Where can i Fly FPV , The UK Law

[Smoothybb]

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

 

900 Mhz :

Pros

[Samuran]

No problem mate, it's so annoyingly confusing.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[Smoothybb]

Yeah and largely everything seems to be against FPV. Like you say, low power for 5.8tx, half that for 2.4. To stay within the law you don't seem to be able to go past LOS both by tx power and the requirement for a spotter.

A bit more reading this afternoon suggests there are very few legal setups in use, people just stay away from important frequencies (1.2 is airport landing beacons plus other uses).

[turok007]

i watched a lot of videos on FPV  and i was thinking wow  it is good stuff.  but after some research  none of it could be used in the UK. 

[Rich8]

Most people flying fpv are doing it illegally simply due to the vtx. Anyone can use power up to 25mw if using 5.8ghz, that's fine.

NO-ONE can legally use a vtx on a quad/rotorcraft/UVA/whatever pushing out any more than that.

A ham licence (even an intermediate licence) lets you transmit on 5.8ghz at way more power than that, but licence conditions specifically prohibit transmitting from an airborne craft (cars, boats, fields all ok. Anything airborne - nope).

[turok007]

did FPV get banned in the US

[Smoothybb]

From what I read last night, the FAA have released a draft interpretation that states you must maintain LOS to the craft and specifically state goggles block LOS. There is some discussion about running through a monitor but it's changed the accepted practice of it being okay if you're goggled up but have a spotter maintaining LOS.

 

There's also some consultation going on about whether the FAA can regulate rc craft any further. I believe a court challenged their authority over model craft.

[turok007]

i think i said before that 250mw is legal  but anything over that needs a ham license.   well i have been searching again because of all this news of bad quad pilots.  well it looks like we can only use 25mw   and it don't matter if you had a BBC radio 1 license  you cannot use anything more powerful.  lol  so by law the UK is a rubbish place to have FPV.  now i know why DJI went with that poxy WIFI setup.

[Samuran]

Yep 25mw is the max vtx power at 5.8ghz. You can use higher power at other frequencies.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[Smoothybb]

Yep 25mw is the max vtx power at 5.8ghz. You can use higher power at other frequencies.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

I thought you could only use 2.4 and 5.8 for fpv in this country? 2.4 limit is 10mw isn't it, works out roughly the same signal as the 5.8 I believe.

 

I read that anything under 2.4 is a no-no, 1.2/3 & 900. That's why I don't use my 1.2tx/rx anymore and have no need for the low pass filter on it's way from China 

[Samuran]

Yeah sorry mate too many different rules...

http://www.fpvuk.org/things-explained/vtx-power-and-range/

[Tamiyacowboy]

433mhz

800/900mhz 

 

these three bands are also used but mostly overseas.

800/900 is gsm realms used for mobile phones

an mot sure what 433 is used by ( possible aircraft datalinks)

 

best thing to remember is this, 2.4ghz handsets - 5.8ghz VTX

5.8ghz is halfwave to 2.4 and 2.4 is half again to 1.2ghz, its all down to wavelength ( wave length as is how long apart the pulses are)

 

boosting vtx one should always look at higher gain antennas than shoving big beef boosted vtx systems.

pop a cloverleaf into your DX6I , add a cloverleaf to your fancy cheap RX. now start walking

because your going to still have a very half decent range to about a mile LOS.

replace with stock antennas and that range just fades to a couple thousand yards if that.

 

this is what a normal straight antenna signal looks like 

 

 

 

left is horizontal . right is vertical, the red marked area is the pattern of the radio waves

 

now heres a cloverleaf antenna 

 

 

 

big difference in the horizontal signal throw its more wide and refined unlike the usual stick antenna we are given.

look at the verticals there are some changes close in, less miss and a more clear space central of the antennas.

so yep JUST changing your antennas can have a marked diffrence in signals range it can travel.

 

i tend to flip my antenna on handset to vertical, then i give it a 90 degree flip left or right, it dont matter but the key is the 90 degree flip.

now if i point the handset at model ( like we all do ) the antenna is side on , so we get max horizontal  and negate that slight miss in the vertical

where the two circles/hoops join ,make a set of specs from your fingers like you show a child, see that V top and bottom thats what your antenna looks like if you could see the waves leaving it.

top V is the tip of the straight antenna, the bottom V is the bottom of antenna. now when you point your antenna direct at model your showing the RX less signal.

 

remember the specs tip above, straight and narrow falls like an arrow, of to the side makes a nice long glide

Edited July 17, 2014 by Tamiyacowboy

[Samuran]

Yeah I know you can't use 900mhz for flight fpv in the UK.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[RCHH]

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 )

March 2014 saw the altitude limit for model craft up to 3.5kg raised to 1000ft AGL max.

What sim are you flying for the Cessna 182 and 'airliner' btw?

And how far are you flying ILS?

[Madmini]

433mhz

800/900mhz

these three bands are also used but mostly overseas.

