(04-Mar-2023, 01:17 PM)iFly4rotors Wrote: When it comes to breaking the law, any law, it first boils down to whether 
or not you get caught. So, if one breaks the law, then just don't get caught.
Right?

So, how do you not get caught?

1) Do NOT fly where there are people.
    The more rural, the better.

2) Do NOT post videos that clearly show
    that the flight is in violation of the regulations.

As long as one does not get caught and there is NO evidence, 
then no harm done. Right?

Well, just be aware of the consequences and be prepared to pay.

Each of us has our own path. Some of us want to be legal and some don't.

Excellent points.

I never endorse or encourage "long range" flying in general.

10% of the time, its boring fields and prairie in middle of nowhere.
But 90% of the time, especially novice DJI owners, are flying over the city to their buddies place to show off the cool toy.
Most people live in cities, and few own 100+ acres, so if you are flying 2km+, its very likely to be over roads and private property.

Basically, as iFly4Rotors said, if you "are" going to do it, don't be a jackass and ruin the hobby by flying over SuperBowl game.

I have no problem being “legal” as long as regulations and laws are based on fact / evidence to benefit all the people.. Not because a politician “believes” this or that..
Unfortunately some people won’t have a choice but follow the rules or face ramifications.. one way or another..
It’s obvious posted videos are the majority of where any prosecution would stem.. the chances of having a Federal law enforcement official walk up to you while ur burning a pack would be “zero to none” .. UNLESS they are building a case…
Maybe it is as simple as having a disclaimer on ur channel.. “These videos are NOT REAL, and meant for entertainment only…. Do not believe everything you see to be true…”

Has nobody treaded his footsteps after?

I'd love to give it a shot! (Will take some permissions and clearances)

Would love some recommendations on the setup!!

I have the ranger module.  

Can yall recommend how i can go about this?
Plane-
VTX-
Onboard cam-
Ground station setup-

Also, any idea how i can contact WezleyVarty?


Thanks!

(14-Mar-2023, 03:41 AM)Thrustworthy Wrote: Has nobody treaded his footsteps after?

I'd love to give it a shot! (Will take some permissions and clearances)

Would love some recommendations on the setup!!

I have the ranger module.  

Can yall recommend how i can go about this?
Plane-
VTX-
Onboard cam-
Ground station setup-

Also, any idea how i can contact WezleyVarty?


Thanks!

I can at least tell you some of what he used for his flight. Forgot what plane, battery config, and VRX he used. The video antenna he used was a neat (31dB?) parabolic dish. Think I remember him using some kind of adapter for ELRS telemetry to MAVLink. Think ArduPilot and Mission Planner were used along with some fallback logic to make sure things were safe and controlled in case of control link loss. (if X distance from home >Y, go to rally point)

VTX: Foxeer Reaper Extreme
RX: Matek R24-D
TX: Radiomaster Ranger full size module

To be honest, I have no idea why I remember all this so well. I watched it one time.

Thanks! Im going to try to work towards this!
Any recommendations on what aircraft type would be best?

(14-Mar-2023, 04:00 AM)Thrustworthy Wrote: Thanks! Im going to try to work towards this!
Any recommendations on what aircraft type would be best?

Better let somebody else handle that one. I'm still doing my research into planes/wings before I actually try them.

Wezley is pretty active on Discord, I see him on Mads Tech, Avatar, and HD zero discords regularly and he seems very approachable. If I remember correctly he uses an AR wing pro for flights.

Here is what I have seen work best, though not from personal experience as this is not legal where I am from.

Plane-
Believer--- https://www.getfpv.com/believer-1960mm-a...t-kit.html

Mini Talon --- https://www.readymaderc.com/products/det...-talon-pnp

Ranger 2000 --- https://hobbyking.com/en_us/volantex-757...7-pnf.html


VTX- 1.3 ghz Matek or RMRC

Onboard cam- Not super important

Ground station setup- crossfire or dragonlink for radio link. For video eagletree eagle eyes diversity with two 1.3ghz RMRC receivers and high gain antennas from trueRC or VAS.

