of 50m horizontal. Even more so against busy background or when trying to re-aquire after looking at the screen or otherwise distracted.
Ok so you can add dayglo skins or powerful nav strobe LEDs that will certainly help but that will run you foul of the weight limits.
I've been doing my research, watching videos, reading articles and already to jump into a new hobby by trying to get the Mavic Mini 3 Pro in Boxing Day sales. Oh well!! After seeing this video, I guess it's time to look for a different new hobby.
Thanks for the update, new to the drone rules and regulations. Hadn’t seen there was an update so thanks for posting this.
In short the CAA just don't want any drones anywhere. They have tightened the rules so much there is hardly any point owning a friggin drone. Obviously these rules are broken every time, just look at all the videos posted on UA-cam or FB and most, don't even know where their drone is :) Good job we have people like you to explain all this crap from the CAA, I wonder if they will compensate me for my drone that I can only fly in my garden!!!!
exactly, I was about to buy a dji mini...really no point now, gutted
If you ignore the rules and fly sensibly then you can still fly drones.
Cant fly in my garden as its in the flight zone of two local airfields, doesnt seem to stop my idiot neighbour flying his and doing punch out vertical climbs bringing him well into the range of light aircraft.
I'm assuming this regulation is also for drones that are under 250g?
Shaun, thanks for the heads up as usual👍 I'll be limiting mine to 3 foot as my glasses steam up and being blind as a bat is something I've considered🤣🤣🤣🤣 All these rule changes good that we all keep up with them, I feel for new hobby flyers that won't read up on the latest changes for, the CAA.
Hey Sean! As you say, probably overdue with the ever-shrinking models, but "sigh"..... Orientation? Apart from the onboard lights, you can't make that the orientation more than 20 - 40 metres away. So in truth, this becomes another rule that instead of reinforcing and building proper regulation and guidance, just becomes another rule that everyone will ignore and instead just be used to prosecute when something goes wrong. It seems a little stupid to discredit telemetry when that telemetry is displayed on the very unit used to control the aircraft, so it goes hand in hand! Why discount it? Pointless restriction and very disappointing....
Hey Ian! Ironically, the orientation part was already in the guidance from the CAA previously. I think the confusion came from the 500m guidance, subject to aircraft size. People read that and took it as all drones.
I cannot see how effective enforcement will happen and as I said in the video, I personally only expect it to come up when someone is already in trouble etc. Unless we will be given sight tests at the side of the road 🤣.
I think this will be one of the most important parts of the upcoming review. We need to change the thinking on how vlos is interpreted by government and the CAA. The current thinking doesn't match. Especially when it was their sub 250g push that moved us all to small drones 🤷♂️.
@@Geeksvana Exactly! We need to be able to keep the 'area' of the drone in VLOS, not the drone itself!
@@Geeksvana Just running my ageing brain over this. It sounds a bit silly.
If a Police officer was to ask "Which way your drone is pointing"... A guess would be right 50% of the time. And then the other 50 percent of the time, How is an officer going to be able to prove which way it was facing.
I think the same as you, there is no point in pursuing a conviction unless something bad has happened.
Non of this makes any sense to me. The 500m was fine. Even if they reduced it to 250 you are dealing with something objective that can be seen on a screen.
Which way is your drone pointing ??
Nonsense.
@@thewhitbyphotographer Have they placed a time limit on the pilots assessment, or restrictions on how visual orientation is confirmed? At any time it would take literally a second or two to nudge a stick and be able to give an accurate answer.. unless you really don't have vlos. It cant be continuous constant vlos otherwise it would be an effective ban on screens, which would leave DJI and co in tatters with no product range. I hate rule / gov overreach and this feels like it but are we making too much of this if establishing orientation only takes a few seconds?
@@DrivenFloored Ivebeen doing tests.
A little bit difficult is to fly mini 2 or any small drone and keep in view. I fully understand to not fly miles away to the limits of the range but as far it is an open space, not city like mountains, lake, fields there should ease it a bit.
