Flying the Mavic into fireworks

[leesmavic]

And that's the bummer, he lost his Mavic for two weeks, and then had to go get it himself at the evidence room downtown. All because the cops don't have a clue about the laws concerning Drone flight. They have now published a 'Drone Policy' on their website.
View attachment 4540

It it enough to place a statement on a website in US to justify police action? If I'm a tourist in the expo territory and don't see no signs, warnings, don't have internet in roaming and put my drone in the air, will I be prosecuted?

Sent from my XT1572 using MavicPilots mobile app

 

[F6Rider]

I doubt that, you will simply be told to land your Drone and not fly in the area. These Officers were making it up as the went along, or were simply taking on faith what someone else said. In your case as a tourist you would simple be advised of the rules. (in most cases)
And even with the statement on the website that is just that, a statement, or Policy, without the rule of law behind it. If you fought it you would win but most people don't have either the will or resources to go the distance. Most agency's think they own the airspace over their area, when in fact they do not, as the FAA has sole jurisdiction over the National Air Space, but it is all up in the air (pun intended) right now and things are changing all the time.

 

[BD0G]

Regarding Cal Expo (or other places like that), I'm not really sure that putting up a notice on their website gives them the right to regulate any form of airspace in the US. While I agree that we should never be a hazard or pest to anyone, simply putting up a sign (electronic or otherwise) does not grant someone legal authority over something that is currently regulated by the federal government.

This is so true. However, now that they have that sign clearly posted for the world to see and likely on thier premises in multiple locations it would be a much steeper climb for one to indicate they were unaware. A judge (if it came to that) might side with the Plaintiff as a result. Its really all conjecture at this point in time until someone knowingly or unknowingly challenges that Cal Expo Pseudo airspace restriction.

Sounds like a "time vampire" to fight though.

 

[bamf]

This is so true. However, now that they have that sign clearly posted for the world to see and likely on thier premises in multiple locations it would be a much steeper climb for one to indicate they were unaware. A judge (if it came to that) might side with the Plaintiff as a result. Its really all conjecture at this point in time until someone knowingly or unknowingly challenges that Cal Expo Pseudo airspace restriction.

Sounds like a "time vampire" to fight though.

I think the only real issue here is that if they tell you that you physically have to leave the premises and then do not, at that point you are trespassing on private property. If you take off from a legal area and then happen into the air space over Cal Expo though, I'm not really sure what if any recourse they have.

But like many other people have pointed out on the these forums, these are the sorts of issues that cause lawmakers to start thinking about adding regulations around drones in general. Your best bet is to remain calm and explain to them that you have not violated any laws (assuming you have not as each situation is different) and then land your drone. Simply being right does not always guarantee a satisfactory outcome for you at any given point in time.

 

[cjurczak]

As a licensed pyrotechnics display operator in the US, the industry is aware of drones being into shoot sites. In my opinion there isn't an increased safety issue, but there is liability associated with having drones in the shot site.

Would I stop a show over it, there is no clear answer, but I fear this is going to come to a head in the near future. That being said we do notify ATC occasionally when operating near airports. So as a drone pilot check for TFR, or NOTAMs...

My suggestion is stay clear of breaking fireworks and away from people... If we don't use common sense we are going to pay the price as a community/industry ...

Sent from my Nexus 6 using MavicPilots mobile app

 

[slr001]

Motley, although technically you are correct, but he has a point. These "guidelines", for hobby users, if continually ignored, and especially if resulting in an incident, will have a negative effect on our hobby. Do you really want to be that guy on the news? What they can get you on is "careless and reckless".
I am part 107 also, and as I stated in a reply above, it is a fine line we are walking right now.

Robert, not a personal attack on you... just chose this message to make my point. As a Hobbyist to a 107's.

The FAA made them "guidelines" for a reason. They didn't have to. They could have made them rules if they wanted.

If hobbyist fly within the guideline 90% or more of the time. With the few times being flying to 500' instead of 400 for a single flight. Or one time exceeding VLOS. I would suggest that is exactly what the FAA thought would happen. Otherwise they would not have made them "guidelines".

It just seems like every time a hobbyist steps over the guidelines they 107's seem to think we are going to "ruin it" for them.

 

[Ryan D]

You could drop them