I think this should be discussed in another thread, not here ....

So the conclusion to this story was that Wezley ended up being handed 2x $1375 AUD fines totalling $2750 AUD (~$1780 USD at current exchange rates). That was just for one of his flight videos (the 100km ExpressLRS one) which does mean that he can't unfortunately re-publish any of his previous videos in case CASA then decide to start investigating those as well, so we likely won't ever see any more flight related videos from Wezley again. His fine was covered in full by a number of generous pilots who contributed towards the gofundme fundraiser that he set up.

For those pilots in Australia, just make sure you keep under the radar and be careful about what videos you post online that might be flouting any UAV regulations.

Source (Facebook): https://www.facebook.com/groups/FPVLIFE/...4964715361

Wezley Varty Wrote:CASA have finally sent out my signed letter of authenticity for my 100km ExpressLRS flight video from earlier this year! Makes for a nice frame to hang in the workshop ?

It took them what felt like a lifetime to determine the outcome of the case, but almost 8 months after the initial 100km flight that caught the attention of the authorities, we are on the other side of it, with a nice $2750 fine to show for it.

I've setup a gofundme to help with the costs of the fine, so if you've ever watched one of my long range testing videos and gotten some value from it, and would like to pitch in to help with the ultimate cost, feel free to drop a couple dollars... would hugely appreciate it ✊

https://gofund.me/e9d16949

=====

UPDATE:

Target amount reached in only 3hrs! You guys absolutely rock!

Fine sorted boys!

A heartfelt thank you to EVERY single one of you that was willing to throw in some cash to help out ?

Especially "Anonymous" with a huge $1350 donation... if you do happen to read this, please accept my deepest gratitude!

… wondering if future “testing” will be strictly in a text format…I’m curious, had there been no “video” would the outcome discipline actions been the same?
“I was able to get “this distance” with ELRS on this output… and here is how I did it..”.. the author could easily state ..”that is fiction.. do u believe everything you read on the internet ..”.
Do we (or authorities) really need video evidence to “confirm” the functionality of a protocol? Yeah, it’s nice to say..”wow, check this video out.. someone did “this / that”.. I guess it’s the “video age”.. “if it’s not on video, did it actually happen”? .. I hope for the sake of innovation prosecution decided to stay away, especially if it’s difficult to prove..
Confirming the conclusion of a hypothesis can be done in “theory”… it has been done for centuries…

Is it possible to spoil the video of flights so that it ceases to be evidence in court? Apply filters, draw a spacecraft and a submarine side by side, convert to cartoon?

Damn, thats a nice trofee . Totally worth the money..... ;-)

Hi LiPoFly,

Two (2) of the things that often result in pilots getting caught violating the regulations
are long range (Beyond Visual Line Of Sight) and too high altitude. Both of these can 
be reasonably calculated from a video. So, how would one hide something that the
pilot/photographer intentionally wants to show??

A long range pilot wants to show that the flight is LONG RANGE and, maybe, brag about
just how far the craft was flown. Often, the flight is so far from the transmitter (pilot) that
there is simply no way that the craft is within Visual Line Of Sight. Sometimes, flights are 
extremely high to get that "view". Nice, but clearly above the altitude restrictions.

Furthermore (3rd thing), these flights are posted for some benefit even if it is simply 
furthering one's personal reputation (personal business) which, in the USA, is considered 
to be a Part 107 activity which requires a Part 107 pilot's license. Often, these pilots are
"content providers" which definitely falls into the "furtherance of a business" category. 

      It is interesting that the terminology used in the FAA regulations is
      In the furtherance of a business instead of commercial use. This
      is broadly interpreted by the FAA as being any benefit of any kind to 
      any entity (even one's self) regardless of money. They have indicated
      that this includes charity work, school events, a farmer checking out
      his own property, even a homeowner check his own gutters to see if 
      they need to be cleaned (yep, a benefit to the homeowner), and even
      simply posting to YT to get "Likes" which is promoting one's personal
      reputation or "business".

