Looking for photo-point study software or solution

[CruiserRunner]

I was approached by another dept today looking to take drone photos of specific points at fairly specific altitudes from afar. Forest restoration project to look at conifer enchroachment in oak woodlands. We would like to be able to repeat the process over time for this study.

This would be, say, launching from road/trail access point/s and having the drone fly out to predefined locations for a photo from a pre-selected altitude, possibly up to a mile from the launch location. Any recommendations for software, strategy, or both?

I've done pre-planned flights over big areas before for mosics, but have yet to figure out a way to integrate terrain following for the steep remote areas we work. The altitude is what make this tricky for my low level of expertise. TIA

 

[MapMaker53]

If you are flying in the U.S., what you are describing would go against FAA regulations as flying beyond visual line of sight -- unless you are using a number of visual observers in radio contact with the PIC.

Having said that, you probably should use the Litchi software to plan the mission waypoints and take pre-planned photos. You can save the mission and later call it up to be run again and again in the future, snapping the same photos. You can set the waypoint altitudes relative to ground terrain, but you will have to set many waypoints along the route if the terrain constantly varies.

 

[JimD]

If you are flying in the U.S., what you are describing would go against FAA regulations as flying beyond visual line of sight -- unless you are using a number of visual observers in radio contact with the PIC.

Having said that, you probably should use the Litchi software to plan the mission waypoints and take pre-planned photos. You can save the mission and later call it up to be run again and again in the future, snapping the same photos. You can set the waypoint altitudes relative to ground terrain, but you will have to set many waypoints along the route if the terrain constantly varies.

VOs With the radio don’t cut it They have to be right next to you.

 

[Ajkm]

Measure Ground Control.

 

[MapMaker53]

VOs With the radio don’t cut it They have to be right next to you.

Sorry, but that is incorrect. The following is taken from Section 107.33 Visual Observer of the regulations:

"To make this communication possible, the remote PIC, person manipulating the controls, and VO must work out a method of effective communication, which does not create a distraction and allows them to understand each other. The communication method must be determined prior to operation. This effective communication requirement would permit the use of
communication-assisting devices, such as a hand-held radio, to facilitate communication from a distance."

You may be referring to the use of binoculars. Those are not allowed.

 

[MavicAir2Marc]

Sorry, but that is incorrect. The following is taken from Section 107.33 Visual Observer of the regulations:

"To make this communication possible, the remote PIC, person manipulating the controls, and VO must work out a method of effective communication, which does not create a distraction and allows them to understand each other. The communication method must be determined prior to operation. This effective communication requirement would permit the use of
communication-assisting devices, such as a hand-held radio, to facilitate communication from a distance."

You may be referring to the use of binoculars. Those are not allowed.

Recreational pilots have to have their VO co-located with them, it's not the same as Part 107 pilots.

 

[JimD]

Recreational pilots have to have their VO co-located with them, it's not the same as Part 107 pilots.

Still VLOS is required. So positioned VO's don't work.
They can use a radio, but the PIC must still have VLOS.

At all times the small unmanned aircraft must remain close enough to the remote pilot in command and the person manipulating the flight controls of the small UAS for those people to be capable of seeing the aircraft with vision unaided by any device other than corrective lenses.

 

[MapMaker53]

Okay, I stand corrected. VO's are basically added on observers who can be a distance away from the PIC and use VLOS to observe the environment around the drone from that distant location and report their observations to the PIC via radio contact, but it doesn't take the place of the PIC's requirement to maintain continuous VLOS with the drone. I forgot that there is currently no daisy-chaining of VO's beyond PIC VLOS allowed in the wording of the regs. So it sounds like the OP's large area of autonomous flight over hilly and forested terrain would be difficult if not impossible to adhere to FAA Part 107 regs in that type of environment, if I'm now correct. Seems it would have to be launch at or near each photo location for the shot.

Maybe that's one reason I got an 88 on the recurrent exam. LOL

 

[JimD]

Okay, I stand corrected. VO's are basically added on observers who can be a distance away from the PIC and use VLOS to observe the environment around the drone from that distant location and report their observations to the PIC via radio contact, but it doesn't take the place of the PIC's requirement to maintain continuous VLOS with the drone. In other words, no daisy-chaining of VO's beyond PIC VLOS. So it sounds like the OP's large area of autonomous flight over hilly and forested terrain would be difficult if not impossible to adhere to FAA Part 107 regs over that type of environment, if I'm now correct. Seems it would have to be launch at or near each photo location for the shot.

Your not the first and will not be the last to think that.

 

[CentralVAphoto]

Okay, I stand corrected. VO's are basically added on observers who can be a distance away from the PIC and use VLOS to observe the environment around the drone from that distant location and report their observations to the PIC via radio contact, but it doesn't take the place of the PIC's requirement to maintain continuous VLOS with the drone. I forgot that there is currently no daisy-chaining of VO's beyond PIC VLOS allowed in the wording of the regs. So it sounds like the OP's large area of autonomous flight over hilly and forested terrain would be difficult if not impossible to adhere to FAA Part 107 regs in that type of environment, if I'm now correct. Seems it would have to be launch at or near each photo location for the shot.

Maybe that's one reason I got an 88 on the recurrent exam. LOL

I got a 93 on the recurrent and still believed what you thought. Maybe a 95 would do it - dunno. I have been planning just such a shoot (5200 ft distance with 1200ft elevation) and put three hi-output strobes on my Mavic Pro to extend LOS. I planned to station a VO at the other end of the flight with a radio and have them contact me when the UA was in sight. I even planned for the flight path to be in the shadow of the mountain, to give the strobes a fighting chance. In four years, I don't think I've ever been beyond 1500 feet away. I will have to test my LOS to max distance under those conditions, but just can't imagine seeing it at a mile. So I don't think my planned flight is legally feasible. Thanks JimD - you may have saved my A$$ on this! I don't mind being wrong from time to time, but there's no excuse for being unsafe when you (finally) know better. Re-learning this sort of thing is what keeps me reading this forum every week. Cheers.

 

[JimD]

I got a 93 on the recurrent and still believed what you thought. Maybe a 95 would do it - dunno. I have been planning just such a shoot (5200 ft distance with 1200ft elevation) and put three hi-output strobes on my Mavic Pro to extend LOS. I planned to station a VO at the other end of the flight with a radio and have them contact me when the UA was in sight. I even planned for the flight path to be in the shadow of the mountain, to give the strobes a fighting chance. In four years, I don't think I've ever been beyond 1500 feet away. I will have to test my LOS to max distance under those conditions, but just can't imagine seeing it at a mile. So I don't think my planned flight is legally feasible. Thanks JimD - you may have saved my A$$ on this! I don't mind being wrong from time to time, but there's no excuse for being unsafe when you (finally) know better. Re-learning this sort of thing is what keeps me reading this forum every week. Cheers.

Here is another tip - strobes are only designated for operation in the civil twilight for the purpose of other aircraft to see your drone. There is not expectation that they will somehow extend VLOS.

For this to happen it would make sense that the strobe would be on top of the aircraft - in fact the FAA does not want you to see the strobe because the bright light in you eyes could "snow blind" you or reduce your vision in the twilight.