"Beyond Visual Line Of Sight."?ÿ?ÿ
Reading an article?ÿ in GPS World just now, I once again found myself cringing when encountering this acronym.?ÿ It seems to me that "line of sight" is an inherently visual phenomenon, making the "visual" in this acronym redundant.?ÿ BVLOS should be BLOS (which also stands for Be Less Obtuse, Stupid).
BVLOS. Works for me.
Show some folks 10x, and it's still not "visual". It'll be "line of site" to you, and not others!
🙂
Grin
The intention is to emphasise the "visual" - with the eye rather than with a set of binoculars. The pilot is supposed to be aware of the surroundings as well as the aircraft. In the UK (not sure about USA) the commercial regulations don't permit any form of headset to give first party views, it MUST be direct sight. No objections though to the assistant using binoculars to help.
At the London UAV show this week the CAA were unofficially not denying that large commercial interests are looking at flying long-duration drones which would autonomously fly a whole series of sites in one flight. The proposed model appears to be that they would have a programme of dates for areas and then collate all the jobs that need flying. Guess it would provide cheap coverage for jobs which aren't urgent; hopefully it still leaves the urgent ones for small operators.
?ÿ
Binoculars are just fancy eyeglasses.?ÿ I don't think BVLOS means you can't operate a drone while wearing corrective lenses.
Binoculars can be used as an aid, but you cannot fly so far that you have to use them...
Jim, you misunderstand - you can wear normal prescription glasses, contact lenses or whatever you need to have normal vision.?ÿ
What you aren't allowed to do is to use an additional mechanical/electrical device to provide enhanced vision, since that may interfere with your peripheral vision and stop/hinder you seeing something coming into the operational area from the side.
As thebionicman says you have to be able to see the aircraft without the additional aid. To be honest, even if you are flying on an extended line of sight with an assistant using binoculars then any distraction can mean that you both lose sight of the aircraft - then it's a Red Button job.
To be clear, I'm not saying that the FAA rules are inappropriate, I'm just saying that they use a poorly-crafted term to describe the approved practice.?ÿ "Line of sight" means "a line?ÿ along which one can see," and that makes the word "visual" redundant.
We know. We know. We just have learned that double redundancy, can improve the chances of folks "seeing" things, or, "getting it".
This is in fact an old device, of Biblical antiquity.
"She was a virgin, neither had any man known her", or, verily verily I say unto you...
In any case, I like to "prove" my decisions, from several points of view. The redundancy helps to convey. Same was true in other contexts, such as "in the mouth of 2 or three witnesses, let every fact be established".
I use this mechanism alot. Especially in communication, where other ideas exist, with less merit, than what I believe, and am persuaded of.
I like redundancy, and saying things "in other words", to persuade, or convince.?ÿ
🙂
I hope you are not grieved with me, or made sore at me for this seeming tirade on doubled evidence, or creative expressions, to persuade. I have a very hard head, and a very small hole, that I learn through. Sometimes you have to throw at that hole alot, to get just a little through my thick skull!
