Welcome to Multi-Rotor UK. Please login or sign up.

Sunday,December 08, 2019, 10:34:47

Login with username, password and session length

Shoutbox

Bad Raven:
02 Dec 2019 20:03:50
Only if the battery is fully charged, leak a few volts and it'll be fine.......
Andy7:
02 Dec 2019 17:19:55
If yo fly a Mavic Mini and get over a gramme of mud on it, do you have to register it?  :rofl:
hoverfly:
02 Dec 2019 08:38:56
Not a problem i've had a body mod, I think of Jean Harlow naked on a trampoline  and the new antenna  extends automatically..   :whistling:
Andy7:
29 Nov 2019 17:17:37
That'll play hell with your FPV signal. :rofl:
hoverfly:
29 Nov 2019 17:10:20
Won't get me i'm wearing my tin foil hat... :wack0
Andy7:
29 Nov 2019 14:19:03
Because GOVERNMENT SPY DRONES are watching us! :frantic:
hoverfly:
29 Nov 2019 11:41:22
BBC News this am ..only 50% of people have registered  for the  CAA  scheme.. If people haven't registered  how do they know it's 50%.. :shrug:
ched:
28 Nov 2019 20:16:14
Very very quiet. I am missing chatting :-( Must be the weather....
Gaza07:
25 Nov 2019 08:28:26
Forums very quiet  :shrug:
ched:
18 Oct 2019 11:25:16
Sounds good yama. Would love to see some images. 3d models sound cool too
Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 197211
  • Total Topics: 19885
  • Online Today: 50
  • Online Ever: 530
  • (Tuesday,June 26, 2012, 08:34:46 )
Users Online
Users: 1
Guests: 48
Total: 49

Theme Changer





thumbnail

3d - Printworx

Printing 3d Forum

FPV & the Law

Started by Jumpy07, Tuesday,February 12, 2013, 09:46:58

Previous topic - Next topic

Jumpy07

Tuesday,February 12, 2013, 09:46:58 Last Edit: Monday,September 08, 2014, 15:27:13 by Jumpy07
FPV / (MultiRotor Flying) Legality
 

UK air law is documented in 'The Air Navigation Order' issued by the Civil Aviation Authority.  You can view the full details of Air Navigation Notice, (ANO),  here:
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP393.pdf

As Multirotor / Model  Pilots we fall under "Small Unmanned Aircraft" and in some instances "Small Unmanned Surveillance Aircraft",  and as such we are allowed exemptions from the most of the Air Navigation Order.  The articles that do apply to Multirotors / Model Pilots are: 131, 138, 161, 164, 166, 167 and  232.


The articles which are relevant to Multirotors / Model pilots and FPV flying are: 138, 166 and 167.


Endangering safety of any person or property
138 A person must not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property.


Small Unmanned Aircraft
166 (1) A person must not cause or permit any article or animal (whether or not attached to a parachute) to be dropped from a small unmanned aircraft so as to endanger persons or property.
(2) The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft may only fly the aircraft if reasonably satisfied that the flight can safely be made.
(3) The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft must maintain direct, unaided visual contact with the aircraft sufficient to monitor its flight path in relation to other aircraft, persons, vehicles, vessels and structures for the  purpose of avoiding collisions.
(4) The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft which has a mass of more than 7kg excluding its fuel but including any articles or equipment installed in or attached to the aircraft at the commencement of its flight, must not fly the aircraft:
(a) in Class A, C, D or E airspace unless the permission of the appropriate air traffic control unit has been obtained;
(b) within an aerodrome traffic zone during the notified hours of watch of the air traffic control unit (if any) at that aerodrome unless the permission of any such air traffic control unit has been obtained; or
(c) at a height of more than 400 feet above the surface unless it is flying in airspace described in sub-paragraph (a) or (b) and in accordance with the requirements for that airspace.
(5) The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft must not fly the aircraft for the purposes of aerial work except in accordance with a permission granted by the CAA.

