Neww FAA Drone restrictions

[rydfree]

One would think that this would be a no-brainer without the FAA having to announce new restrictions but it is in reaction to at least two incidents of the Navy and Air Force reporting drones over bases recently .

"The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has established airspace restrictions over 133 military facilities to address national security concerns about unauthorized drone operations. The specific restricted locations are detailed in a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) – UAS NOTAM FDC 7/7137, and may be viewed online via an interactive map here.

The Agency is using its existing authority under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) § 99.7 – Special Security Instructions – to establish these restrictions. The relief provided under § 99.7 is limited to requests from the Department of Defense and U.S. federal security and intelligence agencies based on national security interests.

U.S. military facilities are considered “sensitive” as they are vital to the nation’s security. The FAA and the Department of Defense have agreed to restrict drone flights up to 400 feet within the facility’s lateral boundaries. There are only a few exceptions that permit drone flights within these restrictions, and they must be coordinated with the individual facility and/or the FAA. The restrictions are effective on April 14, 2017.

Operators who violate the airspace restrictions may be subject to enforcement action, including potential civil penalties and criminal charges.

For more information about these restrictions, including frequently asked questions, please visit the FAA’s UAS website."

 

[kenny lee]

that's for sure.

 

[Jimmie Hanson]

Yep

 

[Slayerstwin]

Good

 

[Strafe1]

makes sense

 

[dewster]

I remember when I could just launch from my deck care free.

 

[Mavic Ray]

I'm in the USAF and I brought my Mavic to work one day to show my co workers. I was able to fly it indoors but as soon as I took it outside and it acquired a GPS fix, it wouldn't let me take off.

 

[erkme73]

And thus, the slippery slope gets slipperier. Next up, police stations, schools, and all government buildings. Followed by a 1 mile radius of prohibited flight around any uniformed government agent, traffic stop, or other public incident.

Remember, .gov can spy on you legally from any angle, any device, anywhere. But if you dare put an eye in the sky to watch what they are doing, you're creating a safety/security/national-security incident.

One more rule that will only be observed by legal, informed, and well-intentioned operators. Those that actually have a nefarious interest in military installations aren't suddenly going to pack up and head home. "We were going to surveil this base to determine how best to attack and kill its occupants, but now that it's illegal to fly near or over them, we will abandon our efforts." Only a bureaucrat could see value and effectiveness in such rules.

 

[BorisTheSpider]

And thus, the slippery slope gets slipperier.

....

Remember, .gov can spy on you legally from any angle, any device, anywhere. But if you dare put an eye in the sky to watch what they are doing, you're creating a safety/security/national-security incident.

Amen to this.

 

[dewster]

I'm in the USAF and I brought my Mavic to work one day to show my co workers. I was able to fly it indoors but as soon as I took it outside and it acquired a GPS fix, it wouldn't let me take off.

Same problem here. I can't fly it indoors due to No Fly Zone. I wish it had an indoor flight setting or a way to switch it to Attitude mode.

 

[Craig540]

Not sure what is changing. I live 1 mile away from a base and have been able to call them when ever I wanted to fly.
The app always says class C warning but I just log in
and click two boxes acknowledging that it will be my responsibility if there is a problem. I have gotten a no fly zone a few times, but if I turn on the Mavic last after the controller and app it never says that anymore. So after the 14th what will happen to my flight privileges in front of my house.

 

[tcope]

This is nothing new... these restricted airspace locations have been this way for years. Again, these are not new restrictions.

What has changed is that the FAA is _now_ offering information to a map that shows these locations.

Give them a few more years and they might even come out with a decent map that is also correct.

 

[Craig540]

Great news then, I just want to be able to test things in the front yard and sunrise sunset images.
They do ask if I can keep it under 100ft which is perfect for my purposes.

 

[frankiez]

[QUOTE="erkme73, post: 154087, member: 439"One more rule that will only be observed by legal, informed, and well-intentioned operators. Those that actually have a nefarious interest in military installations aren't suddenly going to pack up and head home. "We were going to surveil this base to determine how best to attack and kill its occupants, but now that it's illegal to fly near or over them, we will abandon our efforts." Only a bureaucrat could see value and effectiveness in such rules.[/QUOTE]

Just as we register our drones with the FAA, do they think that anybody who wants to use it for unscrupulous things, is going to register it as well? I know someone who has a P3 and told me he will never register it cuz if something happens it can be traced back to him. Not that he is a possible terrorist but if he crashes into someone he can't be held liable if nobody saw him doing it. SMH