Mini 350ft tower

[-MavicMiniPilot]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Yaros]

The top of the tower was about 350ft.

That doesn't make it legal.
I'm not sure but I think that to make it legal the tower needs to be over 400ft high, then you can go up to 400ft over the height of the tower.

 

[-MavicMiniPilot]

That doesn't make it legal.
I'm not sure but I think that to make it legal the tower needs to be over 400ft high, then you can go up to 400ft over the height of the tower.

Coming from drone genuity: Drone pilots are allowed to fly 400 feet above the top of the tallest structure within a 50 foot radius of their operation. So to fly above 400 feet, a pilot would need to be standing near a reasonably tall structure, such as a building or cell tower.

So I can basically fly 400ft above that tower as long as I am within a 400ft radius of it.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

Nicely shot, and you're really just 13 yo ?
If so, that's great, you've got a lot flying time to get under your belt in the future.

So I can basically fly 400ft above that tower as long as I am within a 50 ft radius of it.

The statement above is a little confusing, how could one keep within 50' radius and be able to go 400' above the tower ?

I'm not up fully with the vagarities of the US rules on rec / part 107 etc and structures, but you kept the lateral distance and height above the tower to a reasonable and safe level.

This shows a lot better common sense from a 13yo than you see in many adult pilots.

 

[MA2 317]

Coming from drone genuity: Drone pilots are allowed to fly 400 feet above the top of the tallest structure within a 50 foot radius of their operation. So to fly above 400 feet, a pilot would need to be standing near a reasonably tall structure, such as a building or cell tower.

So I can basically fly 400ft above that tower as long as I am within a 50 ft radius of it.

Part 107 pilots can clear structures.

Not recreational pilots.

We have to stay 400 feet AGL (Ground),

A building or other structure is not the ground.

 

[Eagle Eye 62]

Coming from drone genuity: Drone pilots are allowed to fly 400 feet above the top of the tallest structure within a 50 foot radius of their operation. So to fly above 400 feet, a pilot would need to be standing near a reasonably tall structure, such as a building or cell tower.

So I can basically fly 400ft above that tower as long as I am within a 50 ft radius of it.

I thought it was within a 400 foot radius of the structure from my Part 107 class.....

 

[Skywatcher2001]

What makes it illegal is flying under the exception 44809. You are limited to 400' AGL. Only 14 CFR 107 pilots can fly over structures that exceed 400' (in some airspaces) . . .

 

[Skywatcher2001]

Part 107 pilots can clear structures.

Not recreational pilots.

We have to stay 400 feet AGL (Ground),

A building or other structure is not the ground.

you beat me to it. Perfectly said . . .

 

[Skywatcher2001]

I thought it was within a 400 foot radius of the structure from my Part 107 class.....

Yes, its 400' within the structure. Max distance above the structure depends on the class of airspace, weather and other factors . . .

 

[-MavicMiniPilot]

Nicely shot, and you're really just 13 yo ?
If so, that's great, you've got a lot flying time to get under your belt in the future.



The statement above is a little confusing, how could one keep within 50' radius and be able to go 400' above the tower ?

I'm not up fully with the vagarities of the US rules on rec / part 107 etc and structures, but you kept the lateral distance and height above the tower to a reasonable and safe level.

This shows a lot better common sense from a 13yo than you see in many adult pilots.

I don’t have my 107 yet either but I am planning on getting it in the future.

Nicely shot, and you're really just 13 yo ?
If so, that's great, you've got a lot flying time to get under your belt in the future.



The statement above is a little confusing, how could one keep within 50' radius and be able to go 400' above the tower ?

I'm not up fully with the vagarities of the US rules on rec / part 107 etc and structures, but you kept the lateral distance and height above the tower to a reasonable and safe level.

This shows a lot better common sense from a 13yo than you see in many adult pilots.

You Were correct, the source I had gotten that from was wrong it’s 400ft instead of 50ft radius.

 

[-MavicMiniPilot]

I thought it was within a 400 foot radius of the structure from my Part 107 class.....

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

I thought the structure thing was just part 107 . . .

Well, the OP has probably learned (reasonably safely) from this, and that's part of the forum purpose.

You Were correct, the source I had gotten that from was wrong it’s 400ft instead of 50ft radius.

 

[-MavicMiniPilot]

I thought the structure thing was just part 107 . . .

Well, the OP has probably learned (reasonably safely) from this, and that's part of the forum purpose.

I had never known that it was just for part 107. This forum is great about learning all of the rules and regulations. Thanks for the help!

 

[dirkclod]

.

Am curious why you made your video private then delete it from your opening post ?

 

[-MavicMiniPilot]

Am curious why you made your video private then delete it from your opening post ?

Why is it that you can only fly over structures above 400ft agl if you have a 107 and not recreational because doesn’t recreational pilots follow the same rules as 107 pilots?

 

[dirkclod]

Why is it that you can only fly over structures above 400ft agl if you have a 107 and not recreational because doesn’t recreational pilots follow the same rules as 107 pilots?

Sorry not what I asked.

Added, no recreational pilots and part 107 have different rules .

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

Am curious why you made your video private then delete it from your opening post ?

I agree, the post was fine . . . perhaps the OP is nervous he might get in trouble in some way.

I could see the 350' tower, and the OP flew very much not too far above this, making his flight in reality reasonably close to the 400'.

It'd be good to see the post back, I feel it was really done well and responsibly.

 

[-MavicMiniPilot]

Sorry not what I asked.

Ok, I was unaware until after I posted it that it is potentially illegal.

 

[dirkclod]

Ok, I was unaware until after I posted it that it is potentially illegal.

Well your learning

 

[Skywatcher2001]

Well your learning

That is the key and it's what the FAA wants to see. Also, its what makes this forum so great. As long as he's learning . . . no need to remove the video.