As someone who has been a secretary of many legislative committees in the UK, these committees always include many representatives of the manufacturers to which the legislation will concern. Who is representing our interests as UAV pilots? I can imagine a DJI rep is on the panels, but I can imagine we could do with someone like Geeksvana sitting on this panel to directly represent our interests.
I very much doubt they would allow DJI on the panel as they make drones for the Chinese military.
Well that's just killed it for me.
As a Mini 2 flyer I am often unable to see which way it is pointing when only 20m away due to the colour blending with the sky. I can tell at a glance from the controller but not from vlos observation. There's nothing wrong with my eyesight... I'm an HGV driver an have to have excellent eyesight to pass the medical.
So I guess that it's time to quit the hobby.
Just stick a red and a green sticker on either side of the drone, and your problem is likely solved (who cares about aesthetics over practicality? We do not fly drones because they look pretty, but because of their functionality and output anyways). If you do not care about keeping under 250 grams, you can also stick a green and red LED strobe on the sides, and that way, you see it even more clearly.
Thanks for this update. I don’t feel this is realistic. I’ve been able to fly at a distance no problem, knowing where my drone is. I’ve always made a mission plan before flights in London and never had a problem. Drones are very reliable. The only issue I can see if an outside factor impacted the flight. I will carry on flying as I have been and improve where possible.
in Australia we have that you must be able to see the drone with your own eyes, so a dji mini 3 is about 200m max depending on the sky/ clouds on the day.
i have a mavic 3 and i have a neon orange skin to help keep vlos
Informative, comprehensive and super-dooper, thank you Sean. 👍😊
Thank you sir!
Thanks for sharing. It’s common sense really.
good job i just upgraded my mini to the mini pro 3 with its built in strobes then.. so i can see the green / red and know which orientation my drone is on by visual aid :) Good to see the CAA finally getting a detailed doc out...
I'm afraid that if I have read it correctly you cannot define orientation of the drone by lights alone, you MUST be able to see with your eyes the drones position without any kind of visual aid.
@@LRSTUDIOCREATIONS i never let drone out of my sight anyway when i fly.. i can always see it clearly.. its just the orientation i get confused with when i have been watching my screen and then look back at the drone
Don’t the strobes turn off when recording?
@M0PAX they do yes but I have operator and flyer id so run separate leds
@@LRSTUDIOCREATIONS How would anyone know you are relying on lights, " yes officer I can see where it is pointing "
Sean - Again, great video, straight to the point. Thanks for all your assistance.
We had a speedboat loved wakeboarding, Windermere got a speed limit so sold it. We bought a 4 x 4 to go off-roading then they closed 90% of green lanes, I buy a drone, now this. Anyone know what hobbies I can do that won’t get ruined?
So upgrading your lights with far stronger lights seems like the way to go, super vivid green for the front, vivid red for the back.
Superstrobes might do the trick as well.
What are these rules for ? How many injuries are caused a year by drones? My attention spans too short for any rules.
I believe that there should be a new PDRA available to GVC holders to revert to the previous rules of 500m horizontal separation distance for VLOS.
Especially considering the latest technologies we have in consumer/prosumer level UAS and the 'actions on' for telemetry lost which have been signed off by the CAA for previously certified GVC holders.
These latest round of operational restriction adjustments (I do not disagree that some are completely necessary!) are becoming very restrictive.
Queue thousands of GVC pilots preparing Operational Safety Cases to revert back to the older 500m separation distance to be reviewed by an already overburdened CAA...
I met you at Netelham Police HQ near Lincoln and the information you gave was sensational. Is the letter explained in this VLOS video available to download?
Eager to hear Ian in Londons opinion on this........
Does this mean all night flying is illegal? If you can’t use strobes for orientation all you can do is fly up and down without turning.
CAA don’t think telemetry on screen is adequate, but I bet they want us to use it so that we don’t fly over 120m, ok then, isn’t it. This means my new mini 3 pro fly more combo at £945 is now worthless. Thanks for that. But Sean@ Geeksvana seems ok with it. As long as he gets an exemption, so he can make money from his mapping, fk the recreation flyers.
Good point, if telemetry is useless we’ll have to judge altitude by eye next.
