Hello Fellow Yuneec Pilot!
Join our free Yuneec community and remove this annoying banner!
Sign up

Typhoon H in high winds

Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Messages
302
Likes
91
Age
41
#1
So a lot of people wonder how or if the H can handle high winds. I can tell you for a fact it can and does a could job at it to. Would I recommend it na.
But as some of you know the huge Hurricane Irma has been moving through the south east. Well it just passed through my area the tide was rising so I decided to get some air footage of my area. Winds are forcasted at 30+ knots and gust higher. It was interesting looking at it tilted into the wind holding position. Well not perfect but it stayed put really well.
I will post the video once power or Internet comes back on.
Typhoon 1 - hurricane 0

And to any of you that are in the path I hope all is well.
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2017
Messages
140
Likes
35
Age
49
Location
In and on the air
#2
Well, a Typhoon and a Hurricane ARE the same thing, after all; just in a different ocean. ;)
 
Joined
Apr 29, 2016
Messages
26
Likes
6
Age
55
#3
I tried to resist putting my H in the air. I had to do it. It was solid. I flew it for more than 30 minutes. Two batteries. I love this thing more than before. My neighbor had a P4. He launched and it was all over the place he landed after 4 minutes. I live in north florida.
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2017
Messages
115
Likes
46
Age
61
#4
I live on the east slope of the Colorado Rockies and routinely fly in high winds and turbulent conditions. The stability of the H never ceases to amaze me!
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2017
Messages
140
Likes
35
Age
49
Location
In and on the air
#7
Is there a reason to fly over people and property?
Call me a fuddy-duddy, or a party-pooper, or a jerk if you will, but dang man... this is the kind of stuff that will do nothing but encourage powers-that-be to enact more legislation against anyone operating remote control aircraft.
Ask yourself what you think would happen if something catastrophic would occur when your sUAS was above any of these people's heads.
 
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Messages
302
Likes
91
Age
41
#8
Did you ask if I informed the people on the ground?
Also flying over property is not illegal. Just fyi. Taking off or landing on private property is.
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2017
Messages
140
Likes
35
Age
49
Location
In and on the air
#9
Reading back over my statement, I don't see where I asked.
And I am not speaking about privacy or legality or whether you have permission. I am speaking about property damage and personal liability.
If something happened when you're over someone's head, think of what would happen. Personally, if it happened to me, I'd hate to think that my actions were the cause of some young child being a vegetable for the next 80 years, or worse. I am fully aware that there are those who don't care for other peoples personal safety and property.
For more information, please refer to my signature, or to the well-heeded since the birth of RC aeromodeling that are universally established guidelines of flying RC aircraft.
 
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Messages
302
Likes
91
Age
41
#10
Then I guess I should cancel all the real estate and insurance claim jobs I'm doing? I'll be over property.
Also I am fully aware of the dangers and responsibilities as a pilot. And if you play on your reasoning tgen you shouldn't drive, ride a bike or etc. As what if you loose control and hit someone or something? In all these there are risks and you take the safety measures you can and that's all you can do..

Oh and my neighbors are the ones who asked if I could fly so they could see the damage to the area. Lots of them who were out of town.
 
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
1,260
Likes
320
Age
62
Location
Central Florida
#11
My son is a Police officer, he mentioned, there are so many rules and regulations he could easily issue tickets or put them in jail. You have to apply common sense and some are guide lines to go by.
I personally visited FAA regional office here in Orlando spoke with a Duty Officer yes there are rules but also guidelines, use common sense.
 
Likes: kd4pbs
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
1,260
Likes
320
Age
62
Location
Central Florida
#12
Is there a reason to fly over people and property?
Call me a fuddy-duddy, or a party-pooper, or a jerk if you will, but dang man... this is the kind of stuff that will do nothing but encourage powers-that-be to enact more legislation against anyone operating remote control aircraft.
Ask yourself what you think would happen if something catastrophic would occur when your sUAS was above any of these people's heads.
Yes, real planes do fall out of the sky, big or small.
 
Likes: kd4pbs
Joined
Aug 3, 2017
Messages
140
Likes
35
Age
49
Location
In and on the air
#13
Yes, real planes do fall out of the sky, big or small.
That's why big plane owners and operators carry bazillions of dollars in liability insurance, and responsible little plane operators carry a few million dollars in liability insurance and only fly in places that the insurance provider allows.
EDIT: And if you damage someone or something while not flying in one of the provider's approved areas to fly, you're SOL, as it should be. They don't want to have to be financially responsible for people who are doing stupid things.
Full-size aircraft, by their very nature, must operate over people's heads and property. sUAS, by it's very nature is either a hobby venture - where we must accept limited areas of operation, or a paid venture that is not adversely affected by being limited by a law that states one must not fly the aircraft over people.
Of course, at our RC field, if someone flies over the flight line, they get a warning. If they do it again, they're booted permanently.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 3, 2017
Messages
140
Likes
35
Age
49
Location
In and on the air
#14
Then I guess I should cancel all the real estate and insurance claim jobs I'm doing? I'll be over property.
Also I am fully aware of the dangers and responsibilities as a pilot. And if you play on your reasoning tgen you shouldn't drive, ride a bike or etc. As what if you loose control and hit someone or something? In all these there are risks and you take the safety measures you can and that's all you can do..