Small Unmanned Surveillance Aircraft
167 (1) The person in charge of a small unmanned surveillance aircraft must not fly the aircraft in any of the circumstances described in paragraph (2) except in accordance with a permission issued by the CAA.
(2) The circumstances referred to in paragraph (1) are:
(a) over or within 150 metres of any congested area;
(b) over or within 150 metres of an organised open-air assembly of more than 1,000 persons;
(c) within 50 metres of any vessel, vehicle or structure which is not under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft; or
(d) subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), within 50 metres of any person.
(3) Subject to paragraph (4), during take-off or landing, a small unmanned surveillance aircraft must not be flown within 30 metres of any person.
(4) Paragraphs (2)(d) and (3) do not apply to the person in charge of the small unmanned surveillance aircraft or a person under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft.
(5) In this article 'a small unmanned surveillance aircraft' means a small unmanned aircraft which is equipped to undertake any form of surveillance or data acquisition.

Where a camera is used for the sole purpose of controlling the aircraft the flight it is not considered surveillance or data acquisition.  CAP 722 ( http://www.caa.co.uk/cap722 ) article 3.6 in Section 3 Chapter 1 page 4 refers to this,  "The provision of image or other data solely for the use of controlling or monitoring the aircraft is not considered to be applicable to the meaning of 'Surveillance or Data Acquisition' covered at Article 167 for Small Unmanned Surveillance Aircraft."

However if the video is captured in some way and used for other purposes the CAA considers the flight to have been for data acquisition and article 167 does apply.

Exemption to Article 166(3)
On the 26th September 2012 the CAA issued a general exemption to 166(3) of the Air Navigation Order 2009 for all UK model aircraft flyers wishing to fly FPV without a buddy lead but only under certain conditions.

The complete exemption is reproduced here:

Small Unmanned Aircraft - First Person View (FPV) Flying *1

1) The Civil Aviation Authority, in exercise of its powers under article 242 of the Air Navigation Order 2009 ('the Order'), exempts any person in charge of a Small Unmanned Aircraft (SUA) from the requirement at article 166(3) of the Order to ensure that direct unaided visual contact is maintained with the aircraft sufficient to monitor its flight path in relation to other aircraft, persons, vehicles, vessels and structures for the purpose of avoiding collisions.

2) This Exemption only applies if the conditions at paragraphs 3 to 7 are met.


3) a) The person in charge is the person piloting the SUA *2
b) The person in charge is accompanied by a competent observer who maintains direct unaided visual contact with the SUA sufficient to monitor its flight path in relation to other aircraft, persons, vehicles, vessels and structures for the purpose of avoiding collisions and advises the person in charge accordingly.
c) The maximum take-off mass of the SUA does not exceed 1.8 kg for an aeroplane, or 2.5 kg for a rotorcraft, including any batteries or fuel.


4) The person in charge must not fly the SUA:
a) in Class A, C, D or E airspace unless permission of the appropriate air traffic control unit has been obtained;
b) within an aerodrome traffic zone during the notified hours of watch of the air traffic control unit (if any) at that aerodrome unless permission of any such air traffic control unit has been obtained;
c) at a height of more than 400 feet above the surface;
d) over or within 150 metres of any congested area;
e) over or within 150 metres of an organised open-air assembly of more than 1,000
persons;
f) within 50 metres of any vessel, vehicle or structure which is not under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft;
g) within 50 metres of any other person, apart from the competent observer, except when taking off or landing; or
h) within 30 metres of any other person, apart from the competent observer, during take-off or landing.

5) For the purposes of this Exemption, a 'competent observer' means someone whom the person in charge of the SUA has designated as the competent observer.

6) Before designating someone as the competent observer, the person in charge of the SUA must be satisfied that he or she:
a) has been briefed in accordance with paragraph 7;
b) is competent to perform the tasks which he or she may be called upon to perform in accordance with paragraph 7; and
c) is competent, by direct unaided visual observation of the SUA, to assist and advise the person in charge with the safe conduct of the flight.