Just another rule to stop our fun and enjoyment I’ve just upgraded to the mini 3 pro and at 100m it’s impossible to tell it’s flight path but the remote and the compass in the bottom left is a great help, but as others have said it’s as though they want to kill this enjoyment of ours.
I've already given up on the Committee Against Aviation CAA and now ignore any rules that aren't grounded in common sense. Whilst I don't go out of my way to fly illegally and I respect person and property I regard these laws as null and void. Frankly it's a mess and as most point out it is to ban hobbyists from the sky.
Presumably then the GVC recovery/orientation part of the training/assessment will be removed.
Clear as mud! Too many words confuse the RP and do little to define the visual lines of sight. When does suitable and acceptable change to unsuitable or unacceptable? The next step will be for a politician to decide what is reasonable and acceptable and put an actual distance limit on it. Does a national-wide speed limit of 30 kph sound familiar?
Clear and precise video thanks.
Pretty much what I've been doing. I reckon for the Mavic Mini that 300 metres is the absolute limit, but I would attach nav lights for that range (so no deliberate overflight of people), and I'd need landmarks to be able to reacquire it after looking at the controller screen, and it would have to be flown close to the horizon. Yellow specs essential too.
@@petesig93 I've put it to the test:
I put three lights on it, red, green and white. I can see the general heading by which lights are visible:
White strobe - away
Red and green - towards
Red - leftwards
Green - rightwards
At constant altitude above me, away looks like descent, towards looks like ascent - due to parallax.
Without lights, about 150 metres - but by no means always:
Fly too far above the horizon, and you can lose sight of it at about 75 metres without lights. Flying with trees as the background, as little as 30 metres. Into the sun, 10 metres. It is almost impossible then to reacquire it by eye alone, and many a ruzzkiy has been taught that acquisition of a drone above you by sound is very unreliable.
Acquisition by eye is easy if you know where it is relative to some horizonal landmark - just to the right of the bushy-topped tree, or "below" the pink building on the distant hill, for example.
BUT I did some tests with flying ○s 8s and □s around a row of five posts, standing five metres from the end if the row and close to the line - 10 metres apart and flying at eye level with distant trees in the background - to test the limits of my ability to judge distance. The foreground was plain grass. Although I can fly these figures very well when the drone is above me (as confirmed by the track on the map), it proved impossible to navigate them at eye level without extremely high risk of crashing the drone. I don't recommend anyone else to try it.
Similarly, I tested my ability to describe the same figures in strong wind, upwind and across wind from me, at eye level. Impossible.
Pilots need to be realistic about the limitations of VLOS. So does the CAA. The value of PoV should not be discounted, after all, it works for manned aircraft.
Why do you need to know which way it's pointing if it is set to "headless" mode !?!?
It’s not going to make that much difference the people that fly within the rules will still fly within the rules. Those that fly outside the rules aren’t going to change.
Agreed. At least clarification stops some of the debate. Some...
On the contrary, people were flying within the rules with a perfectly reasonable and safe interpretation which has now been outlawed. If the line you draw makes sensible flying against the rules then people will ignore it as unreasonable. And then why step over a little and not as much as you like? If they continue with nonsense like this I can see a lot more people start to totally ignore the rules and do what they want, just like the situation with escooters.
@@DroidWorks well you pretty much just agreed with everything I said
Have they placed a time limit on the pilots assessment, or restrictions on how visual orientation is confirmed? At any time it would take literally a second or two to nudge a stick and be able to give an accurate answer.. unless you really don't have vlos. It cant be continuous constant vlos otherwise it would be an effective ban on screens, which would leave DJI and co in tatters with no product range. I hate rule / gov overreach and this feels like it but are we making too much of this if establishing orientation only takes a few seconds?
Oh well, I was looking at getting a Mini 3 just after Christmas. Guess I won't bother now, seems over the top.. are many people being injured by these tiny drones?
Most of the time I use my screen. When flying around filming stuff. I could fly my mini 3 to around 100-150m visually, but beyond that, I would need to look at my remote screen so that I am filming the shot.
But from my experience, I usually plan my flight so I know where my done will be even if I have lost sight of it.