      It is not about our interpretation, it is about the FAA's interpretation
      or whatever agency has authority over the airspace.

Of course, there are a host of other things such as flying over a stadium full of people,
flying too close to manned aircraft, flying over trains (illegal in the USA), flying in any
National Park (not National Forest which is different), flying in any NO FLY zone, and
the list goes on and on. Yes, all of these things would be evident in the video and quite
challenging to obscure or hide without destroying the video.

To make matters worse (at least in the USA), there are folks trolling the internet that
are looking for videos that indicate that the flight is violating the regulations. Now,
this is NOT the FAA, but rather people; particularly Part 107 pilots. The FAA has said
that they must investigate reports that are submitted and that most of them are from 
Part 107 pilots.

Although I am not familiar with the airspace regulations for other countries, here in the
USA, these three (3) things and others can reasonably be determined from the video. 
So, how would one hide what the pilot is intentionally trying to show?? Obscuring the 
"evidence" would simply render the video useless. 

       If you remove or obscure all of the ground and any other item such 
       as aircraft from a video, then all you have is "air"; just open sky which 
       sort of defeats the purpose. Furthermore, once one starts doctoring 
       the video that much, it becomes an obvious "fake" which no one really
       cares about so why bother. 

Is it safe to say that the truth is that pilots taking high quality video are doing so
because they want to use the video in some way or another for some type of 
benefit or gain for some entity even if only for their reputation. 
 
Now, consider that the regulations have been in place for many years with no impetus 
to enforce them, but now times are changing and agencies are taking a new interest
in enforcement and reigning in the "wild and free" drone pilots who fly without regard
for the laws and regulations. 

Side Note:   Consider that a snapshot of Remote ID information will clearly 
                  show the craft's location, altitude, and distance from the transmitter. 
                  Could this be used as evidence that the pilot was in violation of the 
                  regulations?  You bet. I believe this is what bothers pilots; not 
                  someone coming to harass them or steal their gear.


Later, iFly  

  

.. apparently the flight video is self incrimination… wonder if “instructional video” will eventually fall into that category.. I know if your searching the net for certain types of “how tos” (video or not) it will send “red flags” to agency’s you don’t want knocking on your door..
Several years back I was learning about brewing beer, and was amazed that it was still illegal to brew your own beer until recently (I think it was Mississippi and Alabama).. it was 2013.
During this time a content creator that I followed for beer also showed the breakdown of distilling (spirits and other things)…well, he got “flagged” regarding his content, videos were removed.. I can’t remember exactly what transpired but he wasn’t the only creator.. it was maybe a year later and the instructional videos returned..
If someone wants to do something (good or bad) they will find a way…wasn’t there a book pulled from libraries for “explosive devices”?… not that everyone reading it would implement anything.. but if the inner workings grabbed your attention.. shouldn’t you be allowed to “study” it?

(31-Aug-2023, 04:23 PM)Rob Axel Wrote: .. apparently the flight video is self incrimination… wonder if “instructional video” will eventually fall into that category.. I know if your searching the net for certain types of “how tos” (video or not) it will send “red flags” to agency’s you don’t want knocking on your door..
Several years back I was learning about brewing beer, and was amazed that it was still illegal to brew your own beer until recently (I think it was Mississippi and Alabama).. it was 2013.
During this time a content creator that I followed for beer also showed the breakdown of distilling (spirits and other things)…well, he got “flagged” regarding his content, videos were removed.. I can’t remember exactly what transpired but he wasn’t the only creator.. it was maybe a year later and the instructional videos returned..
If someone wants to do something (good or bad) they will find a way…wasn’t there a book pulled from libraries for “explosive devices”?… not that everyone reading it would implement anything.. but if the inner workings grabbed your attention.. shouldn’t you be allowed to “study” it?

I imagine the book you're referring to is The Anarchist's Cookbook. But yeah, there's an awful lot of illegal stuff with insanely powerful, yet innocent applications. Wonder how long till they try to ban online encryption that lacks a government backdoor. That'll never get horribly abused, nope.