7) The person in charge must ensure that:
a) the competent observer is fully briefed on the planned flight and what is expected
of him/her taking into account the prevailing conditions;
b) the competent observer understands that he/she must stay directly adjacent to the person in charge and maintain direct unaided visual contact with the SUA at all times, to visually and aurally monitor the airspace for other aircraft and the take off and landing area for any persons;
c) the competent observer has been instructed on the actions to take in the event of another aircraft being spotted and a risk of collision is assessed; and
d) the competent observer understands that he/she must advise if the SUA is proceeding beyond the point at which he/she is able to monitor its flight path sufficiently to identify a risk of collision.

(8) This Exemption has effect from the date hereof until 30 September 2013, unless previously revoked.
*1. First Person View flying is the ability to control a radio controlled aircraft from a "pilot's eye" perspective through the use of an onboard camera and ground based receiving and viewing equipment. The viewing equipment is normally a set of video goggles.
*2. The person in charge remains responsible for the safety of the operation and may only fly the SUA if reasonably satisfied that the flight can safely be made.


NOTE: This exempts only from article 166(3). The other provisions of article 166 and the whole of article 167 continue to apply, so far as may be applicable. In particular, article 166(5) prohibits flight for the purposes of aerial work except in accordance with a permission granted by the CAA

Full details of the exemption can be found here: http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4_945.pdf


NOTICE: Please see update to exemption made in April 2014, (summary is increase of MTOM to 3.5kg and altitude of 1000ft) http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4%20No.%201011%20Small%20Unmanned%20Aircraft.pdf



BNUC-S Pilot with PfCo /PFAW.
UAQ / CAA PfCo Instructor / Flight Assessor

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"

VinHex

Saturday,February 23, 2013, 09:23:13 #1 Last Edit: Saturday,February 23, 2013, 09:29:05 by VinHex
Good info..
Vin,

HEXACRAFTER HC650, DJI WKM, DJI DataLink 2.4Ghz, 4S DesirePower 6200, Aeroxcraft Landing Gear, Xaor 12x6 Pre-Balanced-Props, Spektrum DX8, AR8000 Receiver
TM1000, Fatshark Attitude SD, Sony Exview Had II CCD 650 Line Sony Effio-E, DJI iOSD, Hexacrafter Brushless Gimable Fat-S Spironet Antenna

Ross

Wednesday,April 10, 2013, 10:56:13 #2 Last Edit: Wednesday,April 10, 2013, 12:18:14 by Ross
Def good info..let';s hope people on this forum at least,  take it in -  as a lot of videos show flying in the UK in contravention of these rules.

It only needs one serious incident and that';s it..the CAA will fall on things like a ton of bricks ( how do  I know...I worked for them for 30 years) ....urged on by the people who rabbit on about privacy and the law.
Let's be careful out there.
SAFETY is.. NO accident.

Jumpy07

 
This is the latest CAA exemption No. 956, Valid from 26th March 2013 to the 31st March 2014
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4%20number%20956.pdf


Quote
 


Official Record Series 4
United KingdomCivil Aviation Authority
Miscellaneous

The Air Navigation Order 2009

General Exemption
No: 956

Publication Date: 26 March 2013

Small Unmanned Aircraft - First Person View (FPV) Flying1
1) The Civil Aviation Authority, in exercise of its powers under article 242 of the Air Navigation Order 2009 ('the Order'), exempts any person in charge of a Small Unmanned Aircraft (SUA) from the requirement at article 166(3) of the Order to ensure that direct unaided visual contact is maintained with the aircraft sufficient to monitor its flight path in relation to other aircraft, persons, vehicles, vessels and structures for the purpose of avoiding collisions.

2) This Exemption only applies if the conditions at paragraphs 3 to 7 are met.
 
