So this just happened......NFZ Forced Landing

Status
Not open for further replies.
Your assuming the FW allows for RTH to be initiated when flying LCMC.

Someday it might be implemented (assuming its possible).

In the interim you now know you have one additional consideration to be mindful of.
Well if it allows for immediate uncontrolled landing I'm sure it can do a return home.
 
Last edited:
I'm not offering legal advice but from what I have been informed if your flying outside FAA guidelines your going to be holding the can. You may have some cause of action against other parties to the extent you demonstrate manufacturing fault or software issue contributed. I can't think of anything worse than potentially contributing to significant injury or death that could have been avoided. You will loose everything you own in the process also.
Yes. Except it's really in direct violation of the law. It's not just outside FAA guidelines.

If you're flying under FAR Part 101, you're flying either VLOS at best or FPV at worst. In either one of those scenarios, the pilot could have recognized the problem early and brought his AC back without a hitch.

There is nothing in the ruling allowing for autonomous flights. If one is going to do it anyway - in direct violation of Part 101 - one better be ready to face the legal consequences when something unexpectedly goes wrong.

In fact, the pilot can be fined even if nothing goes wrong. It can be a perfect flight, and he can still be heavily fined.

I think if I was going to fly autonomous missions, I would save my missions for open farmland, rural mountain areas, the ocean, etc.
 
Apologies if I didn't express myself clearly- my point was that conducting operation outside the guidelines will likely provide little, if any, available means to avoid consequences or diminish responsibility for consequential loss or harm. It seems we agree.

Im surprised Litchi doesn't issue a warning in their documentation. Autoflight Logic makes it clear that in enabling LCMC you are assuming liability for any violation of applicable regulations.
 
Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I am beginning to feel the risk / benefit ratio is getting too large for long range autonomous litchi missions (and I have done quite a few myself) Keep us updated if you here anything from Litchi. Thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bkushner
For the record Litchi says their update did not cause this. Not sure how you explain it happening for the first time since update but who knows..Perhaps something else knocked me out of the mission, this will also cause a land in place if it doesn't connect with controller..In any event Litchi has promised to work on something to notify if your planned mission breaches any no fly zones..That company is ON THE BALL..they answer quickly and accurately. One other thing I mentioned to them is some kind of warning if a way point conflicts with altitude...Let's say you set a point and your altitude is below the actual ground level...also one time I had -200 feet instead of 200 feet and that bird came down, I recovered but a warning telling me -200 would be below ground would be great.
 
Apologies if I didn't express myself clearly- my point was that conducting operation outside the guidelines will likely provide little, if any, available means to avoid consequences or diminish responsibility for consequential loss or harm. It seems we agree.

Im surprised Litchi doesn't issue a warning in their documentation. Autoflight Logic makes it clear that in enabling LCMC you are assuming liability for any violation of applicable regulations.
I agree with you 100%. But here's my take...for me missions are everything. I send the bird out to film various things that I couldn't fly to or get their physically..Part of the fun is bird returning and viewing the video..also part of that thrill too is waiting for the bird to return and the feeling you get when it does, or as in my case yesterday the HORROR when it doesn't.

There is no doubt if I lost the drone I'd be 100% responsible for that but that doesn't diminish the current way DJI helps you lose it. There are people that have connection when this happens and they still lose the bird. It's simple, RTH if you are heading for a NFZ breach that's the safest...thing.
 
Yes. Except it's really in direct violation of the law. It's not just outside FAA guidelines.

If you're flying under FAR Part 101, you're flying either VLOS at best or FPV at worst. In either one of those scenarios, the pilot could have recognized the problem early and brought his AC back without a hitch.

There is nothing in the ruling allowing for autonomous flights. If one is going to do it anyway - in direct violation of Part 101 - one better be ready to face the legal consequences when something unexpectedly goes wrong.

In fact, the pilot can be fined even if nothing goes wrong. It can be a perfect flight, and he can still be heavily fined.

I think if I was going to fly autonomous missions, I would save my missions for open farmland, rural mountain areas, the ocean, etc.
I understand all that but there are many stories online of people in control of the bird that lose or or battle to get it back because when this auto landing starts you cannot raise altitude. There was one story of a guy that was flying over a river, with radio control, entered NFZ with no warning and the bird started landing..As he's now reversing to back out of NFZ there is a large group of trees along the banks of the river, keep in mind he cannot go any higher even after he's backed out of the NFZ, clips the trees but did get bird back. There is another guy with radio control that was too far to get bird back to his home spot before it landed and it set down in the middle of a highway, he could see the cars coming at the bird..So this is not an autonomous flight issue only.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JonEQuest
There is no doubt if I lost the drone I'd be 100% responsible for that but that doesn't diminish the current way DJI helps you lose it. There are people that have connection when this happens and they still lose the bird. It's simple, RTH if you are heading for a NFZ breach that's the safest...thing.

While I do agree that most of the time a RTH might be the best option but what if your flight path brings you into the NFZ from an angle that doesn't allow for a direct RTH. It's a bit more complex than simply RTH because you have to think about the route home (may not be direct), Battery life, and obstacles. Sometimes a "reverse the trip" might work better but how to decide which route is beyond this reply.
 
Did you upload your flight log to see if there are any clues as to how this actually panned out.

May help the litchi crew also.
 
Yes I agree as one of the solutions but my suggestion is that it should not take off at all if it senses NFZs on the mission route. Missions are planned on ground so why can't it check it the moment you place a waypoint.


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots
Exactly!
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlashBuddy
What about video it recorded, now this would be interesting to see
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,356
Members
104,934
Latest member
jody.paugh@fullerandsons.