A mission starts with an objective.
You describe the job. The agent builds the plan in a photorealistic 3D world, deterministic checks test it, and nothing advances until you approve.
Build
The agent writes onto the map
You set the area, the home position, and the aircraft, then describe the objective in plain language. The agent inspects the 3D environment — terrain, structures, and the volume the aircraft has to move through — and writes a geometry-aware route, waypoints, and camera actions directly onto the map.
The starting point is the objective rather than a waypoint list, so a plan can be revised by describing what changed instead of dragging pins. You review one mission rather than assembling it step by step in a planner.
MissionSmith writes the route
Area
Northern corridor · five towers
Home
Access road, east gate
Aircraft
Mavic 3E · 45 min
Validation
Clearance, not confidence
Validation runs independently of the language model. Each segment is tested against geofence, altitude limits, and obstacle clearance, then summarized as OK, TIGHT, or BLOCKED, with unresolved readiness gates left visible rather than cleared automatically.
Keeping the checks deterministic is the point: a route the model is confident about can still fail them, and it should. The agent proposes, engineering checks, and the two are deliberately not the same system.
OK
Clearance satisfied on every axis.
TIGHT
Inside tolerance, surfaced for the operator.
BLOCKED
Fails a limit. Resolve before approval.
Clearance ledger
1 blocked
| Seg | Span | Clearance | State |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Home → Tower 1 | 31.4 m | OK |
| 02 | Tower 1 → 2 | 28.7 m | OK |
| 03 | Tower 2 → 3 | 12.1 m | TIGHT |
| 04 | Tower 3 → 4 | 4.6 m | BLOCKED |
| 05 | Tower 4 → 5 | 26.9 m | OK |
| 06 | Tower 5 → Home | 33.2 m | OK |
Corrections
Both plans stay on screen
Tell the copilot what the field sees — a crane, a line that is not in the map, a new deck. Operator-supplied site detail is part of the loop: MissionSmith revises the trajectory, re-runs the same checks, and shows you the plans side by side before you accept either.
There's a crane on the north face that isn't in the map.
Maps go stale and sites change between surveys. Treating the operator as a source of truth about their own site is more honest than assuming the captured world is complete.
Compare
Nothing accepted yet
Plan A · Original
Plan B · Revised
Approval
The operator decides
The route, the warnings, the sources behind them, and any gate still unresolved all stay visible, and nothing advances on its own. MissionSmith plans and validates — it does not take off, command the aircraft in the field, or replace the remote pilot in command.
Approval is a decision made with the reasoning in view, not a confirmation dialog. The judgment stays with the person who carries responsibility for the flight.
At decision
Nothing advances
- RouteEvery segment, as flown.
- WarningsWhat is tight, and where.
- SourcesWhat each finding came from.
- GatesWhat is still unresolved.
Handoff
What leaves with the plan
An inspectable mission: the route, waypoints, camera actions, and the checks behind them. Planning uses the aircraft and payload you configure, and the available export paths depend on which aircraft that is.
Organizations bringing their own airframe specifications can have those modelled during early access.
Route
Ordered segments with altitudes
Waypoints
Positions, headings, holds
Camera actions
What is captured at each stop
Checks
The clearance record behind the plan
Regulatory
Authorization stays elsewhere
No. It can surface location-specific operating requirements, airspace context, and unresolved authorization gates with sources. It does not issue regulatory authorization or determine legal flight status for you.
The same applies beyond visual line of sight: MissionSmith helps assemble a reviewable plan and shows which authorization gates are open, but BVLOS remains a regulatory and operational decision for the operator.
More detail on aircraft support, data handling, and responsibility lives in the FAQ.