3) a) The person in charge is the person piloting the SUA 2.
 
b) The person in charge is accompanied by a competent observer who maintains direct unaided visual contact with the SUA sufficient to monitor its flight path in relation to other aircraft, persons, vehicles, vessels and structures for the purpose of avoiding collisions and advises the person in charge accordingly.

c) The maximum take-off mass of the SUA does not exceed 1.8 kg for an aeroplane, or 2.5 kg for a rotorcraft, including any batteries or fuel.

4) The person in charge must not fly the SUA:

a) in Class A, C, D or E airspace unless permission of the appropriate air traffic control unit has been obtained;

b) within an aerodrome traffic zone during the notified hours of watch of the air traffic control unit (if any) at that aerodrome unless permission of any such air traffic control unit has been obtained;

c) at a height of more than 400 feet above the surface;

d) over or within 150 metres of any congested area;

e) over or within 150 metres of an organised open-air assembly of more than 1,000 persons;

f) within 50 metres of any vessel, vehicle or structure which is not under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft;

g) within 50 metres of any other person, apart from the competent observer, except when taking off or landing; or
 
1 First Person View flying is the ability to control a radio controlled aircraft from a "pilot's eye" perspective through the use of an on-board camera and ground-based receiving and viewing equipment. The viewing equipment is normally a set of video goggles.

2 The person in charge remains responsible for the safety of the operation and may only fly the SUA if reasonably satisfied that the flight can safely be made.

The latest version of this document is available in electronic format at www.caa.co.uk/publications, where you may also register for e-mail notification of amendments. Details for purchasing paper copy can be found at the same web address

 
26 March 2013 Page 1 of 2

 
h) within 30 metres of any other person, apart from the competent observer, other adjacent model operators, or any model flying club members, during take-off or landing.

5) For the purposes of this Exemption, a 'competent observer' means someone whom the person in charge of the SUA has designated as the competent observer.

6) Before designating someone as the competent observer, the person in charge of the SUA must be satisfied that he or she:

a) has been briefed in accordance with paragraph 7;

b) is competent to perform the tasks which he or she may be called upon to perform in accordance with paragraph 7; and

c) is competent, by direct unaided visual observation of the SUA, to assist and advise the person in charge with the safe conduct of the flight.

7) The person in charge must ensure that:

a) the competent observer is fully briefed on the planned flight and what is expected of him/her taking into account the prevailing conditions;

b) the competent observer understands that he/she must stay directly adjacent to the person in charge and maintain direct unaided visual contact with the SUA at all times, to visually and aurally monitor the airspace for other aircraft and the take-off and landing area for any persons;

c) the competent observer has been instructed on the actions to take in the event of another aircraft being spotted and a risk of collision is assessed; and

d) the competent observer understands that he/she must advise if the SUA is proceeding beyond the point at which he/she is able to monitor its flight path sufficiently to identify a risk of collision.

8) This exemption supersedes Official Record Series 4 No. 945, which is hereby revoked.

9) This Exemption has effect from the date hereof until 31 March 2014, unless previously revoked.

J E Benyon

for the Civil Aviation Authority

25 March 2013
 
NOTE: This exempts only from article 166(3). The other provisions of article 166 and the whole of article 167 continue to apply, so far as may be applicable. In particular, article 166(5) prohibits flight for the purposes of aerial work except in accordance with a permission granted by the CAA.
 
UK Civil Aviation Authority Official Record Series 4, No. 956

26 March 2013 Page 2 of 2 
BNUC-S Pilot with PfCo /PFAW.
UAQ / CAA PfCo Instructor / Flight Assessor

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"

dani_r

Interesting stuff on the weight limits there!

teslahed

Quote from: dani_r on Saturday,June 22, 2013, 13:04:54
Interesting stuff on the weight limits there!


Yes - a 2.5kg limit on the total flying weight of a multirotor would limit quite a few people i think.
One circlip short of a quadcopter.
 1 lobe short of an antenna.

dani_r

Quote from: teslahed on Saturday,June 22, 2013, 15:44:37
Yes - a 2.5kg limit on the total flying weight of a multirotor would limit quite a few people i think.


