Flying a drone on your own private property below 85 feet

[karlblessing]

YES! you would not be cited because you are not in NAS! Inside a building/enclosed structure is guess what, inside a structure. You wouldn't need a permit, registration, authorization, part 107, or a TRUST cert to fly inside. Say you own a sports arena with a closed top, no need to register your drone. Once you open the top, the rules change (thinking Silverdome style). Because as you say, there is no danger to manned aircraft inside a building.

Because interiors are not navigable airspace, they are not maintained, controlled or regulated by the FAA. So in reality, this argument doesn't matter, as it isn't what the thread is about.

Though DJI doesn't seem to care or allow for exception, couldn't take off despite that.

 

[smashse]

Though DJI doesn't seem to care or allow for exception, couldn't take off despite that.

Well, actually it probably wouldn't get GPS, so it would allow flight...

Also, flying indoor was just any warehouse, not near an airport. So you could take off even with GPS, or get a waiver for interior, fly atti mode...

As for flying near the airport. Kind of the point isn't it? Personal property or not.

 

[Richiebricker]

I think you are 100% missing the entire context of the thread itself. This is NOT a discussion of FAA Classes, it's a discussion on WHO controls the airspace. The FAA clearly regulates how high you can fly, not any other local, state, or federal agency. I never mentioned anything you are referring to. Stop trolling. Thank you.

This thread has had a couple of back and forths and it seems like he is still is unsure, so I dont know why youre losing your cool when you could have just said "The FAA controls all airspace in America and this court ruling has to do with low flying airplanes and not how high you can fly above your property. Even a ranch in montana that is 250 miles away from the nearest small airfeild has his airspace controlled by theFAA