"Can you fly a drone over railroad tracks?"

[Vic Moss]

Out of curiosity how far out does the turbulence from a moving train extend? I have lots of opportunities to shoot images of trains in the Columbia River Gorge but since I was mostly shooting the overall scene with a train in it I wasn't all that close to the train itself.

Depends on the speed of the train. But even a fast train at 100' wouldn't be an issue. Best way to check is to stand near the track.

 

[retiredNH]

Depends on the speed of the train. But even a fast train at 100' wouldn't be an issue. Best way to check is to stand near the track.

Too funny. This whole thread has been debating various kinds of trespass around trains, tracks and rail yards.

As a technical matter, though, what you see on ground level will not be representative of what you see in the air, due to ground effect issues. I'm no fluid dynamics expert (my expertise is virology, believe it or not...) but I suspect turbulence at ground level would attenuate faster than in the air, and be more complex to boot.

 

[netling]

Out of curiosity how far out does the turbulence from a moving train extend? I have lots of opportunities to shoot images of trains in the Columbia River Gorge but since I was mostly shooting the overall scene with a train in it I wasn't all that close to the train itself.

I would start a whole new thread for that conversation, because that’s getting into aerodynamics, etc.

I’m not an engineer but I wouldn’t think a train would throw off a drone at 100’ maybe 50’ but surely not 100’. Also thinking about it, it would really depend on the train and it’s speed, are we talking freight or passenger speed train.

 

[AlanL]

I would start a whole new thread for that conversation, because that’s getting into aerodynamics, etc.

I’m not an engineer but I wouldn’t think a train would throw off a drone at 100’ maybe 50’ but surely not 100’. Also thinking about it, it would really depend on the train and it’s speed, are we talking freight or passenger speed train.

I was thinking freight trains and they typically go through the Columbia River Gorge at around 45-50mph.

This is more than 100' obviously:

 

[netling]

I was thinking freight trains and they typically go through the Columbia River Gorge at around 45-50mph.

This is more than 100' obviously:
View attachment 155371

These are not mine but clearly illustrate the aerodynamics of a freight train… I would not doubt with a drone you could fly within 15-20’ on the side of the train and within 5-10’ if you remain in front of the train. (Disclaimer: I DO NOT recommend doing this unless you’re hired to do so!!)

 

[AlanL]

Interesting - that's a lot less turbulence than I was suspecting. I'll keep my distance anyway

 

[Tolipa]

I understand your perspective to some degree and I'll try again to explain the point since you ask, but you do seem to answer the question rather well. One of the points to this forum, and many others, is to inform, particularly with regard to, as you say, "policies [that] need clarity". The point, to put a point on it, is to avoid having courts sort it out for forum members because most of our members do not have the "financial resources to sort out this conflict...". If the forum is going in circles, the circles are an attempt to gather the conflicting information and clarify rather than confuse, but confusion often precedes clarity. I see very few folks here attempting to "test the limits of authority" although I will admit that asserting one's legal rights is often perceived as such. My flying over RR tracks for many miles as I followed a moving train, hopscotching down a couple of hundred miles was proceeded by a good deal of research on what was legal and not legal and resulted in my belief that I could indeed do so legally and safely. I also believe I could have flown momentarily over the train but I am not confident in that belief either legally or in terms of safety so if you view the video you will notice I did not fly over the train at any time. I think quite a few pilots follow that basic approach in terms of attempting to follow the law and remain safe while at the same time exerting their right to fly within the law. Perhaps you are correct in that many pilots to push the limits by flying bvlos at times or over 400' but in general it's my belief that -most- folks, at the very least, try to remain safe and in general, within the law. Here's my example wherein I fly over RR tracks with exactly zero attempt to "test the limits of authority". That's it for me on this thread

That's a beautiful video. Thank you.

 

[Chip]

I see a lot of people make stuff up in their heads, especially “security guards” which is always funny because when the real police comes and I start quoting the actual laws, ol’rent a cop get puts in his place and sent home.

In the original thread on this topic, a key point was made that the railroads are patrolled and protected by persons duly authorized to carry firearms and make arrests the same as any other “real police.”

 

[netling]

In the original thread on this topic, a key point was made that the railroads are patrolled and protected by persons duly authorized to carry firearms and make arrests the same as any other “real police.”

A “hired” security has no legal authority to “arrest” people, they can detain if they pose a threat to others but cannot if said citizen was walking across the tracks (trespassing) without illegal intent. Ie. I’m walking across with a fishing pole to fish the stream on the other side. Now this IS different if it’s a federal facility (Ie. Military Base, missile silo, federal court house), then they have every legal right to detain, until the “real” police (or MP’es) show up.

