Practical guidelines for self-regulation of sUAS ops

[Bartman]

It would be wise if those of us in unregulated areas could agree to abide by a set of common sense rules.

My first run at this would include

Operation
No overflying people
No overflying active lanes of vehicular traffic
No overflying private property where owner permission hasn't been received
Altitude less than 400 ft.
All flying to remain within line of site
Flying solely by reference to FPV reference prohibited
Use of ground spotter required in densely populated areas (to manage foot traffic and distractions while sUAS is airborne)
Final authority as to the conduct and safety of the flight lies with the pilot (full scale pilots accept this responsibility with every flight regardless of the nature of the flight)
Absolutely no flying into dense fog or cloud cover

Equipment
Redundant power supply
Redundant (diversity) radio receiver capability
Weight to be less than XXXX lbs. (XXXX kg.)
Preflight check to cover mechanical and electrical connections to be conducted before every flight
Fail-safe scheme to include at a minimum

• controlled/safe rate of descent
• return home (to at least get the heli moving towards a known location even if it doesn't make it back before achieving ground contact)

Audible and visual low voltage indications
Aircraft grade fastening schemes (positive hold, no chance of loosening, redundant hold if necessary)


What else can we come up with as a way to better operate our equipment and to set expectations for new users to live up to?

 

[hjls3]

edit post to keep things nice and simple......Never fly near an airport.

 

[HPL]

It would be wise if those of us in unregulated areas could agree to abide by a set of common sense rules.

My first run at this would include

Operation
No overflying people Good in theory, but a bit too broad I think. I might make it more like "No overflying crowds" perhaps
No overflying active lanes of vehicular traffic
No overflying private property where owner permission hasn't been received Also a bit broad. I don't have any experience, but I would bet it's pretty hard to tell exactly where the craft is once it's a hundred feet up and a hundred feet away.
Altitude less than 400 ft.
All flying to remain within line of site
Flying solely by reference to FPV reference prohibited
Use of ground spotter required in densely populated areas (to manage foot traffic and distractions while sUAS is airborne)
Final authority as to the conduct and safety of the flight lies with the pilot (full scale pilots accept this responsibility with every flight regardless of the nature of the flight)
Absolutely no flying into dense fog or cloud cover

Equipment
Redundant power supply
Redundant (diversity) radio receiver capability Can you explain this please?
Weight to be less than XXXX lbs. (XXXX kg.)
Preflight check to cover mechanical and electrical connections to be conducted before every flight Really good idea and I would like to see the full pre-flight spelled out here on this site so that new folks like me have it as a reference.
Fail-safe scheme to include at a minimum

• controlled/safe rate of descent Exactly what does this mean. I saw an ad for a ballistically deployed parachute the other day. (approx $3000.00)
• return home (to at least get the heli moving towards a known location even if it doesn't make it back before achieving ground contact)

Audible and visual low voltage indications
Aircraft grade fastening schemes (positive hold, no chance of loosening, redundant hold if necessary)


What else can we come up with as a way to better operate our equipment and to set expectations for new users to live up to?

I am planning to try to get a visit with my State House rep in a few days to discuss some upcoming legislation (Texas) and would really like some thoughtful input so that I don't put my foot in it.

 

[ZAxis]

For those in the States and elsewhere, a look at the UK sUAV aerial work permissions is worthwhile. All in all they are a very sensible and thought out set of guidelines. It boils down to learn air law, air navigation charts, write an operations manual and then take a test to demonstrate you do what you say you do.

You can download the document here.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP722.pdf

Look at Section 3. Civil Operation.

andy

 

[Gary Mortimer]

I will +1 on Andys post, CAP 722 all around. I actually think the FAA would be relieved if a group came to them and said that's how they operate.

 

[Stacky]

What about those of us who want to fly in wilderness areas below 100 ft but going 600-800 meters fpv. Thats out of sight effectively with a small quad, it becomes a tiny dot to the naked eye.?

 

[nicwilke]

I think Long range FPV should be more tightly regulated. In Australia, we have a lot of dry bushland, and if you crash in a high fire hazard area on a high risk day (warm and windy), if you are 1000 metres away, you'd have no time to get to ground zero to extinguish a fire. I think lipo cases will need to be deployed if flying out of line of sight. Come to think of it, lipo protection cases should be mandatory on all machines. I know Barts rules are a good general set of rules, so I'm only commenting on the flying out of line of site, it needs to be restricted. TBS have a lot to answer for with hacks going out and breaking the law.