"Flying over people" Drone Classifications

[Vic Moss]

I'm sorry to ask but I think that confused me even more.

Can you please try to explain this?

Supposed you fly over a pickup truck as it goes down the road. If you fly over the empty bed of the truck, you're fine. If you fly over the driver who is in the moving pickup truck, you're not. Same with a convertible. If there is only the driver, and you fly over the passenger side, you're legal.

I know it's in the weeds, but that's how the rules is worded.

 

[Vic Moss]

I appreciate the advice, I really do. But sending links and telling me to read the info doesn't help when questions arise and they aren't answered.

It sounds like that's where communication broke down. I posted the wording, and then the links in case you wanted to verify. I wasn't asking you to read the final rule. Sorry if it came across that way.

Thanks for your tutelage.

Anytime, ask away.

 

[finity]

If you fly over the empty bed of the truck, you're fine. If you fly over the driver who is in the moving pickup truck, you're not.

that's just really strange to me.

I thought I actually understood the intent of the rule but now I know I had no idea.

I always interpreted the "don't fly over moving vehicles" as an attempt to either not distract the driver if the drone crashes on top of the vehicle (if the vehicle is a closed vehicle) or to not hit the person driving/riding in the vehicle if it's open topped.

the way you described it the rule seems arbitrary and fairly useless since the concern seems to be the actual person in the vehicle and not the act of hitting just the vehicle itself. If the vehicle has a steel roof protecting the occupant then how is the person expected to be injured by the drone? Why wouldn't we have the same rule for flying over houses with people inside?

Not trying to argue. You obviously know more about this than I do but this rule seems a bit silly using this interpretation.

 

[lookout]

Supposed you fly over a pickup truck as it goes down the road. If you fly over the empty bed of the truck, you're fine. If you fly over the driver who is in the moving pickup truck, you're not. Same with a convertible. If there is only the driver, and you fly over the passenger side, you're legal.

I know it's in the weeds, but that's how the rules is worded.

That's all fine and dandy if you can quickly point the camera forward and then down and then back forward quickly. They're spending lots of time on things that would require heavy accuracy to get.

 

[lookout]

that's just really strange to me.

I thought I actually understood the intent of the rule but now I know I had no idea.

I always interpreted the "don't fly over moving vehicles" as an attempt to either not distract the driver if the drone crashes on top of the vehicle (if the vehicle is a closed vehicle) or to not hit the person driving/riding in the vehicle if it's open topped.

the way you described it the rule seems arbitrary and fairly useless since the concern seems to be the actual person in the vehicle and not the act of hitting just the vehicle itself. If the vehicle has a steel roof protecting the occupant then how is the person expected to be injured by the drone? Why wouldn't we have the same rule for flying over houses with people inside?

Not trying to argue. You obviously know more about this than I do but this rule seems a bit silly using this interpretation.

It's mostly like the whole guy dropping rocks from the side of a mountain at the end of a tunnel. Cars going highway speed. I think it would require too much effort to waste trying to do that with a drone. It's more of a safety concern rather than a SOP. Or at least the FAA has backed off a little.