How High Can The P3S Go With Litchi App?

[DanMan32]

Technically the phantom can be set to allow height as much as 500 meters, or approx 1500 feet.
The setting is in meters regardless of what unit setting you set the app to. Go will warn you that you are asking to exceed regulation limits.

He said 2.5 miles from town, not from an airport. Still, FAA has jurisdiction and they say 400 feet unless you get clearance from them.
I'd love to try going as high as it can go just once but air traffic is just too populated here to risk going that high. I pretty much stay around 100 feet.

Sent from my HTC 10 using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Paul60]

Technically the phantom can be set to allow height as much as 500 meters, or approx 1500 feet.
The setting is in meters regardless of what unit setting you set the app to. Go will warn you that you are asking to exceed regulation limits.

He said 2.5 miles from town, not from an airport. Still, FAA has jurisdiction and they say 400 feet unless you get clearance from them.
I'd love to try going as high as it can go just once but air traffic is just too populated here to risk going that high. I pretty much stay around 100 feet.

Sent from my HTC 10 using PhantomPilots mobile app

I don't even like flying much above 100ft anymore. I get a stiff neck and dizzy. Must be getting old.

 

[Unit505]

Technically the phantom can be set to allow height as much as 500 meters, or approx 1500 feet.
The setting is in meters regardless of what unit setting you set the app to. Go will warn you that you are asking to exceed regulation limits.

He said 2.5 miles from town, not from an airport. Still, FAA has jurisdiction and they say 400 feet unless you get clearance from them.
I'd love to try going as high as it can go just once but air traffic is just too populated here to risk going that high. I pretty much stay around 100 feet.

Sent from my HTC 10 using PhantomPilots mobile app

I exceeded the maximum once before I knew the rules. The view was stunning and no where near 1500ft. I'm with you on wanting to take it to the limit just once to see. I wonder what my local FAA office would say? I got clearance to fly within 5 miles of our local airport on a Sunday afternoon for two hours and the FAA guy was really cool about it. A few years ago, I was in charge of safety for a horse track and we had to call the air force base for permission to do fireworks shows. It was amazing the information they would give you. "Oh the airfield and tower will be closed during that timeframe". I could have been Osama himself and they had no idea who I was!

 

[solentlife]

Even today, you hear glider flyers in their jingo talking about 'specking it out'.

Gliders are meant to fly high. They are fast, can be quite large & relatively hefty. No one seems too fussed.

There seems to be a disliking of 'drones' among the public.

A glider (sailplane) is ok though as it looks like a proper airplane.?

The 'nanny state' mentality has bit hard too in the past 10+ years. You can't f**t these days without getting a lecture or locked up.

Hi Paul ....

Problem is if you compare incidents of 'Drones' vs other RC - you find Idiots with Drones far outweigh all other RC disciplines added together.

Look at Hogwart ..... he did more damage to Multi-Rotor flying than a whole state of others. Look at the other idiot bouncing of walls in New York Street ... the other guy who caused fire fighting aircraft to be grounded because HE wanted video footage of the forest fire ..... the 'Secrete Service' guy who lost control and landed on rear lawn of White House !

The 'Drone' creates a false sense of safe. So these idiots then go and fly in totally unsuitable locations ... they do stupid antics and then complain when they get hammered.

What really p's me of - is that it spills over to regulate and affect all other forms of RC flying.

Today I am a speaker at a Conference of Remote Piloted Vehicles in Riga ... this sort of topic is food for bureaucrats .. and I try my best to limit it.

Nigel

 

[Paul60]

You are 100% Nigel.

Much of it comes down to common sense, although I freely admit I didn't show much of that myself 25+ years ago. We just didn't really think about collisions with other aircraft then. To us, they were 'model planes'.

As I mentioned, I don't like flying much over 100ft these days, and actually enjoy buzzing around at roof, tree top height.

Paul.

 

[Paul60]

Heh, on a brighter note, I just ordered a 2nd P3S controller.

Seeing as I drilled a hole in my original one, I may just keep this one bone stock.

No mods!

 

[solentlife]

I made two videos yesterday basically for Cruising Association - to show port and yachting areas ...

I enjoyed getting lower and getting eye-view of the parts ... made the flights less boring !!

The second one is still uploading so please wait a bit !!

Nigel

 

[Phantom of the Gorge]

Even today, you hear glider flyers in their jingo talking about 'specking it out'.

Gliders are meant to fly high. They are fast, can be quite large & relatively hefty. No one seems too fussed.

There seems to be a disliking of 'drones' among the public.

A glider (sailplane) is ok though as it looks like a proper airplane.?

The 'nanny state' mentality has bit hard too in the past 10+ years. You can't f**t these days without getting a lecture or locked up.

I wonder if any of the public's dislike of Drones comes from those futuristic films where they are always interfering with the hero.

 

[Jive]

Did the OP give up?

 

[Unit505]

Gone to report us to the governor!

 

[solentlife]

I wonder if any of the public's dislike of Drones comes from those futuristic films where they are always interfering with the hero.