For example, If I am flying my Mini 3 pro over Natural Trust house
I usually have to fly a couple of hundred meters. Also, I like to keep the drone high up over 100m as It's so quiet people don't ever none it there.
I guess I will have to be more careful not to crash my drone when flying close to VLOS.
Surely navigation strobes on the drone will clearly show orientation? Red at rear, green up front?
There is no way that any RP can determine orientation of a small drone using VLOS beyond a very short distance away, especially with something as small and light coloured as the DJI Mini 3 in a daylight sky. It should be a mixture of the VLOS and Telemetry together which is way safer and more reliable. What the authorities should be concentrating on is making sure every flyer does some basic studies and tests to make sure they know how to fly a drone safely rather than allowing just anyone to fly just because the drone is sub 250g. It's not expensive and takes virtually no time at all to get a FLYER ID - this should be a basic requirement for ALL pilots.
So what’s the fallback when you lose telemetry (can be multiple causes of this).
@@Historic-Flight-UK but RTH is not perceived by the CAA as a controlled flight when the operator doesn’t know its location. How can you avoid obstacles/air users if you don’t know the location of one of the objects. That’s the point of VLOS.
@@eyeup Good point but in reality how often does that ever happen? I've been flying over 2 years and it's never happened once, my flights remain safe because I use VLOS and Telemetry / Camera to ensure I always know position and orientation. It's surely safer to utilise all the technology in place rather than VLOS which for many people isnt always easy to judge distance and orientation - mixing both makes things safer IMO.
@@horizonairscapes so far, never. But a RA with the severity as catastrophic (bringing an aircraft down) but likelihood of extremely unlikely will still register as “review” rather than “low” on a standard heat map risk assessment as used by the CAA. So that’s the basis of it. As long as folk understand that, then the risks they take are their own...it’s big boy pants time. I just hate people doing stuff without understanding the basis of the risks.
@@eyeup And being A2 CofC certified, I am fully aware of the risks and how to assess them and manage situations that may or may not arise. My original point was that it's highly unlikely any RP can know orientation at all times without the use of Telemetry unless they remain within a very close distance and even then many will find it hard to judge a true distance, so using both VLOS and Telemetry is, in my humble opinion, a safer way to fly. The technology available on these drones is way better than human judgement in most cases so it should be used to assist VLOS.
The CAA can introduce whatever new rules they want, but I question first of all how many drone pilots are actually going to be aware of them (how many even have a Flyer/Operator ID or know that they need one, the other or both?), and even if they are aware of them, how many are going to observe them?
Had I not stumbled across this video this evening I would remain blissfully unaware of the VLOS update, whether or not the onus is on me to remain fully up to date - y'know, sometimes life is full and keeping my car insurance up to date is hassle enough, checking CAA legislation in case it's been updated probably isn't going to happen very often.
How will this effect the auditors channels? Most of them count on drone footage as part of there video and also to get a reaction. Now that they have to be able to not only see it, but actully be able to see its orientation, they won't be getting as many interesting videos
It’s probably due to the Auditor channels this was made.
I can’t see it making much difference. Most police stations are fairly small, so they’d never need to go beyond VLOS. Those flying over warehouses would have more of an issue, but it’s still doable to keep oriented if you fly a simple flight path.
I think we need to stop sitting on the fence and start saying to these authorities stop play with the rules.This continued altering will harm the hobby and not help it.Please Sean if you have any clout with the CAA start saying ''enough is enough''.And keep reminding them our hobby is one of the safest in the world.
All this will do will make less people follow the rules, I fly sensibly, but how are we supposed to work out orientation at even just 150mtrs? Whereas the ones who don’t care about the drone code will continue, like the DJI phantom flyer that can often be seen flying over my town way beyond visual line of sight
It’s like having a car that can do more than 70mph and don’t know any current models that can’t, even some small drones can still be in radio contact at 5 miles or more.
A radical question: Don't the VLOS rules everywhere impose much stricter requirements on UAV's than there are on crewed aircraft? And is this really sensible and warranted in any way? We have cameras that offer a good view to the front (where most crewed aircraft pilots are also looking), and as long as we don't fly backward or sideways, that should pretty much make sure we see every possible obstacle or other aircraft. On top of that, we have a maximum altitude restriction that also separates UAV's from crewed aircraft, and we have no fly zones that also make things safe.
