I fly large scale gassers primarily, but I also fly FPV at my normal RC field. I don't do it for money, but for fun. You get a wonderful perspective from the goggles, which are not for everyone as mentioned multiple times. The system provides an amazing freedom, though from some of the accounts the guys flying them were not very competent if they are losing orientation. My tricopter rights itself if the sticks are centered. It can fly home at the flip of a switch, and can even land on its own. It is not a commercial system, but made primarily of parts from various hobby shops. I ALWAYS remain within line of sight distances!

I keep it line of sight and don't feel comfortable taking it anyplace I can't get it back if I were to lose video. I have a Heads Up Display that points back home, gives me altitude, airspeed, and heading too. That said, I can also take off the goggles and bring it home manually with no issues. When it's time to land, I normally ditch the goggles and bring it in manually so I can ensure no one is doing touch and goes or flying in the pattern. It's just common sense and we enforce this at our field.

Although I almost always have a spotter, I ALWAYS coordinate with anyone in the air. Some ask me to get video of their airplanes, and I don't ever plan to make money, just having some fun.

The guys we need to worry about are the ones who are NOT on this forum, nor AMA members. The guys who buy a ready made system and fly it without any thought to what they are flying over, or how high. They aren't likely being dangerous on purpose, but their lack of knowledge makes for a bad situation that impacts the rest of us.

This little video is why I fly FPV, and it's wonderful fun. Every flight at my field is strictly coordinated and one guy even brings a 40 inch television out so other club members are able to see from the perspective of the model in flight.

The Bat Bone Tricopter (1 min 51 sec)

good point. also most of the yahoos on the news are line of site flying with just a hd recorder on them. by not jumping on the band wagon you are throwing your rc flying under the buss

Originally Posted by kevod

I have never flown RC equipment in a non-designated area with the exception of the small quad-copters that I flew in my house with my kids.

Not an attack...just trying to put things into prospective about how our society is changing...There would be those that would turn you in to CPS for child endangerment...citing the probability of that little quad to strike a child and possibly put an eye out or something...

We've veered from a society of holding people's person absolutely accountable for their actions, the best deterrent IMO, to a society that prosecutes people for any remote potential of causing harm, all in the name of prevention...People will continue to get the slaps on wrist...get the little fines and when they do cause harm the courts will just administer some impact to their pocket book and never will they actually feel the pain they caused another in any real way... Beating their ass on the county square, viewable on the 6 o'clock news, is just not PC and is viewed as barbaric...

Originally Posted by jbourke

Make sure you read the FAA memo before forming an opinion. The FAA memo does not address FPV. It only addresses goggles. FPV can be flown without goggles.

Jim

Jim - I understand that perfectly. This whole discussion makes me want to go back and re-read the FAA memo over again. As I have mentioned before - I am not 100% decided on where I stand on this and will look at all available information before forming my opinion. This is what all of us should do.

My problem with FPV in general lies with flying RC equipment of any type non direct LOS or in areas that aren't designated for RC equipment.

IMO - it doesn't matter how that is accomplished (using goggles or not, so on).
This just exponentially raises the risks that are inherent to this hobby and those are risks that I personally am not willing to take or promote other people to take.

And it is important to differentiate between what the law actually says and how the FAA has interpreted the law. Nothing in the law prohibits FPV or the use of goggles. All it requires is the aircraft to be within VLOS of the pilot.

This will eventually end up in court after the FAA issues a violation and then a court decides if the FAA's interpretation is correct or not.

This happens in my world all the time. Congress authorizes the EPA to protect the air, water, and land of the US from environmental impacts. EPA decides how to do that. People get issued a violation and the courts decide if EPA interpreted the law correctly. It is how the system works.

Originally Posted by 2185000

I fly large scale gassers primarily, but I also fly FPV at my normal RC field. I don't do it for money, but for fun. You get a wonderful perspective from the goggles, which are not for everyone as mentioned multiple times. The system provides an amazing freedom, though from some of the accounts the guys flying them were not very competent if they are losing orientation. My tricopter rights itself if the sticks are centered. It can fly home at the flip of a switch, and can even land on its own. It is not a commercial system, but made primarily of parts from various hobby shops. I ALWAYS remain within line of sight distances!

