Can you believe this?
- Thread starter Robert Droner
- Start date
- Joined
- May 25, 2017
- Messages
- 8,476
- Reactions
- 7,965
- Age
- 62
Can’t take anything like this for granted, even though it’s just one senators brainstorm idea, and only a proposal.
Glad commercial delivery was mentioned as it is going to have a quickly growing impact on sub 400’ airspace in the coming years.
It almost seems like a competition between developed countries as to who can have the most draconian drone rules, and how fast can they push hobbyists and commercial drone pilots into little pockets of usable airspace.
Glad commercial delivery was mentioned as it is going to have a quickly growing impact on sub 400’ airspace in the coming years.
It almost seems like a competition between developed countries as to who can have the most draconian drone rules, and how fast can they push hobbyists and commercial drone pilots into little pockets of usable airspace.
Gryphon962
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 19, 2019
- Messages
- 194
- Reactions
- 206
Something similar "The Tort Law Relating to Drones" was discussed and rejected by the Uniform Law Commission recently. The kicker is that this leads to lawsuits for trespass into someones airspace, yet noone can prove whether you were below or above the 200' limit. This proposed law complicates it further by adding on airspace around high buildings.
The real nonsense comes here, though.. consider this section of the draft:
SENSE OF CONGRESS .—It is the sense of Congress that
(A) in order for landowners to have full enjoyment and use of their land, they must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of airspace over their property;
(B) the States possess sovereign police powers, which include the power to regulate and use, protect property rights, and exercise zoning authority; and
(C) the Federal Government lacks the authority to intrude upon a State’s sovereign right to exercise reasonable time, manner, and place of operations of unmanned aircraft systems operating within the immediate reaches of airspace
So the premise is that landowners should be able to control what goes on in the 200' above their land ,but then it claims the States have the right to regulate that (not the landowner).
So it's bollocks (a British legal term).
The real nonsense comes here, though.. consider this section of the draft:
SENSE OF CONGRESS .—It is the sense of Congress that
(A) in order for landowners to have full enjoyment and use of their land, they must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of airspace over their property;
(B) the States possess sovereign police powers, which include the power to regulate and use, protect property rights, and exercise zoning authority; and
(C) the Federal Government lacks the authority to intrude upon a State’s sovereign right to exercise reasonable time, manner, and place of operations of unmanned aircraft systems operating within the immediate reaches of airspace
So the premise is that landowners should be able to control what goes on in the 200' above their land ,but then it claims the States have the right to regulate that (not the landowner).
So it's bollocks (a British legal term).
Title is a bit misleading, as they are still allowing 200-400 foot range for flight. Personally, I never am below 200 when flying over someone's land as it is. Just hope they keep the 200-400 space open.
Paul C
Paul C
Mossiback
Well-Known Member
I might be wrong (not the first time) but I seem to have rattling around in my head,
I read on some forum concerning privacy with UAV's that the "lower ceiling" was no less than 50 feet above the highest point on the property, and this DID include the treeline.....???
But this was maybe 2 years ago.....
I read on some forum concerning privacy with UAV's that the "lower ceiling" was no less than 50 feet above the highest point on the property, and this DID include the treeline.....???
But this was maybe 2 years ago.....
Gryphon962
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 19, 2019
- Messages
- 194
- Reactions
- 206
Yes, its in the draft linked in the OP - its the airspace up to 200' agl (plus bits above and around high buildings).
AMann
Well-Known Member
Well, I’m not surprised. We knew this was coming due to the sheer number of them being flown around in an irresponsible way by mostly uninformed beginners and a few others...
Have to laugh though, the joke is on drone owners being spies, even South Park did it (NSFW):
Cartman discovers Butter's dad has a drone. I'm So Bored
Have to laugh though, the joke is on drone owners being spies, even South Park did it (NSFW):
Cartman discovers Butter's dad has a drone. I'm So Bored
Last edited:
harle83
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2018
- Messages
- 103
- Reactions
- 65
- Age
- 63
Tried and failed before and I’m willing to bet tried and failed again. The courts have said over and over the FAA rules the skies 0 to to far to remember. There was a judge somewhere that tried also to say they did not possess that authority and he was very quickly shot down on appeal. Pardon the pun but it didn’t “fly” then and it won’t now either. Of course in this age we live in anything could be possible. Lots of these elected officials are just trying to make points any way they can with 2020 just around the corner. I just don’t think it stands a chance of holding up.
Here's another problem with how the article describes the bill: FAA would not be able to control space below 200'. What about controlled airspace with UAS ceiling below 200'? As worded, that means a property owner could fly up to 200', even if FAA ceiling was lower than that.
THEY ARE THE FEDS WTF if the Senate votes to change the laws that regulate airspace, then the FAA has to follow the law..... basic social studies.
Never below 200 feet, really? 90 % of drone flights are below 200 feet, housing real estate listing, solar panel inspection, roof inspection, power line inspection, event filming, like football games, car races, not to mention TV shows, TV commercials, music videos, sure many if your sight seeing you stay at 200 feet. But working commercial pilots fly below that all the time..
dougiefresh27
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2019
- Messages
- 177
- Reactions
- 103
I think you should be able to control the airspace over your property about as high as you can throw a rock in the air. Beyond that it is fair game as long as you stay within the FAA guidelines for safe flying. But there are a lot of "laws" that get through even if they are not legal or constitutional.
How would anyone determine the altitude of a drone?
Who would be policing drone altitude?
I think most of us here fly with respect to others already.
But the squeaky wheel does get the oil so beware in your community.
How would anyone determine the altitude of a drone?
Who would be policing drone altitude?
I think most of us here fly with respect to others already.
But the squeaky wheel does get the oil so beware in your community.
Enjoy the with wild west guys/gals. When the state and Fed starts to pave roads, we'll all enjoy our drones in a different way. One guarantee. No matter what regulations come out, you'll always have a place to fly the way you want, and you'll always find an ingenious way to enjoy your drone within the regulations.Just look at supercar owners and off road vehicle that are all road legal. 
Similar threads
