(13-Jul-2021, 11:12 PM)MrSolo Wrote: I agree.  If you don't do anything stupid to get attention on yourself then the FAA wouldn't even know you exist.  I fly early every morning. I'm at the park by 7am, put in 4 to 6 packs while making sure to stay away from any dog-walkers. If anyone comes near, I generally drop throttle low as I can while holding altitude to be as quiet as possible and wait for them to go by before I continue flying.  Never go over-head of anyone or over their cars.  And I always make sure to leave the place clean (no trash left behind ect.)  Following these simple rules I'm yet to experience a 'Karen-Event' or police attention. (knocks on wood)

The FAAs primary, secondary, and tertiary concerns are SAFETY.  Keeping that in mind, what are they most likely to spend their time worrying about: someone with a quad that weighs 251g, or who flew 3 packs without a spotter;  Or - Dentists making stupid decisions in their new Cirrus Jet.  Real planes/pilots will always be their primary concern, as long as we don't give them a reason to think otherwise!

Hi MrSolo,

Yes, the FAA's concern is SAFETY, however, that means there is a concern for anyone that is NOT following the regulations...even the small individual pilot. Will they be trolling for those not following the regulations, probably NOT. Will they have the cops on alert? NO. However, the FAA has already started a campaign to enlist the average citizen to report drone flying because no one knows if the flight is following the regulations nor do they know if it is good or bad. Yeah, they want the entire population to be on the look out. 

In fact, it might surprise you at how many anonymous calls the FAA gets from those "concerned" citizens...more than can currently handle. They don't have to troll, but the WILL investigate those reported by the snitches.

Now, you think the FAA won't come after the individual pilot? 
Check out the video in Post #36 of Legally flying around the world.

That said, I believe the future tactics will be trying to stay under the radar, so to speak. 

1) Be very careful about flying near people...any people...any where.
    Best to fly at a remote location or at least one where there are no people.
2) Fly a quad that is pretty quiet. Those loud "basher" quads can be heard at quite a distance.
3) Fly high. Consider flying at an altitude between 300-400 feet...just below the ceiling...I DO.
4) Fly it like you stole it:
                  a) Prepare the quad ahead of time.
                  b) At the location, prep and get in the air as quickly as possible.
                  c) Fly
                  d) Retrieve the quad, collect everything, and LEAVE.
                      Don't linger around too long just in case a concerned citizen reports you.
                  
Oh yeah, don't post the video. The YouTube postings will end up being the death of recreational FPV.

From Pilot Institute:

New FAA Guidance for Recreational Drone Pilots?

Doesn’t sound like it’s possible to fly under the rules at all. Jeez had to turn it off , how can that be called” recreational flying” when your visual spotter needs to be a lawyer.?

(16-Jul-2021, 09:26 PM)iFly4rotors Wrote: From Pilot Institute:

New FAA Guidance for Recreational Drone Pilots?

The Video

So at 8 minutes into the video it goes over the FPV guides (click HERE) where is states that even the FPV pilot needs to be able to see the aircraft at all times, and then it goes on to say that you need to be able to see the aircraft if your "FPV device" were to be removed. They can only mean a screen here (i.e. as used with a camera drone) because the first sentence effectively means that wearing FPV goggles is prohibited.

I really don't get this at all. Situational awareness is one thing but no-one can see a tiny FPV quad in the sky at more then a hundred metres which also makes a mockery of the 400ft height limit (no way to see a small quad at that height). It seems to me that the FAA are using a stealth ruling to try and outlaw flying a model aircraft by FPV.

Quote:3.4.3.3.1 Recommended Safety Guidelines.

If a CBO supports FPV flying, comprehensive safety guidelines should include, at least, the following minimum guidance for operating UAS under FPV. These suggested guidelines are provided as examples to assist CBOs. CBOs should tailor the guidelines to fit their particular needs.

1. FPV flyers should be proficient in flying their UA without an FPV device prior to starting FPV flights. DATE “DRAFT” AC 91-57C 3-5
   
   
2. FPV flyers should perform preflight inspections of the FPV device’s video, control, power source, and mechanical systems before each flight.
   
   
3. FPV operations require someone to be watching the UA at all times to ensure safe operations. This requires the use of a visual observer. Refer to 49 U.S.C. § 44809(a)(3).
   
   
4. Visual observers must be co-located with the FPV flyer and maintain visual line of sight (VLOS) with the aircraft at all times. Visual observation of the aircraft must be made with unaided vision, except in the case of vision that is corrected by the use of eyeglasses or contact lenses. Vision aids, such as binoculars, may be used only momentarily to enhance situational awareness. Visual observers must be in direct communication with the FPV flyer.
   
