Where can i Fly FPV , The UK Law

[Tamiyacowboy]

So where can we fly FPV safely and within the law.

this subject i am asked alot from pilots on MUSK and it is about time i left a video link explaining the Law. 

 

First off OPEN this link to the Notam website : http://www.notaminfo.com/ukmap

NEXT, on right panel unselect all notam details.

Below notam details is AIRSPACE details click this and select SHOW CONTROL ZONES.

 

Now notice those pink blobs, these are airspace control areas. in these areas you find airports. we are interested in CLASS D airspace

this is Ground upto 2000ft. have a listen to what is said in the video, check your local area for any control areas and if so the relevent websites mentioned in the video.

to find your local control areas and the maps to see where the boundrys are. 

 

As always fly safe and away from the clouds, i leave you with the video and some good info on our UK laws for FPV and and our growing hobby.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-G3G7jAxz8#t=270

[samshirley001]

i was told it had to be line of sight, with someone watching making sure its okay, not sure on altitude

[turok007]

i don't know when the BMFA updated it but.  (When flying FPV RC, the pilots MUST use a buddy box system with the pilot in charge using the master transmitter)      so no more flying miles away unless the person with you has super vision.   so that sort of means anyone showing a video of a quad miles away from the take off point might be in a little trouble.

Edited June 2, 2014 by turok007

[Smoothybb]

i don't know when the BMFA updated it but.  (When flying FPV RC, the pilots MUST use a buddy box system with the pilot in charge using the master transmitter)      so no more flying miles away unless the person with you has super vision.   so that sort of means anyone showing a video of a quad miles away from the take off point might be in a little trouble.

 

I have recently been told that you shouldn't be using a video tx strong enough to go out of eyesight (les than 100mw I think he quoted). Not sure how accurate that is but it wouldn't surprise me with what you can and can't broadcast and the strength of the signal.

 

It does annoy me that there seems to be so little info on the letter of the law. Everyone has their own opinion on the law but I haven't yet found anywhere that categorises various types of rc aircraft or even bungs them all in together.

As far as I'm concerned, as long as I don't drift too close to brum airport I should be okay. As for buddy box or spotter when FPV'ing - errr, can't see that happening either. I can see why they have that requirement but still, I don't know anyone that is going to stand next to me for 1/2hr or longer while I mess about on the edge of the visible.

Edited June 2, 2014 by Smoothybb

[turok007]

the last thing i see was 250mw is ok but the 600mw needs a radio license.   as for the spotter it is a law now so if something happens then they would go by the law. but  as some someone catching you doing FPV without a spotter then i don't know what they will do about it.   i go by play safe.  and just don't do anything silly.  but alot of people are getting into the almost self fly quad scene  so something bad is going to happen then the laws will get very strict.

[Smoothybb]

That is the problem, we're transitioning from straight rc to UAV, way-point scheduling and autopilot home etc, the law can't keep up I accept but as with everything else they seem to take the most obstinate position, probably on the basis they hardly ever prosecute but could if they wanted.

 

The thing is, where we fly, there's no houses for quite some way but still, if I lost control it could still float a good mile or two before coming down. How is a spotter going to help me regardless of FPV or not? I guess there is an increased risk with FPV but hopefully I'll come under the radar (get it) by being true rc, not self-piloting vehicle. Probably not though.

 

Again, not seen any update but last time we were flying at dassett, someone who spoke with authority (good at BS maybe) claimed anything over 100mw needed radio licence. I give up. Think I'll go with dual input goggles, one the FPV and one a film. If anyone in authority does ask, I'll deny the plane is mine, I'm just out watching a movie in the countryside.............

[turok007]

i know the spotter was used because of landing and taking off with a RC plane.  but with quads i know a lot of people remove the goggles when landing anyway.   also if your quad is flying around trees in a wood or something a spotter will be no help.  lol   so just be as safe a possible.

[Tamiyacowboy]

no offence but the gov and CCA should keep away from RC as a whole. 

 

these idiots just see a large fat wallet nothing else, we been flying RC since the early 70's ,

what the hedge bet that these people making the rules up SIT on their fat rears all day .... 

