Breaking rules to fly above Fog?

[Russ43Phantom]

I'm sure I could see my drone all the way up to 1200 feet to clear these clouds at over 10,000 feet altitude. No clouds or mountains were harmed during the filming of this video.

There have been many open gears that have operated outside of OSHA regulations and no one was hurt. That in no way justifies breaking OSHA regulations and not putting a cover over the pinch points of the gears.

VLOS requires you to see your drone well enough to know it’s orientation. That shoud be clear. Another issue in my mind is the argument of whether your are, or are not, flying under 107 or as a recreational pilot. Are the safety issues any different? I think not.

ALL flight should be done with a strong appreciation for safety issues. There is so much that can be done within the code. Why look for pushing the edge, causing an accident and creating a situation where even more restrictions are put on drone pilots.

 

[GeneM]

Let me be the first to say- fog and cloud images/video look very cool. To the letter of the regulations though, this is prohibited by the FAA under both Part 101 and Part 107. The information is all there, but like most government regulations, takes some digging to find all of the pieces. The information below is from the FAA Advisory Circular clarifying some of the regulations. You can find it on the main FAA UAS page.The main visibility tests for legal flight are three miles visibility and 500 feet BELOW clouds. If you see fog, you don't have 3 miles visibility, and if the fog (low cloud) is 100ft AGL, then your drone needs to be -400ft AGL to legally fly. You have to have a clear LOS from the drone to the ground to safely land at any time, or to avoid obstacles. Section 5.10.3 specifically states "the UA not be operated above any cloud "

The question people are really asking is "is it legal to fly if I cannot see the ground under my drone?" Unfortunately, the definitive answer is no. In the bigger picture, it is also unsafe, and the last thing we need is more reactive regulations after someone scissors the wings off of a spotted owl. These things are wonderful tools, but they are definitely quirky to fly on a good day. I'd love to skim a fog shrouded pond or a mist covered mountain valley, but t is not worth the risk of an incident, or my license. If someone can hit the Powerball numbers, someone can walk out from behind a tree and be hit with a falling drone because DJI introduced the unannounced feature of in-flight firmware upgrades.

Hope this helps the conversations. Have fun, and fly safe.


(...and before any negative comments about my profile pic- I hold a FAA Daylight Operations Waiver)


Advisory Circular 107-2
https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/AC_107-2_AFS-1_Signed.pdf


Minimum visibility, as observed from the location of the CS, may not be less than 3 statute miles (sm);
Minimum distance from clouds being no less than 500 feet below a cloud and no less than 2000 feet horizontally from the cloud.
Note: These operating limitations are intended, among other things, to support the remote pilot’s ability to identify hazardous conditions relating to encroaching aircraft or persons on the ground, and to take the appropriate actions to maintain safety.

5.10.3 Visibility and Distance from Clouds.
It is imperative that the UA not be operated above any cloud, and that there are no obstructions to visibility, such as smoke or a cloud, between the UA and the remote PIC.

5.12 Remaining Clear of Other Aircraft.
To satisfy this responsibility, the remote PIC must know the location and flight path of his or her small UA at all times.

 

[je2854]

This was above the fog but early in the morning directly above me. No flying left, right or back to front...

Right after that I brought that bird down...

I see no harm in flying above it for a second or two as long as nothing is close by and on your property.....?

 

[blackcrusader]

This was taken standing from home point. No need to fly up through the clouds when they are so far below. Elevation 3740m or 12270 feet.

So taking off at over 12000 ft altitude and flying up to 13600 feet certainly gives you some awesome views.

I wonder if flying above them if I was in the USA ( which I am not ) would still not be allowed. I'm in a no fly zone for passenger aircraft.

 

[OOO]

My launching spot relative to the fog/clouds. I think it is safe to fly here.

 

[GeneM]

Awesome shots guys. To be very clear, I was answering the OP's question about the legality of flight near fog/clouds. I am in no way making personal judgements. There is a distinction between a safe flight and a legal flight. While the flights above would seem safe, they will still violate the FAA 3 mile visibility rule. Would those violations ever be enforced on a pilot? Very unlikely. I compiled the Part 107 regulations for everyone's awareness and understanding. I am not advocating where and when pilots choose to fly. The only thing I ask is they do it safely, for the benefit of us all. As a commercial pilot, who logs all of his flights, I am extra careful of where and when I fly. Last year I had a major company review 12 months of flight logs before granting approval to fly above their facilities. I don't like some of the rules, but I am forced to fly within them.
People speed in their cars on the freeway. Is is unsafe? Not generally. Is is against the law? Yes it is. It is going to take the FAA some time to catch up to the technology, and until then we all have to make our choices.

Safe flying.

 

[Chuxx76]

The drone was always in VLOS.

Would like to know what you’re flying

 

[OOO]

Would like to know what you’re flying

This one was shot with my Mavic.

 

[MTO]

Situational awareness is key.

