Aerotas’ long-running field guidance has treated altitude as a tradeoff, not a default. Fly lower and you typically get stronger ground resolution and tighter accuracy, but you also collect more data and spend more time in the field. Fly higher and you move faster, but you give up some precision.
For many practical projects, roughly 200 to 250 feet above ground is a useful middle ground. It is often the “Goldilocks zone” where crews can still get strong accuracy without turning the flight into a data-volume problem.
What changes when you fly lower
- More detail per image
- Better potential accuracy
- Longer field time
- More batteries and more processing load
What changes when you fly higher
- Faster coverage
- Less field time
- Lower data volume
- Less margin for high-end accuracy, depending on the system
Practical rule: choose altitude based on the final deliverable, not on the false idea that every project should be flown as high as legally possible.
Older non-RTK systems often benefit from more conservative, lower-altitude flying when tight accuracy is required. Stronger modern aircraft can hold useful accuracy even higher up. That does not make altitude irrelevant. It just means the best answer changes with the aircraft and the project.