NEVER flown an rc, have NO clue about the hobby .... yet feel the need to make US pay for something we have been doing for what

30-40YRS+

 

i have had a guttful of it all, if some nubbin comes and taps me on shoulder and says you cant fly that, well

im just going to hand the handset to them and googles and say " well here you fly the ******ing thing then !!! ".

I bet they would say something if we started adding .22 rifles and stuff to our machines and started playing real life skirmish

with out machines. 

 

take the BBC, i seen some of their quad videos and they 100% break the rules

i mean they fly in open areas and urban areas, i bet they didnt get permission to fly from owners land, ie the local councils 

i bet they did not ask everyone on the street at the time " hey mind if we fly our machine here ". 

and flying close proximity to public to. YET we hobbyists are expected to do all this and more.

a joke. 

 

commercial = money makers 

Hobbyists = the idiots that made this tech, we ironed out the stuff, worked out the props motors escs and battery selections.

 

 

yet commercial muppets can muscle in on OUR hobby and make us hurt worse.

how can a normal hobbyist afford 4k+ for a licence its beyond me 

[Smoothybb]

Screw that, it's hard enough landing at the best of times, reckon it will be a while before I come in FPV'd. I haven't even got the gear yet so maybe talking out of turn. Your safety first is a good message, one I tend to ignore in the heat of the moment when flying lol.

 

Ultimately, as you mentioned above, the chances of anything ever happening are so slim and even if something did go wrong, just deny having the goggles on anyway!

[Smoothybb]

@ Tamiya - the problem is the accessability of the hobby to both joe public and those wanting to take it into the commercial sphere. 20yrs ago I couldn't have afforded to get involved in rc flying, both cost and building skill. Now however, I can afford various models, both foam and balsa because they're cheaper and in a lot of cases, easier to put together. Radio gear, batteries etc etc it's all more easily accessable now and that means more people are flying. Remember when you had devotees and enthusiasts flying, not so much anymore, it's people like me that just want to dip into the hobby. We didn't have speed limits until more cars on the roads and people using the M1 for speed testing.

 

Unfortunately, like most things, the more people getting involved means more people are going to cause problems. The same devoted hobbyists will still act carefully and safely as before, however you now have the erm 'chav' element ruining it for the rest of the hobby. It can't be self-policed so what else is there but to formalise the rules and tighten them even further. I'm not in favour of more regulation but at the same time I think anything to deter the casual flyer chucking up a 20kg multi-rotor without any thought or checking sounds like a good idea. I know it's not quite the same but I have seen 3 sets of kid/adult take the indoor type heli's or quads onto the playing field, send them high and they don't come back. Where did they come down? At that weight unlikely to do much damage but what happens when they go to the next size up and do the same?

 

It's not people like you. Dare I say it, it's people more like me that just want to throw and go without worrying about what might happen without the appropriate checks and safe flying techniques. Sadly, they are the type least likely to check what the rules are and how to fly properly.

[turok007]

i have been flying years but only had quads about a year.  and i have the FPV gear.  but i have only ever used it on a mini quad in the back garden. and that is how it's going to be until i have had a few hours flight experience with FPV.  even though i have a quad will full GPS and return to home features. which can almost fly itself.  i just want to be as safe as possible. 

[Smoothybb]

I'll be doing the same although not the garden, the bixler doesn't go too well in such a confined space.

 

Plan is, launch, drop goggles on but keep well within sight. At some point though I'm going to take it higher and at the moment, I have no idea of the range of the radio gear. Lot harder to test than ground stuff!

[Tamiyacowboy]

testing radio gear range. 

 

couple servos hooked into reciver your using and a very long road. 

 

have a friend with the semi setup start walking down the road, keep moving all flight sticks until

the RX starts to flash ( this is frame loss, where the signal starts to wain off) signaling frame loss.

normaly you would not notice this to much flying, but frame loss means a very unstable signal and will lead to a shutdown

any frame loss as in 3+ frames one after the other (about a second-two seconds) your bombed out.

