VLOS
With apologies, if needed, for bringing the topic up...
I don’t see any reference to VLOS in this app (or any others for that matter). I’m wondering how one maintains - or ensures - the VLOS requirement when planning a mission. (I was prompted to ask having been amused by a comment I read that said that the mission was VLOS even though the aircraft couldn’t be seen...)
I’m assuming that the intention isn’t for one to apply for an SFOC (or local equivalent) for every waypoint/path mission created in DL?
This is not a question of a desire to “police” the practices of others, but a sincere concern for maintaining legal flight as a professional pilot.
Thoughts?
Comments
8 comments
I don't think the app developers have any responsibility to mention VLOS. Much like cars being able to go much faster than any posted speed limit; yet to see an owners manual mention speeding.
And again much like speeding each individual decides if, when and how much to exceed the regulations in force. I would hope in both cases that safety is the primary factor taken into account when making the decision.
Mission apps can be very useful in many ways while still keeping the drone in VLOS.
There’s an interesting legal liability point here though. Just like the RV manufacturers who were joined into a suit where the driver left the wheel to make coffee (and claimed that there was nothing in the manual that said he couldn’t do that - leading to extensive safety and exclusion clauses in the manual), what would happen were an app developer to be joined into a suit where a drone caused injury while operating under the authority of a waypoint flight app? It’s not just a moot point either, given the litigious direction in which the world continues to move and the apparent increasing stupidity of some of the planet’s inhabitants.
i realize this is somewhat off-topic for beta testing the app...
Feel free to read our terms of use. You are not allowed to do anything illegal with our software.
Daily it seems people post videos of flights that are plainly in violation of existing FAA regs. So when the inevitable video is posted showing a flight using Dronelink which is clearly beyond VLOS what is the recourse.
I’m based in Canada, but the same question would arise. I suppose it’s covered in the Terms of Use (“comply with all applicable laws and governmental regulations”) but as an ex-lawyer, I would want to argue in court that any autonomous flight, no matter what app, is not directly “under the control” of the PIC. However, I suspect the answer would probably be the same as for an aircraft on autopilot, where the pilot is supposed to be monitoring the systems and immediately able to take human control if needed. But given the recent 787 Max accidents, the locus of liability is at least open to question.
Anyhow, this is rather ancillary to our primary purpose here and more of a thought exercise than anything else. Sorry, Jim, if you consider this an inappropriate discussion; DL is doing some great things and definitely is something I want in my work flow - it will be interesting to see if Litchi et al respond with further development of their own.
Andrew, your example would point to DJI, the "vehicle" manufacturer. They are the ones who built a device capable of breaking the law, and they know this.
It's pretty iffy going after someone when there's no way to know when your product is being used illegally, and I'd expect if anyone were to try in this instance, they'd go after the deep pockets; that's again DJI.
I'd expect expressly forbidding illegal use of your product is the best you can do. You can't protect yourself 100% from litigation. I've heard it said, "you can indict a ham sandwich". Well, you can probably sue one too.
I reckon this is what liability insurance is for. 😁
Good points, Dan. Mind you, the situation hasn't been helped by the likes of Transport Canada who didn't take action against a blatant and public beach of the regulations in Toronto during the Raptors celebration when someone well-known flew right over a crowd, at night, in downtown Toronto (within a control zone), without an SFOC. If they ignore that kind of behaviour, then it's open for anyone to do anything. No point having regulations and then refusing to enforce them.
this topic of VLOS is already being address by FAA and will be allowed under certain criteria.....i mean is VLOS even preventable? says who any drone cant have a flyaway?? the key for drones will be to have full scale aircraft location awareness and avoidance (ADS-B) and also onboard FAA compliant transponder, which are becoming lower cost....this way both, drones and aircraft are aware of each other....and take evasive action (TCAS)
Please sign in to leave a comment.