   
5. FPV flyers must have the capacity to see the aircraft at all times. Although a visual observer may be watching the UA, the FPV flyer must ensure that, throughout the operation of the UA, he or she would have the ability to immediately see the UA if the FPV device was removed.
   
   
6. The FPV flyer and visual observers should have preplanned communications and procedures to ensure the UA remains under control and within VLOS during any event when the safe operation of the aircraft is in question
   
   
7. An FPV system should not be used when the weight of the UA exceeds 55 pounds.
   

It's clear that those guys are really out of touch from the hobby. The pilot should be capable of abort flying if something goes wrong and that's it. Even if the drone is still in line of site, most of fpv pilots will make more damage trying to recover from something bad than disarming. It's ridiculous that point.

The end result is go fly and take iFly's advice.  Fly away from people, if you post videos don't have corroborating evidence on the video or elsewhere on the net, i.e post the video that is clean of guilty evidence but then post about it on facebook, etc.  The action taken against you is civil not criminal in most cases.  So the burden of proof is only preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond reasonable doubt.  Basically it is more likely you did what they are charging you with than not.  Very easy burden to meet.  So be smart and use common sense.  In time as the general public get informed, every wannabe cop with a cell phone will be snitching on you.

Also, whatever you are doing in violation of FAA regs has a statute of limitations, somewhere between 6 months and 3 years.  You would need to talk to an attorney familiar with FAA prosecutions to know where your exposure ends.  After that has passed, you can post all the videos and pics with impunity.

Just send it!

(13-Jul-2021, 12:51 PM)nuxnik Wrote: If you have a Ham license and are transmitting over 25mW, are you displaying your call sign in the OSD?

There is an exception to the FCC call sign rules for RC gear, though it seems unclear regarding FPV.  From the ARRL Ham Radio License Manual [emphasis added]:

Quote:The first rule of identification is that unidentified transmissions are not allowed.  Unidentified means that no call sign was associated with a transmission.  The only exception is when your signals are controlling a model craft.  Remote control signals are weak and don't travel long distances, so a call sign is not of much use.

I don't know the precise wording of the FCC rule itself.  It's a judgment call as to whether the video signal from an FPV transmitter is "controlling" a model craft.

(17-Jul-2021, 12:49 PM)Krohsis Wrote: The end result is go fly and take iFly's advice.  Fly away from people, if you post videos don't have corroborating evidence on the video or elsewhere on the net, i.e post the video that is clean of guilty evidence but then post about it on facebook, etc.  The action taken against you is civil not criminal in most cases.  So the burden of proof is only preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond reasonable doubt.  Basically it is more likely you did what they are charging you with than not.  Very easy burden to meet.  So be smart and use common sense.  In time as the general public get informed, every wannabe cop with a cell phone will be snitching on you.

Also, whatever you are doing in violation of FAA regs has a statute of limitations, somewhere between 6 months and 3 years.  You would need to talk to an attorney familiar with FAA prosecutions to know where your exposure ends.  After that has passed, you can post all the videos and pics with impunity.

Just send it!

Hi Krohsis,

You mention the statute of limitations. Consider, the statute of limitations applies to an individual occurrence rather than an ongoing practice. For example, suppose a person robs a store. Ok, that has a statue of limitations. Now, suppose the same person robs a store 2 years later. Yes, again a statute of limitations, but not associated with the original crime. Each individual occurrence of a crime has its own "start" date and statute of limitations "end" date. The start of the first robbery is NOT the start date of the second. So, in keeping, each, individual YouTube posting has its own start date for statute of limitations. Not a statue of limitation on posting anything to YouTube or committing multiple crimes.  Anyone that is confused about this concept might want to contact an attorney.

The bottom line is that instead of the FAA working with hobbyists and trying to get them to comply with an easy to understand set of rules that even an idiot can understand, they have  taken the route of over-complicating everything by making it difficult for people to know if they are actually flying within the rules and regulations or not, and they have implemented rules and regulations that make no sense to anyone who knows anything about how the hobby actually works, which is a hobby that the FA have demonstrated that they clearly have no clue about.

The result of this is that the FAA are now already driving people who are passionate about flying to go rogue and who will just avoid registering themselves and take their chances, then get on with flying in a safe manner the way they always have done without getting buried neck deep trying to decipher the myriad of confusing rules and regulations that the FAA have implemented. This surely makes the whole situation worse from a monitoring and regulation point of view, which means that the FAA have well and truly shot themselves in the foot if their aim is/was to educate people and to get them to be compliant with a (reasonable and simple) set of rules and regulations.

The other worrying thing here is that governments in other countries seem to look up to the FAA as an organisation who know what they are doing, and they just copy/paste the same rules for their own country. So all of these ill thought out rules and regulations will eventually have a global impact by trickling down into other countries regulatory requirements.

