Do you need V/O with you on all commercial flights?
- Thread starter jdwarren
- Start date
I believe VOs were required under 333 exemption, but not under Part 107. However, the scenario that you described might be a problem! The PIC (you) has to maintain VLOS, you can't delegate that to a VO. If you are wearing goggles, probably not kosher. If you are just watching the tablet in the open, you still have to maintain VLOS and the VO wouldn't be required, but could be useful.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2016
- Messages
- 68
- Reaction score
- 10
Richard R,
I would not be using any goggles, just the iPad connected to my remote controller. I am the PIC and also the one manipulating the controller. I thought that since I am looking at my iPad screen to take pictures and manipulating the controls, I would not be considered maintaining VLOS? (yes, I have not gone behind any buildings, if i look up from my controller I can still see it, but does the FAA want a constant eyes on the bird? Which would require a V/O with me at all times)?
I would not be using any goggles, just the iPad connected to my remote controller. I am the PIC and also the one manipulating the controller. I thought that since I am looking at my iPad screen to take pictures and manipulating the controls, I would not be considered maintaining VLOS? (yes, I have not gone behind any buildings, if i look up from my controller I can still see it, but does the FAA want a constant eyes on the bird? Which would require a V/O with me at all times)?
You must maintain VLOS with or without a VO.
If you're not operating under a waiver (it will mandate whether VO is required when operating under it) then you are not required to have a VO but always having one is a very good idea. Our company mandates at least 1 VO for any commercial operation.
If you're not operating under a waiver (it will mandate whether VO is required when operating under it) then you are not required to have a VO but always having one is a very good idea. Our company mandates at least 1 VO for any commercial operation.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2016
- Messages
- 68
- Reaction score
- 10
Thank you for the post.
Under this scenario, would i be considered to have VLOS:
I am the only person in the crew, I am the PIC. I am hired to take real estate pictures. I go to the house, setup my iPad on my P4 remote and off I go. I keep the bird at the front of the house where I am standing BUT I am looking down at my iPad screen to take pictures. Does this mean I do not have VLOS because I am looking down at my iPad screen and not looking at the bird in the sky? I heard that the FPV camera (ipad screen) does not qualify as VLOS. (unless that means, if I go behind a building).
BigAl, you said your company requires at least 1 extra person as the V/O. Is that a requirement by law or why did you choose to do that? I means you will have to hire an employee and pay them a lot more money.
Our company was doing this long before we even knew what a VO was. We operate with an abundance of caution and always have. Then when we got our Section 333 Exemption (prior to Part 107) a VO was required. So we had already made this part of our procedure and we never changed it.
We have people already on staff who can stand in as VO so why not utilize them and operate safely. Also some of the additional "Waivers" we are seeking will require VO(s) as well.
Sooo.... jdwarren When you said FPV, we think googles or the like that prevent you from seeing anything other than the screen. We all look at the phone / ipad / tablet when maneuvering to setup / preview the shot..
Now if you have your ipad / RC is mounted to a tripod and you stick your head inside a sunshade so you can't see the AC by just moving your eyes / twisting your head, then you don't have VLOS. Or like if you have your back to the AC, then again, you don't have VLOS.
The main thing about VLOS is being able to see the AC itself. Of course you are also required to see the area around it so you can watch for other AC or people.
When I read all of part 107.31 very carefully I find nowhere that it says I must eyeball my AC 100% of the time.
If you can see the AC out of the corner of your eye, then you have VLOS. You can look at your iPad. In fact, maintaining situation awareness of the flight requires you to break eye contact with the AC and look around every now and then & check your battery and other flight info status on your display. But looking at your ipad 100% of the time would not satisfy the 107.31 requirements.
Take a look at AC107-2 https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/AC_107-2_AFS-1_Signed.pdf , section 5.7. Here's you'll find that the FAA says it's ok for you to loose sight of the AC for a brief amount of time. However, it's generally accepted that this does not mean you can do something like a 360 around a house at near ground level, losing VLOS for quite a while.
TL;DR - You're fine.
Now if you have your ipad / RC is mounted to a tripod and you stick your head inside a sunshade so you can't see the AC by just moving your eyes / twisting your head, then you don't have VLOS. Or like if you have your back to the AC, then again, you don't have VLOS.
The main thing about VLOS is being able to see the AC itself. Of course you are also required to see the area around it so you can watch for other AC or people.
When I read all of part 107.31 very carefully I find nowhere that it says I must eyeball my AC 100% of the time.
If you can see the AC out of the corner of your eye, then you have VLOS. You can look at your iPad. In fact, maintaining situation awareness of the flight requires you to break eye contact with the AC and look around every now and then & check your battery and other flight info status on your display. But looking at your ipad 100% of the time would not satisfy the 107.31 requirements.