That means no using my pro rig for FPV then :D 7.9kgs!

Need a lighter rig I reckon! But good for the heavy lift stuff.

jimmyhorns

I do think the CAA need to wake up and smell the coffee.

2.5kg ??? Really?...

So, any muppet can fly a nice big heavy fixed wing, line of sight along with all it';s problems, with almost no rules about flying close to people and buildings (no distances specified), but someone who has invested in fpv has to abide by such stringent rules......

If you make rules realistic, there is much more chance of people following them

dubzn1

well it only takes one idiot to spiol it all for us so lets hope people pay attension
interesting weight limit , wonder what made them decide on that figure

dirtyharry

I dont think 2.5kg is unrealistic, if you want a bigger flying fpv multi than 2.5kg you';ve probably got enough money to invest in the appropriate paperwork to do so.




Ross

Tuesday,August 27, 2013, 08:05:32 #10 Last Edit: Tuesday,August 27, 2013, 15:30:09 by Ross
Some answers to all this are

1. Be responsible
2. Don';t fly over crowds.
3. Don';t fly too far away on FPV in case you loose your way and become disorientated. (See 4).
4. Don';t rely too much on electronics...it has a nasty habit of failing at the moment it may be required!
(and how many  modellers REALLY understand the electronics they are dealing with?)

Read and understand the CAA rules and (and OBEY them)  not pick holes in them,  because they do not suit you and you disagree with them, (there is nothing YOU can do about them....there is a heck of a lot the CAA can do about you though).....

The more popular UAVs become the more publicity they will receive. There are people out there just waiting to  find an incident they can hammer the hobby with and get even more stringent rules laid down (for example..requiring  ALL UAVs a  Permit to Fly)


That';s my 2 pennyworth.  It makes sense to me.
Let's be careful out there.
SAFETY is.. NO accident.

tony

its alls law that taxi have to carry a bail of hay

in most instances as long as your responsible and not doing any harm your fine ..please remember you need land owners permission to fly over there land for your bmfa insurances to be valid

most police men are not going to no these laws and as long as your safe and responsible your going to be fine any other law changes will make the news

keep a eye on team black sheep';s trial it should fingers crossed open the doors for us and stop a lot of stupid regs you no we live in little America

Ross

Sunday,October 27, 2013, 10:05:16 #12 Last Edit: Monday,October 28, 2013, 07:51:27 by Ross
Quote from: tony on Sunday,October 27, 2013, 09:34:02


most police men are not going to no these laws


Let';s not run away with the idea that the police do not know anything  about Aviation Law.
Any reports plod gets and he is NOT  sure about, it';s just a case of consulting a senior officer.............

So do not assume PLOD knows nothing........

Every police station has a copy of the ANO  or should have and if not, the HQ will for reference.. and will consult it when required...it is also updated as an when amendments are sent out.


As someone who worked for the CAA and Air Traffic Control for 30 years  and carried a warrant card  I can assure you the ANO will be used against violators of the Order.
It may end up as a court case or may not,  but certainly adverse publicity for the hobby will result.  The newspapers just love that........and then, probably more stringent rules will be applied.

I refer you to my earlier post.
Let's be careful out there.
SAFETY is.. NO accident.

Marklincs

Sunday,October 27, 2013, 15:24:00 #13 Last Edit: Sunday,October 27, 2013, 15:49:18 by Marklincs
its interesting because you only need permission for the take off spot so you take off from field x and fly over field z

you don';t believe full size ask permission to fly over every field do you  :laugh: :laugh:

Also once you go over the 2.5 kilo weight your not insured, if FPV flying, without a buddy lead

FPVUK and RCHA were the ones that got the multi rotor weight upped to 2.5kilos the BMFA was trying to kipper all FPV to buddy lead only at the time and were not exactly helpful but went along with it so there members didn';t loose out!

if it wasn';t for RCHA and FPVUK being at CAA meetings you';d not even have 2.5kilo multis flying! without a buddy lead.