Here in Europe, the new rules apply to us from January 1, 2021. The FPV recreational pilot is not allowed to fly without an observer. Of all the regulations, this is essentially the biggest and brutally restrictive requirement. If a group of friends fly together, it's not a problem, but a huge group of pilots just fly alone, including me. It's a big problem for me to get someone to spend an hour of their time with me every other day and watch my drone spin in the air. Especially for the time I train.

I have experience reporting that I flew in the meadow alone with my glasses, someone reported me anonymously and I was being investigated by the police.

It annoys me a lot. How do you handle this?

(21-Jul-2021, 09:32 AM)MomoBrut Wrote: Here in Europe, the new rules apply to us from January 1, 2021. The FPV recreational pilot is not allowed to fly without an observer. Of all the regulations, this is essentially the biggest and brutally restrictive requirement. If a group of friends fly together, it's not a problem, but a huge group of pilots just fly alone, including me. It's a big problem for me to get someone to spend an hour of their time with me every other day and watch my drone spin in the air. Especially for the time I train.

I have experience reporting that I flew in the meadow alone with my glasses, someone reported me anonymously and I was being investigated by the police.

It annoys me a lot. How do you handle this?

To be fair, flying BVLOS or without an observer was always against the rules in most European countries even before the new EASA rules were put into place earlier this year. The main difference now is that breaking any of rules is deemed a criminal offence, not just a civil offence as it was before which means there are potentially bigger consequences to face if you get caught. At least in the US it is still only a civil offence, so taking a risk in the US by not using a spotter seems to have less repercussions if pilots there get caught in the act doing that.

If you fly alone, people who have no interest in the hobby don't want to be dragged along with you to end up being bored out of their brain just trying to keep track of an impossible to see tiny speck in the sky while you are having some fun. The whole VLOS and spotter rule goes to show just how out of touch the rule makers are. Of course, the rule makers are happy to let future delivery drones fly completely autonomously without anyone keeping a watch over them. It stinks of hypocrisy.

The only real way for lone pilots to deal with such a restrictive rule is to make sure they don't keep regularly going to the same flying spot on the same day/time, and when they do go to a spot, stay for as short a time as possible (just a few packs) and then quickly move on. Random visits coupled with you not being there for long will make it difficult for people to keep a track of when you might be there next, so they (or the authorities) can't then lie in wait to confront you the next time you go there. If a member of the public does happen to confront you in person, never give any of your personal details to them (only someone in authority has a right to know anything about you) and try not to get into an argument. Just try to diffuse any situation then pack up your stuff and quietly leave as quickly as you can. If you have a car with you the it's probably best not to go straight back to that until you know the person has gone so they can't get a record of your vehicle registration plate.

It's all terribly out of place, tools are simply being created to anonymously persecute people who aren't doing anything wrong in the general sense, not harming anyone or anything. It makes us act like outcasts ... hide, run away, not be seen, etc etc etc ... This really sucks.

(21-Jul-2021, 11:20 AM)MomoBrut Wrote: It's all terribly out of place, tools are simply being created to anonymously persecute people who aren't doing anything wrong in the general sense, not harming anyone or anything. It makes us act like outcasts ... hide, run away, not be seen, etc etc etc ... This really sucks.

Yes, unfortunately this hobby is slowly being driven underground whether we like it or not with a hidden agenda by the rule makers to try and kill the hobby so they can clear the 0-400 feet airspace for commercial flights that will be paying them money. Sadly these rules are just the start, and things are only going to get worse from here on.

Soon we will need to make sure we wear a balaclava when flying and have a getaway car waiting with the engine running so we can fly a few packs and then make a quick escape.

(21-Jul-2021, 12:13 PM)SnowLeopardFPV Wrote: Soon we will need to make sure we wear a balaclava when flying and have a getaway car waiting with the engine running so we can fly a few packs and then make a quick escape.

This made me genuinely laugh

(17-Jul-2021, 06:13 PM)iFly4rotors Wrote: Hi Krohsis,

You mention the statute of limitations. Consider, the statute of limitations applies to an individual occurrence rather than an ongoing practice. For example, suppose a person robs a store. Ok, that has a statue of limitations. Now, suppose the same person robs a store 2 years later. Yes, again a statute of limitations, but not associated with the original crime. Each individual occurrence of a crime has its own "start" date and statute of limitations "end" date. The start of the first robbery is NOT the start date of the second. So, in keeping, each, individual YouTube posting has its own start date for statute of limitations. Not a statue of limitation on posting anything to YouTube or committing multiple crimes.  Anyone that is confused about this concept might want to contact an attorney.

Yes, each law violation has its own statute of limitations.  And possibly unknown to you the prosecutor may have enough info to charge you(criminal) or bring a cause of action against you (civil), if that happens the clock on the limitations stop, for most part indefinitely.  

Bottom line, STFU and use common sense and you will be fine.