Oh and my neighbors are the ones who asked if I could fly so they could see the damage to the area. Lots of them who were out of town.
When I drive, I have liability insurance that covers me in case I drive stupidly and hit someone. And I'm not driving over people's heads or homes, so if my vehicle were to suddenly malfunction, it wouldn't fall like a rock and take someone or something out. I also drive within the parameters of the laws that I agreed to in order to have the privilege of driving. And if my engine stops while driving, I simply pull over to the shoulder of the road, get out, and curse a few times... no harm done to anyone or anything. So, apples, meet oranges.

If you're flying under part 107, then you have the required liability insurance for property damage, and that's why you are allowed under part 107 to fly over structures. That said, as you well know, even part 107 law specifically states you are not to fly your sUAS over people other than the pilot and operators of the sUAS. Ever. Not even if you have their permission to do so.

Look... again, I'm not trying to be "that guy" - but so few people seem to speak up when there are flagrant violations of rules and regulations that I HAVE to say something. There used to be a time in this country, not too long ago, that those of us who flew RC aircraft enjoyed very limited regulations. We would be mentored by a person who knew right from wrong, what to do and not do, and how to fly responsibly. We'd spend all we could save up for as kids on some expensive RC aircraft and a year's membership in the AMA, go to the field on weekends, and fly responsibly. Then all of the sudden tons of unskilled, careless operators brought the wrath of the FAA down upon even those of us who operated responsibly and didn't fly these $1.98 aircraft that the nairy-do-wells called "drones". Suddenly, those of us who flew RC for decades were faced with having to register our aircraft at a ridiculous amount per aircraft, or face insane fees and even prison time if we didn't comply... all because of these newbie jerks flying their little toys above neighborhoods and people. Thankfully the FAA was overruled on all of that, and we responsible RC flyers are not having those draconian laws shoved down our throats. At least for now.

I agree... you take the safety measures (following rules and regulations) and that's all you can do. #1 on that list, in my book at least, is to not fly over peoples heads. And with that, I stick by my original statement; the more videos government regulators see of sUAS pilots flying over property, and especially people, the greater the risk of those draconian regulations being enacted.

And, as Forrest says, That's all I got to say about that.
 
Joined
Jul 4, 2017
Messages
1,260
Likes
320
Age
62
Location
Central Florida
#15
KD: I'm sure not every RC flyer flies responsibly, there are jerks out there and still jerky RC flyers. I've seen it first had!
Take a deep breath and relax your taking this to seriously. I my self and a commercial business drone operator and carry insurance. Risk is inevitable part of success!
 
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Messages
302
Likes
91
Age
41
#16
Also, I'm glad you have insurance on your car. But you can't control all malfunctions or external forces to be. A blow out of a tire can send you off the road into a playground full of children running over them. A heart attack can do the same.
Just saying.
 
R

Rayray

Guest
#17
Good differences of opinion, and we all have opinions. Good discussion.
I watched all 3 videos, maybe got a bit bored, but for folks who live there, it would be interesting as they recognize familiar places.

I did not see any overflying of crowds, saw nothing that rang my alarm bells. I myself would have flown higher above houses in the first video, but in the next two the elevation appears higher.

Only compelling reason not to fly in these situations is if a local NFZ regulation has been put in place.
 
Joined
May 1, 2016
Messages
7,025
Likes
2,847
Location
N. California
#18
There are no insurance mandates in Part 107. Those that have insurance do so because of sound business decisions, not because of a legal requirement.

Part 107 prohibits flying directly over a person or part of a person with the exception of a couple of conditions, both of which require the people that may be over flown be either part of the flight crew or cognizant (briefed) on the operation and have a shelter available. 107 does not prohibit flight near people. If the aircraft is above but even 1' offset from a person there would be no violation of the law. Some questionable judgement but no legal violation.

As for flying near people, such is done frequently under controlled or semi controlled conditions. Best practice is when all that could be impacted are fully briefed on the activity beforehand. Public events, weddings, and similar are extremely difficult to shoot because of briefing all involved, controlling the crowd, and diverting the aircraft when and as the public wanders into the flight path, but they can be and are done-legally. They are considered high risk by insurance companies though, and responsible operators should view them similarly.

After viewing all three videos there was no part that clearly established the aircraft was being flown directly over a person. Certainly very close to directly over, and a couple points where it might have been directly over, but directly over could not be established though anything I saw in the video. There were some questions raised about possible TFR violations, LOS issues, and intended purpose of the flights, but not absolutely knowing where the operator was, and if the flights were conducted prior to or during the effective period of the TFR, is not mentioned by the OP. OTOH, this was the type of activity the FAA and first responders have asked people not to participate in unless they are an official part of the mobile response efforts in order to assure safe passage of manned emergency aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Likes: CSI
Joined
Mar 30, 2017
Messages
302
Likes
91
Age
41
#19
Yeah ray not meant to be exciting. It was just a flight to ease the minds of my fellow neighbors that were out of town. That's why the first flight was lower. At that time there was not any flight restrictions.
 
Joined
Feb 13, 2017
Messages
115
Likes
46
Age
61
#20
When I was getting my part 61 private license 40 some years ago, the airfield I based out of had a sign on the taxiway that said "Avoid Overflying Houses". My instructor, an ex Nam medivac chopper pilot, would always comment that if there were "Overflying Houses" in the area, it was to damn windy to fly!
 

New Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
12,877
Messages
146,946
Members
15,511
Latest member
sober118