I keep it line of sight and don't feel comfortable taking it anyplace I can't get it back if I were to lose video. I have a Heads Up Display that points back home, gives me altitude, airspeed, and heading too. That said, I can also take off the goggles and bring it home manually with no issues. When it's time to land, I normally ditch the goggles and bring it in manually so I can ensure no one is doing touch and goes or flying in the pattern. It's just common sense and we enforce this at our field.

Although I almost always have a spotter, I ALWAYS coordinate with anyone in the air. Some ask me to get video of their airplanes, and I don't ever plan to make money, just having some fun.

The guys we need to worry about are the ones who are NOT on this forum, nor AMA members. The guys who buy a ready made system and fly it without any thought to what they are flying over, or how high. They aren't likely being dangerous on purpose, but their lack of knowledge makes for a bad situation that impacts the rest of us.

This little video is why I fly FPV, and it's wonderful fun. Every flight at my field is strictly coordinated and one guy even brings a 40 inch television out so other club members are able to see from the perspective of the model in flight.

The Bat Bone Tricopter - YouTube

MetHerInBaghdad - Extremely well stated.

You fly within the rules at a designated area for RC equipment.
That is how it should be done.

Originally Posted by papabatman

fair enough. you feel that fpv is the straw that broke the camels back. what i feel is all rc outside of AMA fields is the other 99% of the straw on the camel. example lots of parks and parking lots have banned any rc flying. some because of 3d type flying or people just flying with very little skill or knowledge. AMA and all of use should not fear what is new but embrace it. take it under are wings teach them how to do it safely. like i said earlier most fpv is done low and close vs high and far. we need to get the word out to go to a AMA field to learn how to do it safely get them a AMA card. then the yahoos who do dumb stuff out side of AMA for any type of flying should be fined or forced to take a safety class run by AMA for a fee.

Very well stated.

I do agree that we should be taking people under our wings and helping them in their part of the hobby and doing it safely and reducing the risk. That is what was done for me personally when I started in the hobby and I would be happy to pay that forward.

I have no problem with people flying FPV under the rules and in the proper areas - it just isn't for me personally, just like flying IMAC (which is what I primarily do) isn't for other people.

As I stated to Jim - my problem is non LOS flying (via any method) and flying in non RC areas.

Originally Posted by kevod

MetHerInBaghdad - Extremely well stated.

You fly within the rules at a designated area for RC equipment.
That is how it should be done.

Hmmm... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gT3f...NZ8cbBriCWlpMw

Originally Posted by littlecrankshaft

Hmmm... FPV Skywalker with GoPro HD - YouTube

Yep, that's my neighborhood and not very smart. However, I have since pulled my head out and only fly at my field or unpopulated areas. When I first got my system I could not wait to try it out. Although I was flying over houses in my area (quite stupid to be sure), I was still completely line of sight. It doesn't happen anymore.

Shocker alert here, but you will find a ton of videos like this where people are flying over populated areas with or without FPV. FPV has nothing to do with dumb!

Originally Posted by littlecrankshaft

Hmmm... FPV Skywalker with GoPro HD - YouTube

.....removed.....

My comment made it a personal attack against MetHerInBagDad which I don't like nor think that was deserved.

Originally Posted by MetHerInBaghdad

Yep, that's my neighborhood and not very smart. However, I have since pulled my head out and only fly at my field or unpopulated areas. When I first got my system I could not wait to try it out. Although I was flying over houses in my area (quite stupid to be sure), I was still completely line of sight. It doesn't happen anymore.

Shocker alert here, but you will find a ton of videos like this where people are flying over populated areas with or without FPV. FPV has nothing to do with dumb!

Not trying to pick on you...and glad to hear you are being more conscious of safety. What most people aren't taking into account is that technology is progressing...The laws are and will always be behind the curve. Once we accept certain laws and regulations they will be very hard to change. I see a future when FPV platforms that will only be just a few ounces all up...Almost impossible for them to cause any physical harm no matter where they are flown...

Originally Posted by kevod

.....removed.....

My comment made it a personal attack against MetHerInBagDad which I don't like nor think that was deserved.