Raf

CAA recognised Small Unmanned Aircraft (SUA) - First Person View (FPV) Flying

Published today at: http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=detail&id=6204

Orfy

So it';s now 3.5kg inc batteies and 1000ft ceiling.
TBS Diso, Naza M lite (GPS), e300 motors and esc,

BrianS

But will your competent observer be able to maintain direct unaided visual contact with a SUA at a 1000ft ?

They will have to have good eye sight.

mikim

Quad: All black DJI 550 - E300 - NazaV2 GPS - DJI H4-3D - Gopro 4 - Spektrum Ar8000 - DX8- Fatsharks - 7" Black Pearl monitor - ImmersionRC video tx/rx and TBS-OSD + Gav's antennas :-)

barneyg

Quote
maintain direct unaided visual contact


Notice the word in bold

jamie16v

So lense wearers have had it then  :tongue:

mikim

Tuesday,May 27, 2014, 11:06:42 #20 Last Edit: Tuesday,May 27, 2014, 11:09:45 by mikim
Oh yes, of course... using binoculars would be stupid as I forget the image is completely different when seen through glass.   :whistling:

I';m not stupid though I can see what they are getting at; I';m sure they mean that by having unaided visual they are suggesting that the viewer has FULL visual reference of the ground as well as the flying vehicle, but there is no harm if out of useful range (vertically). But then I guess the argument is that really we shouldn';t be flying that high in the first place?

To be honest I';m all for regulation as it makes for sensible guidelines and there is always a muppet out there that has no respect for others and needs sorting out when they screw it up for everybody else. Unfortunately like any regs there are difficulties with the grey areas. Thank goodness there is good representation from the likes of RCHA and FPVUK, and by the sounds of it TBS are fighting for a happy ground too.

What would be good is a set of non statutory guidelines that are recognised by us and the law, followed up by some statutory regs that are more extreme.

It is hard to argue that it is right to have statutory law surrounding ariel camera work though (not including FPV). Why should this differ from flying a 3.5KG rotor without a camera... a little bird tells me this is a financial gain getting ahead of safety?
Quad: All black DJI 550 - E300 - NazaV2 GPS - DJI H4-3D - Gopro 4 - Spektrum Ar8000 - DX8- Fatsharks - 7" Black Pearl monitor - ImmersionRC video tx/rx and TBS-OSD + Gav's antennas :-)

flybywire

You need a ';flight plan';?  WTF?
Blog: http://ajwillis303.wix.com/stuff
The spiritual home of fpv large
Keep it emax, capiche?
Hardware? sure, I got hardware!

Friskle

Monday,September 08, 2014, 14:43:47 #22 Last Edit: Monday,September 08, 2014, 14:47:31 by Friskle
Quote from: mikim on Tuesday,May 27, 2014, 11:06:42
Oh yes, of course... using binoculars would be stupid as I forget the image is completely different when seen through glass.   :whistling:

I';m not stupid though I can see what they are getting at; I';m sure they mean that by having unaided visual they are suggesting that the viewer has FULL visual reference of the ground as well as the flying vehicle, but there is no harm if out of useful range (vertically). But then I guess the argument is that really we shouldn';t be flying that high in the first place?

To be honest I';m all for regulation as it makes for sensible guidelines and there is always a muppet out there that has no respect for others and needs sorting out when they screw it up for everybody else. Unfortunately like any regs there are difficulties with the grey areas. Thank goodness there is good representation from the likes of RCHA and FPVUK, and by the sounds of it TBS are fighting for a happy ground too.

What would be good is a set of non statutory guidelines that are recognised by us and the law, followed up by some statutory regs that are more extreme.

It is hard to argue that it is right to have statutory law surrounding ariel camera work though (not including FPV). Why should this differ from flying a 3.5KG rotor without a camera... a little bird tells me this is a financial gain getting ahead of safety?