If it’s just a railroad, the hired security has no authority to arrest. Yes, they may carry guns, that’s a second amendment right and may be legal in their state but that gun does NOT give them special privileges to arrest people.

 

[Chip]

A “hired” security has no legal authority to “arrest” people, they can detain if they pose a threat to others but cannot if said citizen was walking across the tracks (trespassing) without illegal intent. Ie. I’m walking across with a fishing pole to fish the stream on the other side. Now this IS different if it’s a federal facility (Ie. Military Base, missile silo, federal court house), then they have every legal right to detain, until the “real” police (or MP’es) show up.

If it’s just a railroad, the hired security has no authority to arrest. Yes, they may carry guns, that’s a second amendment right and may be legal in their state but that gun does NOT give them special privileges to arrest people.

I thought so too until I read some of the material posted on original thread which I took as a warning to tread carefully around railroads and rail stations. The authority of the officer varies from country to country and state to state in US but most have the power to arrest (some off railroad property).

Railroad police - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[retiredNH]

A “hired” security has no legal authority to “arrest” people, they can detain if they pose a threat to others but cannot if said citizen was walking across the tracks (trespassing) without illegal intent. Ie. I’m walking across with a fishing pole to fish the stream on the other side. Now this IS different if it’s a federal facility (Ie. Military Base, missile silo, federal court house), then they have every legal right to detain, until the “real” police (or MP’es) show up.

If it’s just a railroad, the hired security has no authority to arrest. Yes, they may carry guns, that’s a second amendment right and may be legal in their state but that gun does NOT give them special privileges to arrest people.

Don't believe everything you read online. This post above is a good example.

 

[netling]

I thought so too until I read some of the material posted on original thread which I took as a warning to tread carefully around railroads and rail stations. The authority of the officer varies from country to country and state to state in US but most have the power to arrest (some off railroad property).

Railroad police - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I see what you’re saying, it’s the circumstances that the security guard has been “A railroad police officer who is certified or commissioned as a police officer under the laws of any one state shall, in accordance with the regulations issued by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation, be authorized to enforce the laws of any other state in which the rail carrier owns property.”

I stand corrected and thank you! Now how to politely ask if said person is “Certified or Commissioned as a actual police officer”… I would assume most people who could be commissioned would actually be a police officer for the pay but maybe not as it’s less dangerous.

Thanks again and this is why we have this lovely forum!!

 

[RedBaron2]

I see what you’re saying, it’s the circumstances that the security guard has been “A railroad police officer who is certified or commissioned as a police officer under the laws of any one state shall, in accordance with the regulations issued by the U.S. Secretary of Transportation, be authorized to enforce the laws of any other state in which the rail carrier owns property.”

I stand corrected and thank you! Now how to politely ask if said person is “Certified or Commissioned as a actual police officer”… I would assume most people who could be commissioned would actually be a police officer for the pay but maybe not as it’s less dangerous.

Thanks again and this is why we have this lovely forum!!

I really appreciate all of the comments and replies, especially on a drone pilots forum. Having had prior experience with a rail officer, I knew that I needed to be polite and respectful. With guidance from many drone pilots on this forum, I have learned to ask several questions. First, who are you and what is your authority. Second, question the source of their "facts" about drone flying. Third, I will show them the actual email message I received from the FAA. Fourth, I will continue to be polite and respectful. Fifth, I will continue to respect all opinions on this forum.
Thank you.

 

[netling]

Don't believe everything you read online. This post above is a good example.

View attachment 155439

Other than being a smart butt, what is your contribution to the conversation? So you’re saying hired security can arrest people? Where is your source of information because mine is from working experience. However, I’ll still respect your input and advise, I’m not being confrontational but my input is valuable and I’ve personally dealt with a situation where the police almost arrested the security guard to illegally detaining me (Ie. Kidnapping) and I chatted with them about this, they stated that it happen often that “security guards” act as if they have authority and they do NOT.

 

[retiredNH]

Other than being a smart butt, what is your contribution to the conversation? So you’re saying hired security can arrest people? Where is your source of information because mine is from working experience. However, I’ll still respect your input and advise, I’m not being confrontational but my input is valuable and I’ve personally dealt with a situation where the police almost arrested the security guard to illegally detaining me (Ie. Kidnapping) and I chatted with them about this, they stated that it happen often that “security guards” act as if they have authority and they do NOT.

I presume "smart butt" is a complement? Why thank you.

Your problem is that you don't seem to understand that some security agents/guards can indeed have police power, especially if they're deputized. Worse is the case where the guard acts beyond his authority and then you react to that illegally. You can then be arrested.

As I've stated before, "asserting one's rights" can have consequences, especially in a changing security environment where you, amazingly, might be wrong. I don't have the financial resources it might take to "assert my rights" when doing so might take me to court. Not worth it. Too many other great flying opportunities.