 

[blackcrusader]

Awesome shots guys. To be very clear, I was answering the OP's question about the legality of flight near fog/clouds. I am in no way making personal judgements. There is a distinction between a safe flight and a legal flight. While the flights above would seem safe, they will still violate the FAA 3 mile visibility rule. Would those violations ever be enforced on a pilot? Very unlikely. I compiled the Part 107 regulations for everyone's awareness and understanding. I am not advocating where and when pilots choose to fly. The only thing I ask is they do it safely, for the benefit of us all. As a commercial pilot, who logs all of his flights, I am extra careful of where and when I fly. Last year I had a major company review 12 months of flight logs before granting approval to fly above their facilities. I don't like some of the rules, but I am forced to fly within them.
People speed in their cars on the freeway. Is is unsafe? Not generally. Is is against the law? Yes it is. It is going to take the FAA some time to catch up to the technology, and until then we all have to make our choices.

Safe flying.

I have emailed the FAA and asked as they also replied to me that foreign tourists visiting the USA can fly under Sec 336 but not need drone registration as that is for residents and citizens. They also replied that the max height of 400ft is not a law for Sec 336 operators but ask that operators follow community guildelines when flying.

I'll let you know their reply and I have linked this thread in my email.

 

[KongWerks]

If you are above the fog (or cloud), how can you see what is on the ground (or between the fog and ground) below you?

As cool as it looks, I can't see (no pun intended) how this would qualify as safe flight.
No one on the ground can see you either, which just adds to the danger.

 

[PhantomFlyer3SE]

One more point to take into consideration before you fly into a cloud:

It's was a Sparc, and not mine

 

[techmyjustin]

If you are above the fog (or cloud), how can you see what is on the ground (or between the fog and ground) below you?

As cool as it looks, I can't see (no pun intended) how this would qualify as safe flight.
No one on the ground can see you either, which just adds to the danger.

I suppose if you are flying over a forest, you can't see if there are people hiking through the dense trees, so it's the same thing. They would be able to hear the drone but not see it either because of the trees.

If we need to identify every person within a certain radius while flying, mountain shots are going to be against the rules.

 

[Russ43Phantom]

I suppose if you are flying over a forest, you can't see if there are people hiking through the dense trees, so it's the same thing. They would be able to hear the drone but not see it either because of the trees.

If we need to identify every person within a certain radius while flying, mountain shots are going to be against the rules.

Now this is a non-sense comment. The issue is not having VLOS of your drone and any potential manned aircraft makes your drone a major potential hazzard to manned aircraft.

 

[BigAl07]

I suppose if you are flying over a forest, you can't see if there are people hiking through the dense trees, so it's the same thing. They would be able to hear the drone but not see it either because of the trees.

If we need to identify every person within a certain radius while flying, mountain shots are going to be against the rules.

You are completely missing the point/intent of See & Avoid and it has nothing to do with "people on the ground" except the person operating the sUAS.

 

[Russ43Phantom]

This was taken standing from home point. No need to fly up through the clouds when they are so far below. Elevation 3740m or 12270 feet.

So taking off at over 12000 ft altitude and flying up to 13600 feet certainly gives you some awesome views.

I wonder if flying above them if I was in the USA ( which I am not ) would still not be allowed. I'm in a no fly zone for passenger aircraft.

View attachment 93609

On first impulse, this would appear safe. The issue, in many places, is manned aircraft that could ascend through the clouds into your drone.

 

[techmyjustin]

Now this is a non-sense comment. The issue is not having VLOS of your drone and any potential manned aircraft makes your drone a major potential hazzard to manned aircraft.

No, actually, my issue was not about VLOS, as you can see from my previous posts that I did maintain VLOS.

So to say it was then about the possibility of people on the ground below my drone under the fog would be EXACTLY like flying over a forest with hikers possibly below. I don't think it's a valid concern, to fly over a sparsely populated area (to take the part 107 verbatim) over fog, while I maintain VLOS.

 

[techmyjustin]

On first impulse, this would appear safe. The issue, in many places, is manned aircraft that could ascend through the clouds into your drone.

I agree, and since I live here and know that I'm only a couple hundred feet above ground, I'm confident there are no manned aircraft that will be emerging from the fog.

 

[Nightwolf]

No, actually, my issue was not about VLOS, as you can see from my previous posts that I did maintain VLOS.

So to say it was then about the possibility of people on the ground below my drone under the fog would be EXACTLY like flying over a forest with hikers possibly below. I don't think it's a valid concern, to fly over a sparsely populated area (to take the part 107 verbatim) over fog, while I maintain VLOS.

Trees are NOT the same as fog. If someone is hiking under a canopy of trees they are more protected than they would be under a cloud!

 

[John Locke]

VLOS requires you to see your drone well enough to know it’s orientation.

I don't recall seeing this "orientation" requirement in any of the rules and guidelines I studied. I assume you mean via VLOS. Would you mind sharing where you found this as an FAA guideline?

However, I can always see my craft orientation in the radar screen.