Exactly, the bottom line that is, of course it';s financial gain, it';s  just a case of someone sitting there one day thinking to themselves " hey, they are making money from thier hobby, let';s screw them over and charge crap loads for tests, and make some money off them"
Yuneec Q500+
Yuneec Typhoon H
Nano QX2
Nano QX3D
Blade 180QX
Blade 200QX
DJI 450 frame + Naza M V2 = GPS
ZMR 250
250 Pro - Dys 2300kv motors , Naze32 Acro
300 Folding Frame sporting a Naza Lite + GPS

Friskle

Quote from: jimmyhorns on Sunday,June 23, 2013, 13:47:09
I do think the CAA need to wake up and smell the coffee.

2.5kg ??? Really?...

So, any muppet can fly a nice big heavy fixed wing, line of sight along with all it';s problems, with almost no rules about flying close to people and buildings (no distances specified), but someone who has invested in fpv has to abide by such stringent rules......

If you make rules realistic, there is much more chance of people following them


Not true, the rules have always been there for fixed wing, 50 metres to people or property, the factor, that generally you rarely find anyone outside of clubs flying large aircraft, and where you can fly them, is also restricting.

Take the Blackpool vid, you cannot do that with a large aircraft, the difference is, these can literally be flown anywhere, a fixed wing cannot.
Yuneec Q500+
Yuneec Typhoon H
Nano QX2
Nano QX3D
Blade 180QX
Blade 200QX
DJI 450 frame + Naza M V2 = GPS
ZMR 250
250 Pro - Dys 2300kv motors , Naze32 Acro
300 Folding Frame sporting a Naza Lite + GPS

flybywire

Quote from: Friskle on Monday,September 08, 2014, 14:53:33

Take the Blackpool vid, you cannot do that with a large aircraft, the difference is, these can literally be flown anywhere, a fixed wing cannot.


But that';s why they';re so appealing, and fixed wing flying is boring  :sleep:
Blog: http://ajwillis303.wix.com/stuff
The spiritual home of fpv large
Keep it emax, capiche?
Hardware? sure, I got hardware!

Jumpy07

As of April 2014, MTOM was increased to 3.5kg, and altitude 1000ft
BNUC-S Pilot with PfCo /PFAW.
UAQ / CAA PfCo Instructor / Flight Assessor

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"

Chippercheese

Quote from: flybywire on Monday,September 08, 2014, 14:56:31
But that';s why they';re so appealing, and fixed wing flying is boring  :sleep:



Lol I';m starting to feel the opposite way - getting a bit bored of rotor FPV (apart from the mini) in favour of learning to fixed wing!
TBS Discovery + ghetto printed gimbal, HovershipMHQ 1 & 2, QAV250, Turnigy Talon V2, chinese Alien500 thingie, 3d Printed Tricopter, Bix 3, Flyingwings.co.uk FalconEVO, Venturi EVO 1+2, Hornet Racing Wing, Radjet800 (by the dozen)... Permanent sucker for FPV, and lots and lots of OpenLR

NorcoT

Great information, need to digest it all.. also there is UK law on legal tx frequencies, I can';t remember the precise details but I believe we are limited to 2.4ghz and 5.2ghz tx as the lower frequencies I.e. 900mhz are reserved for other services. There is also a legal tx power too.. I';m still research as I';ve only just decided to try out FPV so this thread is very useful thank you.


quadfather

Quote from: Wyntrblue on Wednesday,October 22, 2014, 22:15:40
I found this particularly useful

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/spectrum/information/licence-exempt-radio-use/licence-exempt-devices/ofw311


Interesting.  If I understand this correctly you can';t use a VTX with more than 25mW EIRP.  Some people counter that saying you';d need a HAM license for anything more powerful.  However, that page clearly says "the Amateur Radio licence prohibits any airborne use".
-rw-rw-rw-  -  The Number of the Beast