 

orangerx R610 made a max 70m 

orangerx r610 with sat made 140m 

 

thats a 50% gain in distance 

 

orangerx R710 with at made 4000ft before a failsafe was engaged on a test video i watched and studied

 

a spektrum setup aka spectrum branded reciever made double.

i am now really debating the orangerc stuff now ok its cheap but range is one big problem it seems.

worse thing, i just forked out for a r710 orange reciever for my fpv quad, i dont think i will be flying the quad fro another 6months

until i can afford a spektrum rx.

 

anyways am hopeful to grab a AS3Xtra airframe this friday if all pans out so atleast i can get airborne

and run some F3P  3d flights maybe a few vids to static ground vids that is.

 

Testing FPV signal range is just the same a large open countryside and a mate thats no affraid to wander a couple km

maybe a bike and headcam mount with the pilot linking that way. as always use a decent walkie talkie set

as you need to know when the glitching happens and shuts down fully. 

 

DX6i power output is 25mw ( milliwatts , note a standard CB radio outputs 10 megawatts) in EC mode

in the other power modes i would guestimate a output of around 50mw -75mw

all the tests above were done in EC mode power output. and yes upping the output power will give a stronger signal

but it is dependant on the rx being able to see the signal and lock into it.

Edited June 2, 2014 by Tamiyacowboy

[Smoothybb]

Yeah I thought that would be the way to do it, not sure I can find somewhere with line of sight for 1km or more though.

 

How do you match the recorded ground range to how far away your plane is? Not sure I can guesstimate 1km straight up.

[Tamiyacowboy]

fpv wise you would use an osd. 

 

none fpv wise, this is going to be somewhat hit and miss, the best way would be some extra coding

in the flight system ( both naza and multiwii should have a max ceiling limiter ( using baro to measure high/pressure) 

 

 

for us, our major problem is that CLASS D airspace and Control Zone. 

we are somewhat limited to 400ft  ( the max ceiling for class D is ground to 1,500ft ), but this i think is Visual only.

 

I need to do tons or research to get upto date on current aviation ruling and laws , its been a few years since i was

flight sim and flying with ILS and visual , but am already in the know about squalking etc etc

so when/if it comes to it i will write out some simple coms for everyone to contact Air traffic control (ATC)

and how to talk the talk.  ( i wonder if the social will pay for me to sit a UAV-s course lol )

 

 

truth is at 400ft your not going to see your craft, its going to be a small speck in a blue sea to be very honnest.

 

ILS ( instrument landing system ) in other words your blind and all you see is your OSD readout.

you can fly just by OSD and no video feed, it just takes a little time to get used to. ( i have around 180 flying hours in small cessna sim craft 

and have about 40hrs flying jetliners both of these via visual and ILS )

Edited June 2, 2014 by Tamiyacowboy

[Smoothybb]

When you say out of sight at 400ft, are you talking multirotors (well it in that section I guess)? I'm looking to get an altimeter either built in or in conjunction with an OSD but I'm pretty sure I've had my bixler well over 130m high. Not so much a small speck but sufficiently high that I'm flying by reaction rather than able to see the orientation of the plane.

 

We might be at crossed purposes, obviously I don't have naza or any other pilot assist aids.

[Tamiyacowboy]

Yes you really have to trawl the CAA ( civil aviation authority ) website. 

 

most of the time they talk about drones and UAV, but we are classed as small models.

CAA say a limit of 400ft. 

 

now you may think if i wander to the top of the mountain and fly am good right ?

well heres the dark area, is that max 400ft from sea level or from the current landing/take off spot.

so if you 5000m up a mountain and have a 400ft max ceiling high its got to be from a known level.

sea level is the norm for us, so that 5000m has to drop by 4600m.

thing is we are not told if this is a sea level high / or landing/take off area high. so its a dark horse,

but for a long time us modelers HAVE used the 400ft max high and we tend to use it from the current takeoff/land zone.

sometimes we use sea level.

 

we are also not excactly classed as drones, more models, small craft under a certain kg limit. UAV's are upto 20kg

lets be fair none of us would ever own a craft upwards of 10kg, we tend to hover around the 2-7kg limit ( mostly sub 2kg)

here in this sub limit we are classed as small models.

