Why people think the 30nm TFR is there for drones only is beyond me. The TFR that size was to encompass all applicable aircraft. Crashing a drone will not wipe out thousands of people, but a larger aircraft could as we saw with 911. Come on people let’s try reading the text of the TFR instead of seeing 30nm and saying “BS, this is overbearing and unwarranted “.
The article that is linked to the original post says it is a one mile radius. "...Federal Aviation Administration issued a temporary flight restriction (TFR) covering an area within 1-mile radius of the stadium up to 18,000 feet in altitude as part of a security plan designed to protect and secure the events leading up to and including Super Bowl LV." Where does the 30 mile radius come from?
The fact that this has to be bolded and repeated over and over is ridiculous and shows the narrow mindset and unwillingness to learn SIMPLE procedures such as reading a thread posted with comments. The easiest thing to take from all the "Drone and Me" comments is that if you can't do something as simple to learn why a TFR and All aircraft apply is that perhaps you don't have the needed mindset to be flying in the first place.
What if drones are their sole source of income? This is their 1st offense. I don't think ruining a career or bankrupting them is warranted. Anyway, I also believe drones shouldn't be held to the same standards as large aircraft. They should be considered as an entirely different class of aircraft, especially the lighter weight ones; let us say up to the mass of a dji phantom or inspire, but no heavier. Guns have less restrictions, but that is because the constitution specifically identifies fire arms as a right. I just think these small plastic toys do not create a risk any greater than driving a car. Terrorists use cars a lot and put bombs in them. They also put bombs in paper bags. Lets restrict cars from coming within 5 miles of special events unless you can prove you live there or have given special permission to drive that close. Which I believe they already do that. Drones are as or more harmless than cars and guns until the wrong person uses them. Restrictions won't stop a person hell bent on creating havoc, by car, bomb in a bag, gun or jet liner. It's the person using the equipment that are the danger and sometimes the equipment itself. If a cars breaks fail, a lot of people will be dead or in the hospital. But do we change laws every time someone uses a car or gun inappropriately? Never mind this superbowl thing. Why is society and therefore politicians so up in arms about commercial drones. most people don't fly the ones with super zoom cameras and infra red spying gear. To spy with a drone, is almost impossible. You have to get pretty close to your subject with current drone tech. They will see you. I wonder how those 2 guys got caught so easily. Were they testing the waters for future terrorist attack? One time, before the police in my area were educated on drones, they actually launched a police helicopter to track me down. That's how hard it currently is to find the pilot. Just to let you know, I wasn't charged with anything. They just leave me alone now. I'm just ranting. No need to respond, unless you wish to rant yourselves. Don't be mad at me. Just thinking out loud.
It has nothing to with Drones! It's a restricted area for all aviation. It's just that drones are included in the restrictions. Any major public event, or Potus has had TFR's for as long as I remember, way before drones became consumer items. They seriously effect loads of aviation businesses, so they are not taken lightly. Many flight schools, small airports, charter companies are shut down for the duration.
They are both licensed Part 107 pilots and they knew that the TFR was in place. It's as simple as that.
Let us just go for the lightest class of sUAS the sub 250g (0.55lb). A baseball is about 2/3rds of that weight. Try and consider that falling from 100 feet to 400 feet AGL and landing on someone’s head. It may not kill them , but it would definitely cause injury.
Exactly my point- it should not affect all aircraft, from a kids toy up to an international aircraft! That’s overreacting. The laws were made based on situations existing prior to drones even being available. I am well aware of them - what I’m saying is, “How as a community can we put up a good argument to get them changed?”. I must come clean- I’m not from USA. But in fact, US law often has a flow on effect to other countries, through multiple ways such as forcing technology to be upgraded and become more expensive unnecessarily (for other countries) through to international understandings around aircraft filtering “up” from US and “down” through legislation elsewhere. Hence there is an international interest in the laws...
And that makes some sense for that situation. My fear is that overreach is used and before you know it, there’s NFZs all over the place for - for example- every vaguely important person playing a round of golf due to “terrorism” or any thing they can use to justify it.
And there are already rules not to fly over crowds. So they need to be enforced, through busting individual operators - not by restricting everyone through NFZs every time there’s a crowd. For example, I see no data whatsoever that flying out over the water away from the actual arena of a sporting event, not over anyone (within all other flight rules) is an issue. Sure there are idiots who break the rules - doesn’t look like NFZs stop them anyway, so why not just bust them under existing laws if they break them. Of course, NFZ if there is a temporary helipad or something, same rules as an airport.
I did not interpret your post that way and I agree with your comment. To put a finer point on the matter, I can understand that there are times/places where the lawfulness of one's conduct may not be all that clear. But the Super Bowl...it is clear to me that they were "teasing the dragon". I really enjoy my drones and I do not want to have my pleasure diminished by the actions of a very few fools.
Some rules you don’t protest for safety reasons. Do you really want
That qualifies as the one of the most irresponsible comments I've ever read. The safety implications around a 'live' event if anyone did this don't bear thinking about.
There have been no reports that they were flying their drones as a form of civil protest.
