FAA AGL 400' but what if you are on a ridge at 850', fly at 1250'?

[kaduken]

Depends, it's probably more expensive than you're gonna be used to, but if you're lucky, $150 round trip. If not, then around $200. Hawaiian airlines is essentially our only option.

 

[DroningOn]

rmb,

Can you explain the table on Getting Started

Specifically the "operating rules" and the difference between the Fly for Fun column and Fly for Work column. The Fly for Work column specifically states the 400' rule. Fly for Fun does not list a maximum flight ceiling.

If you are correct and the 400' "rule" applies for hobbyist, then perhaps someone at the FAA can update this chart. It is after all on the main "learn more" page when you go to register.

They're not going to update it cuz it's not a rule.

 

[voxelman]

I'm going to be on Oahu from Feb 11th to 24th. And I planned on bringing my Mavic. I'll be staying with family on Wilhelmina Rise. There is a recreation area at the head of the rise that seemed like a great place to fly. My only concern is that it can be quite windy at that time of the year.

 

[msinger]

Specifically the "operating rules" and the difference between the Fly for Fun column and Fly for Work column. The Fly for Work column specifically states the 400' rule. Fly for Fun does not list a maximum flight ceiling.

Right -- because there is no 400 foot rule/law for hobbyists. The FAA would still like hobbyist to fly below 400 feet AGL though -- as show here in their safety guidelines.

 

[slr001]

But I have read on here many many times that hobbyists are limited to 400'.

Are people trying to enforce "rules" that don't exist?
Are the "professional" flyers mad because they went to all the trouble to pass the exam and now have tighter restrictions than the Hobbyists?
Are people just wrong, but still making definitive statements out of ignorance?

This mis information is really not good for the new flyers that are coming here to learn.

rmb, can you clear this statement up?

 

[DroningOn]

Are people trying to enforce "rules" that don't exist?

Bingo!!!

Over the years, and hundreds of flights, I've never had the desire or the need to fly over 400 feet but that doesn't mean that in future I might. To video a wilderness scene, a tall building, capture an extraordinary panorama etc. In all cases the rule is to do it safely and without hurting anybody. As a pure hobbyist, that's the only "rule" I am interested in.

 

[Grey Wolf]

I'm assuming the Big Island is ok to fly?
I want to film the Volcanos.

 

[Gordon]

It is but don't fly in the Volcano National Park. NPS rangers will be after you.


Sent from my iPhone using MavicPilots

 

[RIDETOEAT]

But I have read on here many many times that hobbyists are limited to 400'.

Are people trying to enforce "rules" that don't exist?
Are the "professional" flyers mad because they went to all the trouble to pass the exam and now have tighter restrictions than the Hobbyists?
Are people just wrong, but still making definitive statements out of ignorance?

This mis information is really not good for the new flyers that are coming here to learn.

rmb, can you clear this statement up?

Definitively correct ?? don't even matter to me and here is why, I am not positive but, I am a pilot for 25 years and Manned airplanes can and are allowed to fly anywhere they generally want in unrestricted airspace down to 500' so is playing with a toy and the pleasure or desire to go higher than what is suggested or allowed either way worth risking the peoples life aboard a small manned airplane. Yes or no, either way, that should give anyone the appropriate answer. At 500 feet approaching from any direction we do not have the amount of control needed to really take evasive maneuvers, we lack visual perspective, depth perception, not to mention decent rates or lateral speed to even try to do something. So I fly not more than 400' above the nearest structure cause they fly 500' above the nearest structure. I don't like being that close but it sets a basis for trying to create some level of safety so we can share the skys as best we can and that is a good thing, I actually rarely fly above 300' or even less. I would hate to face the remaining family let alone explain why it was so important I flew my drone in their airspace. I don't like rules either but personally think there is a moral need to do the mature thing on this subject. Easier said as a 50+ year old that it was at 20 something for sure but just my two cents worth. I set my max height in my phantom at 400' years ago for this reason and have only a couple of times allowed to to go higher when ascending hill sides where "xxx" agl was changing as I moved up the hill side.

 

[CactusJackSlade]

Maybe people should learn the difference between above AGL and MSL before they fly and many of these questions would not come up

 

[slr001]

Definitively correct ?? don't even matter to me and here is why, I am not positive but, I am a pilot for 25 years and Manned airplanes can and are allowed to fly anywhere they generally want in unrestricted airspace down to 500' so is playing with a toy and the pleasure or desire to go higher than what is suggested or allowed either way worth risking the peoples life aboard a small manned airplane. Yes or no, either way, that should give anyone the appropriate answer. At 500 feet approaching from any direction we do not have the amount of control needed to really take evasive maneuvers, we lack visual perspective, depth perception, not to mention decent rates or lateral speed to even try to do something. So I fly not more than 400' above the nearest structure cause they fly 500' above the nearest structure. I don't like being that close but it sets a basis for trying to create some level of safety so we can share the skys as best we can and that is a good thing, I actually rarely fly above 300' or even less. I would hate to face the remaining family let alone explain why it was so important I flew my drone in their airspace. I don't like rules either but personally think there is a moral need to do the mature thing on this subject. Easier said as a 50+ year old that it was at 20 something for sure but just my two cents worth. I set my max height in my phantom at 400' years ago for this reason and have only a couple of times allowed to to go higher when ascending hill sides where "xxx" agl was changing as I moved up the hill side.

Here is the problem.

There are rules. and there is common sense, and there are suggestions, etc.

Lets not mix them up. It appears to me that on this forum, not only are we mixing them up, but there seem to be some here intentionally misstating the rules.

For the record, I have never been over 100'. I doubt I will have the need to ever go over 400'. But if I do, I will do it responsibly. And I don't need someone here telling me I am breaking a rule.

 

[*ICE*]

Hawaii folks - I will be in Hawaii next week and am looking for some good, safe places to fly..bringing my mavic!

You'll love it! Which island are you going? I got a few pics of Hawaiian taken with my previous P3P here. www.instagram.com/henry_do