 

to be honnest and heand on heart, if i was caught by CAA the charges would be because i was close proximity flying.

i like my flights fast and hard, low down and involving quick thinking and pilot skill reaction.

the problem i see at high alitude is you have a very small window of view, unlike an aircraft they have a wide view.

this is a problem you become tunneled (tunnel vision) you do not see the out of sight dangers and could cause a collision.

 

hitting a jumbos engine at 7000ft is not a good idea, your single small machine has now put 200+ lives in high danger

its reckless to say the least, in a court its endangering of life/lives.

i would personaly still enjoy the view from 400ft , it is a view we humans very rarely see , but you can AND WILL get lost.

you will get tunnel block and you will loose spacial awareness , if this happens at hight, yes you have time to kind of sort your head out

but what else in in the skys with you, a jet, a glider, a small craft, thats it we dont know all we have is a small window in a huge sky.

 

Problem is we a hobbyist need a defined set of rules, we are not companys making cash, we are not a UAV, our crafts are models

low power and small in weight. the CAA needs to sit down and really work with the BMFA and work out a set of guidelines.

get us mapping with controlled zones and regulated airspace marked out, so we know where we can where we cannot.

rules on hight , maybe tied in to OSD use. 

 

above all they must not SCREW us over, we have a right to the freedom of the sky just like birds and companys do.

its better to keep us above ground than push us deep underground as then we will just make our own sets of rules.

[Smoothybb]

I can see your passion for the sport filtering through in what you write. I do respect your commitment to doing it properly for everyone's benefit.

 

Just to pull out a couple of points you noted:

 

Close proximity? Is this not allowed? Not only do we try and brush the crops but also get asked to fly in between camera holder and subject, I'm guessing this is frowned upon? Quick low passes (knee height if no one else but us around) aren't unusual. This means trouble if the CAA saw us? Then again, I know with speed even foam can do damage but they're not even close to something with a IC engine built from balsa in terms of how much energy they hold and the pain/damage that an impact would cause. I've been hit twice in the back by an overly low pass and tbh, the most annoying thing was losing my ciggy.

 

Realistic height, I'd say probably somewhere between 500ft and 900ft. Take your point about low flying aircraft but being in the flight path to brum (well outside control zone) we're a long way from the bigger birds but smaller aircraft have led to us pulling down to a more reasonable height for safety. Then again, we had a powered microlight buzzing the windmill around 25m off the ground the other week. We kept our distance. I do agree you can get tunnel vision though, bizarre as it sounds looking at an open sky. It's not unusual for one of us to clip the other's model when powered flying in open spaces. It's incredible how you can zone in on 1.5m's of wing foam and see virtually nothing else. Far worse at extreme heights (to naked eye) than close up. And then for two models to contact in such an open space!

 

It is an interesting one about height in relation to.......? Considering how many other elements of the CAA regs are so tightly dictated/detailed. Hopefully I will never have an issue with CAA or similar. I doubt I ever will with the fixed wing but if I keep reading your posts about self build multi-rotors, that might change a little and the care I take about flying site.

 

Like you say, the CAA need to sit down with BMFA to at least hammer out some guidance. We need more than 5 bullet points but really, like you say, give us some clarity, not a list of rules each one running to 1.9.9Z with an extra 4 pages in the appendix.

[Tamiyacowboy]

close proximity is not done very often. think of blacksheep crew bombing a mountain side, fairly safe not much around

for the trees and side of mountain. 

But urban its different , finding away inside a buiding then a exit , problem is people/the public.

or bombing the side of a skyrise with the street below, a fail could end in a hard hitting object from knowwhere to an unsuspecting pedestrain.

even though your with the craft all the way to the end, they have no warning your coming.

 

As a pilot YOU have to take all these considerations in, would you want some chap flying his large food blender near your child/father/mother.

or screaming down the side of your officeblock like a dogfighter from the first world war.

everyone will egg you on, 

 

can we get a little closer

can we fly under this and over that

just a little faster

just a little higher. 

 

problem is, you as the pilot is at fault if something goes wrong, its not to say it will but we do fly machines

that have electronics and parts, and they do and can fail, its just a case of when not how.

when i go out i TELL people where to stand and where not , i then power up the quad and say " its a flying food blender, would you put your hand in it ? "

they get the idea then. i also tell them ITS NOT SAFE for me as a pilot to , go that bit faster, bit higher, bit closer. i have their safety at the forefront of my mind. 