It's OK, I am not immune to stupid. Negative comments are fair and probably deserved, but as I become educated I grow and wouldn't do that today. It still doesn't make FPV evil or any more dangerous than other facets of RC flight. Imagine flying over houses with a helicopter, which you can find doing random YouTube searches. Dumb is just dumb and the FAA can't fix that.

Originally Posted by MetHerInBaghdad

It's OK, I am not immune to stupid. Negative comments are fair and probably deserved, but as I become educated I grow and wouldn't do that today. It still doesn't make FPV evil or any more dangerous than other facets of RC flight. Imagine flying over houses with a helicopter, which you can find doing random YouTube searches. Dumb is just dumb and the FAA can't fix that.

And FWIW I am certain most are like you...always learning. And that's the real answer in the long run.

For discussion as my posts and recent posts from others are focused on FPV and it's implications:
Per Jim's recommendation I am re-reading the FAA response before forming my final opinion.



From the Super Simple FAA summary:

3. The FAA's Interpretation suggests that hobbyists who fly their models by "first person view" (FPV) might be doing something wrong if they are using video glasses or "goggles."
For the past decade, FPV has been inspiring students, engineers, robotics enthusiasts, and many others to take up the hobby or to expand their hobby activities.
FPV control adds no danger to the hobby, especially when a spotter is present to monitor the airspace.
The language of the 2012 statute concerning "within visual line of sight" indicates how far away a person should fly the model aircraft, not what method of controlmay be used for the recreational experience.
[This part of the FAA's interpretation impacts me because I enjoy flying FPV or plan to explore FPV in the near future.]



Broken down (my opinions):

* The FAA's Interpretation suggests that hobbyists who fly their models by "first person view" (FPV) might be doing something wrong if they are using video glasses or "goggles."
This is true. See my comments about VLOS below.





* For the past decade, FPV has been inspiring students, engineers, robotics enthusiasts, and many others to take up the hobby or to expand their hobby activities.
This is what the hobby is all about - expanding and growing and including new people and technology.
I am amazed at the equipment that we have now compared to what was present when I started 12+ years ago.

I am for FPV being included and promoted if it is done within the same set of rules and regulations that the rest of RC is included in and those rules are enforced.
If the rules are not followed then there should be action taken up to and including the AMA which has been shown to not be the case from what I understand. Are there examples to the contrary?

If there are not consequences for not following the set rules/guidelines then I personally am for the AMA distancing itself from supporting FPV for the good of everybody in the hobby.
It isn't right for me (or anybody) to be regulated out of the hobby because a small number of people don't want to follow the rules and the AMA isn't willing to enforce the rules.




* FPV control adds no danger to the hobby, especially when a spotter is present to monitor the airspace.
I don't agree with this statement - this is a blanket statement that would be true in some cases and not in others.
This statement makes a lot of assumptions such as the RC equipment is always within VLOS, what type of RC is being flown, whether goggles are being used or not which would affect reaction time, is a buddy box system being used, so on.





* The language of the 2012 statute concerning "within visual line of sight" indicates how far away a person should fly the model aircraft, not what method of control may be used for the recreational experience.
This is true (based on my understanding) that the statute refers to a distance and not the method. The FAA interpretation limits that down much further as we know.
My problem is that FPV in and of itself makes it completely achievable (and dare I say even promotes?) to fly well beyond VLOS.
This in combination with non-enforcement of safety code violations is a major issue for me personally.




* [This part of the FAA's interpretation impacts me because I enjoy flying FPV or plan to explore FPV in the near future.]
Why add this? What does this contribute other than adding potential bias?





I am just trying to see what other opinions are out there about this - there isn't any intention of throwing anybody or any type of flying "under the bus"

Originally Posted by kevod

I am just trying to see what other opinions are out there about this - there isn't any intention of throwing anybody or any type of flying "under the bus"

Very good!

Its great that everyone has an opinion.

Just so you have something to consider, I actually know people that think a Giant scale planes as the one in your avatar is beyond what should be allowed... When is safe, safe enough???when is a piece of string long enough???

Safety is purely subjective and if you ask 100 people to quantify you'll get 100 different levels that suit each... That's the problem we have now...instead of the pursuit of making each person accountable for his actions we will have endless interpretation of what's right. A point in every direction is no point at all.