A remote pilot and visual observer disagree about whether an obstacle clearance during a flight is adequate. The VO believes the aircraft is too close to a rooftop; the pilot believes there is sufficient margin based on the camera feed. Who has final authority and what should happen?

Why →Under § 107.19, the remote PIC holds final authority for the operation. However, CRM principles require that safety-critical input from a crew member be acknowledged and evaluated before dismissing it. A VO's obstacle clearance warning is exactly the kind of safety-critical call that should trigger an immediate pause, not a debate. The PIC verifies, then makes the call. Dismissing a VO warning without verification is a documented CRM failure pattern in aviation accidents.

The trap →Proceeding on the pilot's own assessment is technically correct about authority but misapplies CRM principles. Authority does not mean ignoring crew input. Giving the VO authority over obstacle calls overstates the VO's role. The VO provides information; the PIC decides.

Field note →The practical protocol: any VO call of 'stop' or 'too close' means the aircraft stops moving until the PIC confirms position. This takes three seconds. The alternative, dismissing the warning and clipping a rooftop, takes far longer to recover from.