The whole VLOS mindset seems to stem from RC aicraft that do not have a camera, where it is kind of logical that you wouldn't want it to be beyond your VLOS. Somehow, drones inherited that rule. And it strikes me as completely implausible that this should actually make the skies safer in any significant way, while greatly restricting usefulness of drones despite the technology being able to support so much more.
The regulation is also open to disagreement with RP on whether something is LOS or not. Regulations need to be proportionate to the risk and reasonable this AMC is not.
I bought a secondhand drone the other week and haven’t even flown it yet, there are so many rules and regulations that I don’t know where to start.
I bought a spark so read that I couldn’t fly within 150m of a house, then I was told I could fly up to 30m but would have to join fpvuk. Did that, now I’m not even convinced if that’s true. So confused with this whole
Drone thing.
Hey Neil! As the Spark is over 250g, you do not get a lot of the freedom of sub 250g. That means flying in the A3 subcategory category 150m from residential, etc with 50m from uninvolved people.
You can take the A2 CofC, which would give you a lot of freedom with the Spark as you can fly sub 500g in the A1 sub category, close to people. This includes congested areas with no separation from uninvolved people, just no intentional flight over people.
The FPVUK membership gives you access to the Article 16 Authorisation. This allows you to fly drones in areas primarily used for leisure. So parks, beaches etc. It reduces the separation from 50m to 30m, (15m when taking off with further mitigation), and it can be used in congested areas but only in the volume of airspace of the park etc.
Personally, I would find a cheap A2 CofC course and take that. Then you will have almost the same freedoms as sub 250g drones with the DJI Spark.
@@Geeksvana thanks for taking the time to reply. I read about the A2 CofC and was told I wouldn’t need it if joining the FPVuk. Guess it comes down to where I want to fly really. As a total beginner open fields are probably my best option until familiar with flying.
There are open fields near me but working resedential areas and some with a few houses scattered so thought the FPV would allow me a little more freedom until I’m not too much of a “beginner”
I’ll have a look into the course though. Thanks again.
This seems to me, to be based on risks involved with automated 'delivery drones' rather than general safety issues, as there have been zero incidents, (that I'm aware of), that would initiate such changes to the regulations.. 🤷🏻♂️
I also think the rules are fast becoming a farce. I am 67, ex police and ex NHS nurse. All I want is to take video of landscape from my tiny drone.
So, basically put, you're relegated to flying within 50 or so metres of yourself, which essentially removes half of the reason you'd fly GPS drone, you know, to get good shots in cool areas... What I hope will happen here is that the rule will just be so widely NOT adhered to by flyers (with next-to-zero or zero incidents) to such a point that the rules will just be scrapped. A victimless crime, along with stupid rules surround such 'crime' is a recipe for people to just ignore the rules. This stuff is just madness. What do these rule makers think they are 'fixing' with these rules? This is just so frustrating. Thanks for your continued efforts Sean.
So imagine you want to take a picture or video, do you a, break the VLOS and fly it where you can't see because of the sun needs to be behind the drone to light the subject area up or b, have a crappy video/picture because of sun glare in it...
The m2/3 can get lost pretty quickly when trying to get the best images on the screen if you are like 200ft away and 350ft high, it's not bad if it's quiet area you can pic out the buzzing but if you're in a loud environment like next to a road etc you may not be able to hear the buzz
Is there any point buying a drone as a hobbyist? It seems like you'll only be able to fly it within a few feet of yourself in your own back garden....if your back garden is in the middle of an empty field
It sounds like very little, if any change to me. The 500m was only an advisory anyway and assumed that VLOS meant so that you could see the orientation of the drone to be able to keep control in an emergency, so no real difference.
It would be great to be able to fly without VLOS, especially with the tech on drones nowadays, is there a way to legally do this?
It would be amazing to set off and fly the drone 4 miles away, do you think that this will ever happen in the UK?
Are there any countries that this is allowed? (If not, why can DJI drones fly this far away?)