Hope your good luck in beating the actions of those terrible security guards continues.

 

[netling]

I presume "smart butt" is a complement? Why thank you.

Your problem is that you don't seem to understand that some security agents/guards can indeed have police power, especially if they're deputized. Worse is the case where the guard acts beyond his authority and then you react to that illegally. You can then be arrested.

As I've stated before, "asserting one's rights" can have consequences, especially in a changing security environment where you, amazingly, might be wrong. I don't have the financial resources it might take to "assert my rights" when doing so might take me to court. Not worth it. Too many other great flying opportunities.

Hope your good luck in beating the actions of those terrible security guards continues.

It seems we both like sarcasm, tip of the hat to you.

I acknowledged, especially after the wiki post, (you did read that comment right?) that some railroad guards can be deputized, 90% are not and yes I will assert my legal right, not the push over cry baby type but the know my rights kind of guy. I’ve always been respectful and 90% of the time that will get the situation set right but I’m not going to have a run of the mill power hungry security guard stop me from performing my job or task at hand.

Were we differ is I have the means but even without, shouldn’t one know his actual rights and be smart enough to have an intelligent conversation with said security guard in an smart way to get what one wants, yes?

 

[RedBaron2]

It seems we both like sarcasm, tip of the hat to you.

I acknowledged, especially after the wiki post, (you did read that comment right?) that some railroad guards can be deputized, 90% are not and yes I will assert my legal right, not the push over cry baby type but the know my rights kind of guy. I’ve always been respectful and 90% of the time that will get the situation set right but I’m not going to have a run of the mill power hungry security guard stop me from performing my job or task at hand.

Were we differ is I have the means but even without, shouldn’t one know his actual rights and be smart enough to have an intelligent conversation with said security guard in an smart way to get what one wants, yes?

Thank you for your comments. You explained the exact reason why I sought, and received, guidance from forum members. Without the guidance to seek FAA comments, I could not have an intelligent conversation with someone who purported to have a significant degree of authority. In my case, the FAA's response was clear and convincing evidence of our rights as drone pilots. My questions addressed one facet of drone photography, but flight authority affects all of us. Thank you to all; much appreciated.

 

[waynekayn]

This is a follow-up to my recent encounter with an apparent snaptube vidmate rail employee. I was ordered to land immediately because the rail employee said that I was flying illegally over a federal railroad.
1. As a follow-up, I just sent the following message to the subject railroad:
"Does XXXX publish a list of safety or restrictive guidelines for drone photography? Specifically, can I fly my drone over and above tracks (not a yard; not a train) for the purpose of moving my aerial camera to take a scenic photograph? "Uncontrolled airspace", safe altitude; no workers; no passengers; no trains; visual line of sight maintained.
As an FYI, I am registered with the FAA as a recreational flyer, and I have my TRUST certificate. Your response would be much appreciated.

2. Today, I just found this informational item.

Can You Fly A Drone Over Railroad Tracks? Is It Safe?

Can You Fly A Drone Over Railroad Tracks? Is It Safe? If you are in an area with many railroad tracks, this is a question you will have. Click to read.

hobbynation.net

I welcome your comments.

The controlled airspace is regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration, while the uncontrolled airspace as the name implies is not regulated, but different states and areas have regulations that control the uncontrolled airspace."

 

[seicer]

In general, the FAA regulates the airspace, not the railroad. From a conversation I had with our local FAA rep, as long as you are flying with respect to the airspace (restricted or not), and are not launching/landing on railroad property or right-of-way, you are in the clear. Now, whether or not the "security officer" or railroad police would want to hear that is up to them - false charges are always a risk and can be costly because of qualified immunity that doesn't hold them accountable.

The issue with some random railroad employee having an issue with photography isn't new. I had a battle with CSX years ago over on-the-ground photos of a passing train taken from a public right-of-way. I eventually won, but it was a protracted years-long debate.

Thinking back - how many times has someone harassed another person for taking photos - drones or not? This is an age-old question about the ignorance of security or police - and sometimes about the ignorance of the drone pilot - and a mess of conflicting state/federal regulations and laws. My local FAA rep stated it as much but ultimately said that airspace is under the purview of the FAA and no one else.

 

[tlyons]

The controlled airspace is regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration, while the uncontrolled airspace as the name implies is not regulated, but different states and areas have regulations that control the uncontrolled airspace."

I have to comment that this is absolutely incorrect in the USA. "Uncontrolled" just means there is no air traffic controller. The FAA is the one and only authority in US air space. To quote them, "there is no such thing as unregulated air space."

Please take the Trust test: https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_flyers/knowledge_test_updates

https://www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/where_can_i_fly/airspace_101