I personally dislike the name Drone. In my mind - it creates in public mind visions of video surveilance as in Military / Police use.
I would much prefer to go back to the Hobbyists terms of Quadcopter / Multi-Rotor etc. Much nicer sounding and no connection to the military stuff.

Nigel

 

[SkyHog]

It seems there is a presumption that anyone flying higher than 400 ft above home point must be violating the regulations. I suppose most people making these comments must be flying over generally flat terrain. I live in an area of rolling hills, among some forests with very tall trees. This makes some nice perches to capture great views below, with viewsheds that exceed many miles, but also flying from low spots near hills. I can easily fly with great visual line of sight, with altitude excursions of more than 1000 ft, while never flying more than 400 ft above the ground. It would be silly to limit my maximum altitude to 400 ft above my takeoff point, because I'd use almost 150 ft of that just to get over the trees in my own yard! Instead, I set my altitude limit to 1640 ft (max), and I often use over 1000 ft of that range, all while flying perfectly legally, and fully within FAA guidance.

Also, the Go app warning does NOT warn that you are asking to exceed regulation limits, as is often said by commenters. It actually warns that you could exceed limits (if you don't pay attention to terrain). DJI Go and Litchi allow altitude limits to be set far above 400 ft, because that is perfectly legal in many cases.

 

[DanMan32]

That's just semantics. The parenthesis part in the warning states a 400 foot flight limit is set by the FAA. I don't think flying up a steep hill was in mind when the warning was written into the app. More likely one setting a limit above 400 is looking to be more than 400 AGL either knowingly or unknowingly the rules or guidelines.
Point is though a warning is posted if you try a setting higher than 400ft and quite a wordy warning too.

 

[SkyHog]

That's just semantics.

Of course it's just semantics. That's the whole point. You think setting a limit above 400 ft means someone is "looking to be more than 400 AGL", and I don't think that is necessarily so. I already gave you several examples where it isn't so, but if you want to think setting an altitude above 400 ft is breaking the rules, go right ahead and use your own semantics and think what you wish.

 

[solentlife]

Today out in clear open field well away from any obstacles / flight patterns etc. - I set the P3S climbing ...

I set her about 130m distance in front of me and then just went up .... she reached about 470m and then initiated RTH ... unfortunately as she climbed - air movement caused a positional shift and she ended up nearer to me at that height triggering the RTH.
I was getting low on battery and also demonstrating the P3S to a new owner who has problems with his. He sent his of to DJI service before I could take a look ... he has the typical failed Upgrade story ...

So thats today 470m altitude ... I will try again another day with further out from Home Point to keep control as long as possible and not trigger RTH.

Litchi and 1.8.10 FW .... Icarus 27db .... Argtec antenna system.

Video will be uploaded later ...

Nigel

 

[skiptv]

People should have to take their FAA flight test before they can actually buy a drone, then present that document to drone dealers. People like Chmewy are just going to eff-it up for all the rest of us. Hey Chmewy, go to a flight school, then get your FAA License. The day you screw up, and it sounds like it is coming soon, you'll go to jail, or pay a huge fine, or some one that you crash into is going to sue the hell out of you, additionally you might actually hurt someone.

 

[solentlife]

WOW ... bring on Arnie !!

Nigel

 

[Unit505]

People should have to take their FAA flight test before they can actually buy a drone, then present that document to drone dealers. People like Chmewy are just going to eff-it up for all the rest of us. Hey Chmewy, go to a flight school, then get your FAA License. The day you screw up, and it sounds like it is coming soon, you'll go to jail, or pay a huge fine, or some one that you crash into is going to sue the hell out of you, additionally you might actually hurt someone.

I'm not a pilot, but I know a few. Flight school is going to teach what? Rules? I know of no license or college degree out there that grades you on common sense. So with that said, I disagree with the FAA License idea. I completely get where you're coming from. Again, I repeat, COMMON SENSE! I work in the medical field. It's a **** shame that they teach people that "You'll never go wrong by the book!". People die because of those **** books! I'd rather see a "Common Sense Certification". Flying, Medical, Public Service, Etc. Academies are a great place to test this "Common Sense" thing. The whole class passes or fails. One idiot screws it up for you, the rest deal out the punishment. I feel this way about gun crimes too. You screw up with a gun and it's gun owners that you have to deal with! Ok, I'm done! Lol

 

[Goldenzrule]

Am I the only one that noticed the pic of Mayor Quimby immediately being followed by the OP say he is from Springfield

 

[Phantom of the Gorge]

I'm not a pilot, but I know a few. Flight school is going to teach what? Rules? I know of no license or college degree out there that grades you on common sense. So with that said, I disagree with the FAA License idea. I completely get where you're coming from. Again, I repeat, COMMON SENSE!

I got my private pilot's licence years ago. I remember in the ground school portion a particular individual that had failed the FAA written exam something like 6 or 7 times. Talking to his instructor, I found out he had over 70 hours of dual instruction (actual flight time with instructor) and still had not done his first solo flight, the average was something like 10 or 12.This guy had no common sense.
My point is that there is a certain amount of common sense built into the testing requirements. The above person was being subsidized by a rich Arab uncle, any normal person would have run out of money long before ever receiving a license.