But when Amazon start doing Drone deliveries the new rules will not apply to them.
To be honest, this is pretty much how I interpreted the original guidance. If you can't see the drone orientation and you lose video/telemetry feed, then things can go south pretty quickly!
I feel the CCA are changing laws too quickly and unnecessarily for recreational pilots to keep up, which will be the bulk of fliers in the UK. After spending hours studying and doing the A2 CoC and GVC they are changing laws at the drop of the hat.
Have they had events where a mini has taken a helicopter down 200m from the remote pilot? Or even a near miss?
The definition of vlos from the CAA already included the requirement to be able to see the orientation of the drone. However, the inclusion of a 500m general advice note was included prior to the sub 250g drone became popular. This in itself created a lot of confusion even though the CAA did state it depended on the size of the drone being flown.
This new legal definition of vlos is not a law change but a refinement of advice already in place. It is not as if you were able to fly bvlos with a Mini drone prior to this.
This was put through public consultation but did not receive the level of responses that other more popular consultations such as the legacy extension gained.
Sadly, therefore, this clarification was always coming. As much as anyone might not agree with it.
So moving from a defined and provable definition of limit, to one open to interpretation and argument, of which the only relevant outcome is ultimately decided by a judge...
Same with motoring where lack of proper signage per regulations is no longer a defence as long as there's enough information for "a careful and competent motorist" to understand.
So glad I found your channel 👍. I'm thinking of gerting a "drone" soon (likely a DJI Mini 2) but I want to do my homework first. Obviously, reading reviews etc for the device, but probably (and more importantly) the rules and legal requirements for it's use. Looking at UA-cam, depending on where the drone is being used there seems to be an awful lot of conflict with public, security staff and police etc and this has actually prevented me making my purchase thus far. For a lot of UA-cam content I can see that "common sense" (an old and maybe unacceptable term these days) would have that the drone pilot should expect to be challenged. I will certainly make sure that I carry with me a copy of the necessary guidance and CAA legislation at all times.
The mini drones will only be able to be used around a small garden
Thank you for putting the country in the title.
A lot of people calling Auditors. But they will one the ones to watch in the coming weeks to see how enforceable this is. Be interesting to see how it all pans out.
DJ Audits comes to mind.
Not had chance to watch it all, but what's stopping me pitting say an orange strobe on the back of the quad? Instantly tell its orientations then?
Hi new subscriber. Can you please confirm that if I buy a done under 250g .all I have to do is register the done not take a test . I am getting very confused with the new CAA regulations and regulations.kind regards Eugene
Hey Eugene! Welcome to drones! You have correct. For sub 250g drones in the UK you only need an Operator ID and display it on the drone. The Flyer ID is nor required, (but it is free and useful info). Good luck and thanks for the sub!
If you blink then you are not vlos, if you look around at your surrounding area to make sure it's safe are you not vlos? 🤷 do you get more flexibility with a drone in headless mode as you know it's front is away from you
I must say as a UAV pilot since the start of all this that I believe we as drone pilots do have to be wholly responsible for our aircraft and its operation. We should demonstrate dual redundancy in our batteries(this has saved me more than once) and propulsion redundancy. When you lose one motor as I have in the past, you are then fully reliant on your skills as a pilot, to land the aircraft safely. My thoughts on using telemetry to give accurate information are very limited as I have experienced telemetry failure many times. Even when using backup telemetry. I believe the CAA are correct in making us demonstrate safe operation. These UAVs are extremely safe when operated according to very strict rules and regulations. I have seen drones fly out of control and nearly kill people on a few occasions, and not just in this country. Most accidents are caused by pilot error. If you are at one with your aircraft, do regular testing and work within the rules of your operations manual you are at least acting in the safest possible way.
So does this mean flyers of large drones now have to fly in such a way that they can spot a Mini about to hit their drone? This would suggest we are all now restricted to 200-300m tops?
Thanks yet again Sean, always a clear and reasoned assessment of the legislation.
One orher point..they keep changing all the shit.but they do not write or email me with the crap.even tho i paid them to register and have all the needed "cert"