Demonstration of why Altitude Limits should be removed
- Thread starter The Roach
- Start date
-
- Tags
- over 400 feet
I agree as I see people going to work putting on makeup and fixing their hair or eating while texting.Coming home I see people driving with their knees and both hands on the phone texting.I had blue tooth text and phone engaged on my truck but after a week I shut it off due to the distraction of the text part.
I good example was last week when I was at San Simeon along the central California coastline. I wanted to fly Hearst Castle, but when I launched in legal territory on Hwy 1, then flew up to the castle, it happens to be at exactly 1640' higher than my launch point, and 3 miles away. With DJI's 1640' height limit above launch point, I couldn't get high enough above Hearst Castle to make a complete loop around the Castle. I needed another 200' to safely fly around the castle and maintain a connection. You can see it below. I have this same issue at the Flatirons in Boulder, CO. I need about 500' more elevation, then I'd be happy, for about month maybe....LOL.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2017
- Messages
- 987
- Reaction score
- 303
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2017
- Messages
- 987
- Reaction score
- 303
Hehe, well, if you were 400' AGL, no problem.
I flew at 5,600', went over hills, but no more than 400' AGL! Obstacle avoidance.
You mean 5600' MSL, not above launch point, right? Or did you change your flight parameters?Hehe, well, if you were 400' AGL, no problem.
I flew at 5,600', went over hills, but no more than 400' AGL! Obstacle avoidance.
Check this flight out, 12,000'+ MSL at the continental divide in Colorado.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2017
- Messages
- 987
- Reaction score
- 303
Yeah, I was at 5,600' MSL, but the P4P was never over 400 AGL.
Nice video, I used to fly Hang Gliders in Telluride, Co, beautiful flying spot. 13,600' launch, in a hang glider, is a real eye popper, as well as a lung buster. Air is soooo, thin!
So you no longer believe in personal responsibility. After all, why prevent something when it's solely the person's responsibility. A person can put higher speed rated tires on the vehicle but it's still throttled.
The legal history is much more complicated. Should we just be able to hand a person something dangerous and when they accidently kill someone, say... I had nothing to do with that. Even though I knew they would probably kill someone with it. There are _some_ responsibilities placed on the manufacturer to make their products safe. Yeah, I knew it was probably a bad idea to make those prescription drugs look like candy and out them in an easy to open container... but "personal responsibility" means I can't be held responsible for anything I do.
I know. We should start another poll titled "Do you agree with DJI's prudent and logical policy of...?" and see how they compare.
Wo
Wow! What a place John! So you were 3 miles out with no RC issues at all? Can you get to a closer launch point to shoot that castle some more?
No, they restrict drones from flying from the Hearst property, they have signs out. So launching on Hwy1 is the only legal place to fly from. I found a tree along the coast Hwy and had a clear VLOS view of the castle. I was guessing it was 1200' higher than Hwy 1, but I was wrong, it's 1640' above Hwy 1. I needed another 200' to circle around back of the castle, but didn't have adequate elevation. Hah, I was also guessing it was 2mi away, but it was 3mi away. I had a couple of glitches in video, but no disconnects. Range wasn't a problem, it was the elevation that kept me from completing the mission I had hoped to fly.
If I ever change the parameters in my P4P to go higher than 1640' ALP (above launch point), then I'll be able to fly a better flight route around the castle. I definitely want to go back next year to give it another try, plus I would hope to capture more whale video off San Simeon Point. I could spend all day flying around the whales and dolphins feeding, so much fun.
Last edited:
Interesting thread but Roach you never needed to be concerned about a limitation since you were flying incline over or up a hill. I do enjoy your controversial post though.
Well that's not correct. Many of us are concerned about the 1640' height limitation. We want the ability to fly higher. We're all on our honor today with the 1640' limit (500m), right?. Why not make it a 2500' limit? How did 1640' get picked? I need 2500' to climb the mountains I want. As long as we stay within 400' of land, we're OK. Why limit us to 1640'?
Last edited:
Exactly, why 500m? Why not 1000M? You can get in the same amount of trouble with 500M as you can with 1000M, so why not provide a 1000M ALP (above launch point) limit?
I yearn for the technology offer a cost effective range finder looking down from the drone, allowing an option to auto-limit flight height to 400' AGL, and a 3000' ALP capability.
I would guess that an onboard DEM is more likely than a radar altimeter. Weight may be the more fundamental problematic factor than cost, for an altimeter.
Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,350
- Reaction score
- 9,292
We'd see lots more cases of flyers getting into more trouble if there was a 1000 metre limit.
We already see plenty of cases of flyers that go up 1000 ft or more and have their drone blown away because they don't understand how high level winds can be very different from what they experience at surface level.
Without a 1640 ft limit, we'd see even more drones blown away.
Descent time and battery life is another important factor
If you climb to 1640 ft just getting down requires 2.8 minutes but if you went twice as high you now need 5.6 minutes just for a max speed descent
DJI have given you the ability to fly to 1640 feet above launch point and that is more than enough for most people, most of the time.
The number of times users would be inconvenienced by a limit of 1640 ft above launch point would be very small.
If you have a real need to climb higher, there are other drones you can do it with.