Take a look at AC107-2 https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/AC_107-2_AFS-1_Signed.pdf , section 5.7. Here's you'll find that the FAA says it's ok for you to loose sight of the AC for a brief amount of time. However, it's generally accepted that this does not mean you can do something like a 360 around a house at near ground level, losing VLOS for quite a while.
TL;DR - You're fine.
Must disagree with you about this. If you do have a VO then you the pilot does not need VLOS. Take a look at 107.31.(b):
"Throughout the entire flight of the small unmanned aircraft, the ability described in paragraph (a) of this section must be exercised by either:
(1) The remote pilot in command and the person manipulating the flight controls of the small unmanned aircraft system; or
(2) A visual observer."
So, If I wanted to, I could position my VO 1/4 mile away and fly to where we both could see it, the VO takes over primary VLOS and I fly further. As long as I or my VO (107.33) VLOS requirements are met, I'd be good to go.
I'm not an Aviation Attorney nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night but I believe you're reading this wrong. Without a VLOS waiver the PIC must be able to see the aircraft at all times. He/she may not have to be LOOKING at the aircraft but they must be able to see it and determine it's orientation and direction of flight.
Let me show the entire section so I can amplify on what I read:
§107.31 Visual line of sight aircraft operation.
(a) With vision that is unaided by any device other than corrective lenses, the remote pilot in command, the visual observer
(if one is used), and the person manipulating the flight control of the small unmanned aircraft system must be able to see the
unmanned aircraft throughout the entire flight in order to:
(1) Know the unmanned aircraft's location;
(2) Determine the unmanned aircraft's attitude, altitude, and direction of flight;
(3) Observe the airspace for other air traffic or hazards; and
(4) Determine that the unmanned aircraft does not endanger the life or property of another.
(b) Throughout the entire flight of the small unmanned aircraft, the ability described in paragraph (a) of this section must be
exercised by either:
(1) The remote pilot in command and the person manipulating the flight controls of the small unmanned aircraft system; or
(2) A visual observer.
As sometimes the FAA rules seem published backwards, first telling you what's needed and then saying exceptions to them or how to satisfy them, so seems this one.
First it says in section (a)1-4 what's VLOS requirement are.
Then in (b) is says that the stuff in (a)1-4 is satisfied by either (b)(1) or (b)(2).
(b)(1) say the PIC; (b)(2) says the VO. It says "by either". Not both, Or not just by only the PIC. Just "by either"
So there you have my reading of it. I'd truly welcome a discussion about what part / words preclude having only the VO (per 107.33) satisfy the requirements.
§107.31 Visual line of sight aircraft operation.
(a) With vision that is unaided by any device other than corrective lenses, the remote pilot in command, the visual observer
(if one is used), and the person manipulating the flight control of the small unmanned aircraft system must be able to see the
unmanned aircraft throughout the entire flight in order to:
(1) Know the unmanned aircraft's location;
(2) Determine the unmanned aircraft's attitude, altitude, and direction of flight;
(3) Observe the airspace for other air traffic or hazards; and
(4) Determine that the unmanned aircraft does not endanger the life or property of another.
(b) Throughout the entire flight of the small unmanned aircraft, the ability described in paragraph (a) of this section must be
exercised by either:
(1) The remote pilot in command and the person manipulating the flight controls of the small unmanned aircraft system; or
(2) A visual observer.
As sometimes the FAA rules seem published backwards, first telling you what's needed and then saying exceptions to them or how to satisfy them, so seems this one.
First it says in section (a)1-4 what's VLOS requirement are.
Then in (b) is says that the stuff in (a)1-4 is satisfied by either (b)(1) or (b)(2).
(b)(1) say the PIC; (b)(2) says the VO. It says "by either". Not both, Or not just by only the PIC. Just "by either"
So there you have my reading of it. I'd truly welcome a discussion about what part / words preclude having only the VO (per 107.33) satisfy the requirements.
Also, just for kicks here are the performance standards for requesting a waiver of 107.31:
- Applicant must provide the method by which the remote pilot will be able to continuously know and determine the position, altitude, attitude, and movement of their sUA and ensure the aircraft remains in the area of intended operation.
- Applicant must provide a method for the remote pilot to avoid other aircraft, people on the ground, and ground-based structures and obstacles at all times.
- Applicant must provide a method to increase conspicuity of the sUA to be seen at a distance of 3 statute miles unless a system is in place that can avoid all non-participating aircraft.
- Applicant must provide a means by which the remote pilot is alerted of a degraded sUAS function.