800/900 is gsm realms used for mobile phones

an mot sure what 433 is used by ( possible aircraft datalinks)

best thing to remember is this, 2.4ghz handsets - 5.8ghz VTX

5.8ghz is halfwave to 2.4 and 2.4 is half again to 1.2ghz, its all down to wavelength ( wave length as is how long apart the pulses are)

boosting vtx one should always look at higher gain antennas than shoving big beef boosted vtx systems.

pop a cloverleaf into your DX6I , add a cloverleaf to your fancy cheap RX. now start walking

because your going to still have a very half decent range to about a mile LOS.

replace with stock antennas and that range just fades to a couple thousand yards if that.

this is what a normal straight antenna signal looks like

left is horizontal . right is vertical, the red marked area is the pattern of the radio waves

now heres a cloverleaf antenna

big difference in the horizontal signal throw its more wide and refined unlike the usual stick antenna we are given.

look at the verticals there are some changes close in, less miss and a more clear space central of the antennas.

so yep JUST changing your antennas can have a marked diffrence in signals range it can travel.

i tend to flip my antenna on handset to vertical, then i give it a 90 degree flip left or right, it dont matter but the key is the 90 degree flip.

now if i point the handset at model ( like we all do ) the antenna is side on , so we get max horizontal and negate that slight miss in the vertical

where the two circles/hoops join ,make a set of specs from your fingers like you show a child, see that V top and bottom thats what your antenna looks like if you could see the waves leaving it.

top V is the tip of the straight antenna, the bottom V is the bottom of antenna. now when you point your antenna direct at model your showing the RX less signal.

remember the specs tip above, straight and narrow falls like an arrow, of to the side makes a nice long glide

Here's a video I came across that explains it really well for us non technical types

http://vimeo.com/m/8826952

[ajlovering]

You can use 459mhz legally in this country but not 433mhz. Car key locks and other access equipment run on 433 and it can mess them up. Not sure on the max power for 459mhz

[Tamiyacowboy]

Its always best to check gov rules with all the numptys in the world making the hobby look mad. 

 

fpv i will not bother with at this time, so my rules stick to no closer than 50m for people and 150m for buildings

no fly in built up populated areas , i keep my max alt to 200m and my low ceiling hight at 60m inc failsafe / remote return landing.

 

and as early on you do not need to boost the vtx system, you change out the antenna to one more suited to the signal you transmit

and that signal you want to receive.

 

cb's came with a rubber ducky stick, we dumped them for candy whips , why they acted like a big antenna

more gain less loss. a dx6i standard power running a cloverleaf antenna set up was seen to reach out to a mile.

dont forget you pumping out RF signals and thats means RF noise that electronics need to be shielded from

the tx is usually well away from the camera and stuff for a reason. not signal but the frequencys it transmits.

 

stick on 5.8ghz as 1.2 is popular for rc crafts, and think antennas, you could have the most powerful system in the world buts its usless

if its antenna aerial is a coat hanger  and not a 150 ft high monster

Edited January 29, 2015 by Tamiyacowboy

[oodboo]

I know this is an old topic but reading through it has kind of put off buying a dji phantom. I've spent the last few days looking at them and was trying to decide between the 3 and waiting a bit for the 4. Only wanted it to take walking and get some nice shots up hills and maybe take some photos of farms for people (I know some farmers that might like that sort of thing). Quite fancied the active tracking for following me on my bike as well but looks like that's out of the question. I don't think I'll bother with either now.

Edited March 21, 2016 by oodboo

[turok007]

18 hours ago, oodboo said:

I know this is an old topic but reading through it has kind of put off buying a dji phantom. I've spent the last few days looking at them and was trying to decide between the 3 and waiting a bit for the 4. Only wanted it to take walking and get some nice shots up hills and maybe take some photos of farms for people (I know some farmers that might like that sort of thing). Quite fancied the active tracking for following me on my bike as well but looks like that's out of the question. I don't think I'll bother with either now.

the DJI has some good features  but you cannot use them.  you need a spotter if your doing fpv  and if you do films or pictures for people you could get in trouble (classed as making money)   also insurance would be needed as it could be classed as a business.  As for active tracking  you have to have full control of the quad at all times also in sight  + the fact that trees and people might get in the way.   The Tech is going crazy for quads  but the laws are so far behind.

[oodboo]

2 hours ago, turok007 said:

the DJI has some good features  but you cannot use them.  you need a spotter if your doing fpv  and if you do films or pictures for people you could get in trouble (classed as making money)   also insurance would be needed as it could be classed as a business.  As for active tracking  you have to have full control of the quad at all times also in sight  + the fact that trees and people might get in the way.   The Tech is going crazy for quads  but the laws are so far behind.

I wouldn't be taking photos to make money, I don't think the camera is good enough for that.

One idea for the active tracking was to get up early and get it to follow me across striding edge or something like that. I wouldn't be able to keep my eye on it or control it at the same time. The Phantom 4 looks like it would do it fine but it seems to law says no so that feature will probably be disabled in a future firmware for the UK. It was more for the autonomous features that I would've bought it for rather than FPV flying. Don't think I'll bother though. 

[turok007]

23 minutes ago, oodboo said:

I wouldn't be taking photos to make money, I don't think the camera is good enough for that.

One idea for the active tracking was to get up early and get it to follow me across striding edge or something like that. I wouldn't be able to keep my eye on it or control it at the same time. The Phantom 4 looks like it would do it fine but it seems to law says no so that feature will probably be disabled in a future firmware for the UK. It was more for the autonomous features that I would've bought it for rather than FPV flying. Don't think I'll bother though. 

the thing is  if you could say 100%  that no one is going to be around then you could risk it.  But if something bad did happen the law would be against you.   i have watched some videos of the tracking and the DJI lost sight of easy targets a few times.