Had an interesting discussion, that left me thinking. (Dangerous,I know).
In the rules it says this:
Quote
‘Unaided’, in this context means without the use of any other equipment, such as binoculars, telescopes, cameras or any other such equipment.
This does not include corrective lenses, which may be worn.
Unquote
So opens a point of law.
The definition and sub-note about ‘corrective lenses’ clearly details items that have to be ‘aimed’ at the drone and that use visible light and lenses to capture and change the image displayed to the user, and the words ‘other such equipment’ clarifies that’s the only ‘equipment’ the rule applies to.
The screen being looked at by the drone pilot does not meet this definition so is excluded from the ‘rule’ and is therefore completely legal.
it has been discussed elswhere
but to close this down.
the CAA stipulate corrective lenses are glasses or contact lenses, so they are ok.
So, binoculars, telescopes or digital enhancements such as a camera with a zoom lens and screen are not allowed.
As for the looking at the controller screen. they have stipulated that the screen should only be looked at briefly to check telemetry, warnings and possible line up a shot.
so using the screen is not acceptable, and not legal as a means of determining the aircraft position and orientation.
The CAA also made it clear that you must be able to identify the orientation of the aircraft while in the air.
which removed an earlier stipulation of VLOS was about 500m.
Just a few cases and the Crown Court ones were more complex than just this issue alone.
I wonder if with drone development, LIDAR, GPS advance and RTH developments move the goalposts, but if it’s not up for discussion, that’s fine with me.
lidar etc will not change VLOS. as VLOS is about you knowing what is happening around your drone more than where your drone is, so that if you see something encroaching you can take avoiding action.
Thanks, I just used LIDAR as an example of the advancements being made since these regulations were put in place.
It seems to me this clause (as is often the case) has been written as a sticking-plaster and to be all encompassing, when there are numerous situations where its application by the court system and by judges, is already well out-of-date and is far from ‘fair’.
For example:
No aircraft has all around vision so is never flown using VLOS as a principle.
In fact many use automatic take off and landing some of the time and cruise control always, often early in the climb.
It could be argued, especially with drones under 250grams and with the functionality we have today of onscreen displays showing the position of the drone, it’s orientation, the position of the pilot and both the actual flight path and straight-line RTH line, the drone pilot viewing the screen has considerably more data available to them than the full size aircraft pilot.
They had perfect opportunity at the start of this year with the ‘reg changes’, but ignored all input from hobbyist lobbyers (including GADC), some even commented that all hobby drones should be banned.
One wonders how far manned flight would have progressed had pilots been required to maintain visual contact at all times with the airfield they took off from
Could you imagine someone who has 2 pairs of glasses
1 pair for short sight and 1 pair for long sight DJI owners just saying I know its 2026 and there’s verifocals nowadays
Unfortunately not, I’m sure the CAA is well aware of the capability of modern drones but the law is clear on this point:
“Just because the UA is still visible (for example, a dot in the sky), this does not mean that
it meets the definition of VLOS. A RP must be able to visually determine the aircraft’s
orientation at all times. While this may potentially be aided by navigation lights, the sole
use of telemetry to indicate UA orientation to the RP is not considered as acceptable”
(From UAS Regulation UK Regulation (EU) 2019/947 dated January 2026)
DJI owners just saying I know its 2026 and there’s verifocals nowadays