- Applicant must provide a method to assure all required persons participating in the operation have relevant knowledge of all aspects of operating a sUA that is not in visual line of sight of the remote pilot.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2016
- Messages
- 68
- Reaction score
- 10
Great info!! Thank you so much for writing it out. It makes sense, and that is what I thought, but I always doubt myself with FAA rules!
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2016
- Messages
- 68
- Reaction score
- 10
I have heard similar things that the V/O can take over the primary VLOS of your drone, as long as he/she has radio communication. I can't remember where I saw that but have you ever heard of it before?
I have also heard that the PIC is the main head honcho that has the final say on everything which means he may have to keep VLOS on it ...
This is correct.
Conversely, under Part 101 (hobbyist), the OPERATOR must have VLOS at all times and cannot use a visual observer (or goggles).
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2016
- Messages
- 68
- Reaction score
- 10
holy smokes... read #5 again.. it says that the all the ppl must have knowledge of operating w/o VLOS... well if it is illegal for me to fly w/o VLOS (unless i get a permit) then how in the bloody hell am I gonna get any knowledge of operating that way! Can't teach us w/o letting us do it ..
I just got 100% confirmation from our FAA sUAS Liaison in regards to PIC and VLOS.. I was going over some things with him and I tossed the VO question mentioned above and asked for clarification. Here it is directly from the FAA:
"For the VLOS question, the RPIC must maintain VLOS with the UA at all times. The VO provision is for the temporary moments when the RPIC may need to look down at the data they may be collecting on additional systems. During those times, the VO would be able to alert the RPIC of any danger."
If anyone wants to call their FSDO and get their input I'm confident you'll get the same interpretation.
"For the VLOS question, the RPIC must maintain VLOS with the UA at all times. The VO provision is for the temporary moments when the RPIC may need to look down at the data they may be collecting on additional systems. During those times, the VO would be able to alert the RPIC of any danger."
If anyone wants to call their FSDO and get their input I'm confident you'll get the same interpretation.
Just to flame the fire some more, this is from the FAA Part 107 Advisory Circular
"For operational necessity, the remote PIC or person manipulating the controls may intentionally maneuver the UA so that he or she loses sight of it for brief periods of time. Should the remote PIC or person manipulating the controls lose VLOS of the small UA, he or she must regain VLOS as soon as practicable. For example, a remote PIC stationed on the ground utilizing a small UA to inspect a rooftop may lose sight of the aircraft for brief periods while inspecting the farthest point of the roof. As another example, a remote PIC conducting a search operation around a fire scene with a small UA may briefly lose sight of the aircraft while it is temporarily behind a dense column of smoke. ". NO mention of needing a VO.
I agree with what you've said but I think the key is "brief" rather than transferring the visual requirement to another person. Posted above it was stated that the VO could take over the VLOS requirement to extend the flight distance but that's clearly NOT the case in the eyes of the FAA without the infamous VLOS waiver.
The intent here is to ensure that the PIC knows the environment around the UAS and can ensure that there will not be a collision with something (wire, bird, tree, building, etc) that may or may not be moving in the environment around the UAS.
In my operations, I've found birds to be the most pervasive problem - especially with the Mavic. They seem to treat it as a potentially interloping bird and tend to come check it out, The Phantom, I guess, is loud enough and weird looking enough to avoid all but confrontations involving a nest in most cases.
If you know the operating environment and are assured of the safety of the craft - as in the cited case of moving a few feet to inspect a different portion of a rooftop when the aircraft is a few dozen feet from you - the danger factor is low enough to where the minor NLOS isn't a significant risk. This is vastly different than flying thousands of feet away where you have zero idea of what's around the aircraft at all.
In my operations, I've found birds to be the most pervasive problem - especially with the Mavic. They seem to treat it as a potentially interloping bird and tend to come check it out, The Phantom, I guess, is loud enough and weird looking enough to avoid all but confrontations involving a nest in most cases.
If you know the operating environment and are assured of the safety of the craft - as in the cited case of moving a few feet to inspect a different portion of a rooftop when the aircraft is a few dozen feet from you - the danger factor is low enough to where the minor NLOS isn't a significant risk. This is vastly different than flying thousands of feet away where you have zero idea of what's around the aircraft at all.
And there in lies the rub.The first sentence says "MUST ... AT ALL TIMES" and the next one says "WHEN THE RPIC MAY ... LOOK DOWN". So now we have an inconsistency even there.
Please ask your FAA sUAS Liaison why 107.31(b) has the word "EITHER" in the sentence that specifies who may fulfill ALL of the VLOS requirements in 107.31(a)(1-4).
If it's miss-worded then reword it or publish a clarification in the Federal Register.
Similar threads
- Poll