Every time i go out flying i RIGHT OFF MY CRAFT , if i come back intact its a bonus. i walk out the door and the craft is dead /lost/bust/mashed 

i walk back in 9-10 times with craft intact, but i have that its a gonner always there, its saves me heartache when i fall from the sky and have a little man cry.

meh it was gonna happen and it did.

 

i think really we have to be adults at whatever age we are and have that safety first above all else attitude.

dont get me wrong, i would love a 1km climb then a pure 100+mph dive, or a 8+mile glide run.

or dive off a state building to the street below, but is the risk for the reward really worth it.

 

CAA is not our governer the BMFA is, the CAA controls the air around us, the BMFA makes it safe for us to fly our machines.

low passes always fun, but most clubs and even group/crew flyers will have a flight apron set out. ( an area where nobody but pilots and co-pilot are allow )

its like the grass strip and the big orange tape 

you can see this in the meeting videos , when a low pass is done its tends to be center the runway, the pilot is stood on the apron side,

the public are behind the apron thats fenced off

[Smoothybb]

Wise words indeed!

 

In one respect we're always flying well away from general joe public, my worst fear is to have people around but I can always ditch in the field if need be. Yes the farmer may be annoyed but better that than someone taking a hit.

I personally do struggle not try and max out my skill level each flight or push it just that bit closer or faster on the pass. I've never been interested in building up my skills slowly, covering the technical aspects etc. Rightly or wrongly, my planes live in my car, my batteries stay charged for a a week at a time. I'm not old skool flyer material, which is what I was trying to explain yesterday. As I say though, I shy away from flying where joe public COULD get in the way and generally we avoid anything that could lead to ANY complaint from ANYONE. To contradict that though, I have no interest in joining a club to fly in a field. I'm not interested in the social side (another reason to avoid joe public). I'd much rather fly from a footpath 10miles from civilisation if the surroundings are worth it. I am the type of people that reg's are needed for but at the same time, I try and go so far from civilisation that the only harm I should do is to my models and possibly my flying buddy. The more I look at utube though, the more I see people in built up areas, chasing cars down roads etc. With the increasing accessability of the hobby, that's what worries me. More and more people hooning round with 3kg 'toys' without care or worry of what can go round. That's what I think needs tightening up on but how do you do that without impacting the sensible flyer just as much? With what kids and adults are doing with quads in built areas, I can see ban coming into force, over-reaction demanding certified flying sites.

 

I do wholeheartedly agree on the writing off your model though. It's gratifying to not need the plastic bag when packing away and reduces the tears when your plane decides to pretend to be a spear from 50m up.

[Samuran]

I believe that all flown RC models are only allowed to be flown within 500 meters of the pilot, weather there is FPV or not... the power output of FPV systems depends on the frequency used. For 5.8 ghz systems it's 25mw... which is basically nothing (makes no odds if you have a HAM licence)... I think...

[Tamiyacowboy]

2.4ghz is used for lots of things these days. 

 

 

we poor modelers get the rough end of stick, look at how poupulated 2.4 is now.

look at products, routers/ wifi/phones pahblets tablets ipods consoles etc etc they all now leatching into 5.8

 

why, because they can and will because they make money from it we dont.

we only need a small bandwidth, but they take up huge amounts, they overpower our signals with junk

but complain if our little plane makes a speck on the meters. 

 

soon we wont be jitter free and back to the old days of fm/am styled ribbons and fixed single channels no skipping allowed.

[Samuran]

Yep, it pretty much seems like the main choice is changing to a 33mhz system and then using 2.4 ghz for the vtx/vrx... I dunno, the more I read into FPV the less I understand....

[Smoothybb]

Yep, it pretty much seems like the main choice is changing to a 33mhz system and then using 2.4 ghz for the vtx/vrx... I dunno, the more I read into FPV the less I understand....

Read anything on 1.2mhz? I heard it was less likely for video to break up but nothing about the legal tx power.

[Samuran]

1.2 is illegal in the UK at any power... and I guess you meant ghz?
 

900 Mhz :

Pros

Edited June 8, 2014 by Samuran