Flyovers - are they legal?

[orionshooter]

New Denver, CO pilot here with a question. While I understand operating a drone in certain state and city parks is illegal, is it still illegal to do so while the operator is not on the property while the drone flys over? In other words, does the city/state control the airspace over the property?

 

[Lyon McKeil]

One of our park districts here is Northern CA has a ban in place for drone operations. It specifically says that the policy prohibits the use of drones on or over any property managed by the district.

I would suggest seeing if you can find the policy in question and check the verbiage.

With that said, I think I'd avoid such areas as the rules of where you fly are usually put in place for a reason and flying through loopholes might not reflect well upon the UAS Community as a whole. But that's just my two cents worth.

 

[orionshooter]

I think that’s excellent advice Lyon - akin to, “Just because you can doesn’t mean you should.” Thanks

 

[eEridani]

As a general point, no land owner owns the sky above their property, and can't really mark it as no trespassing: that authority resides with the FAA. But as pointed out earlier in this thread, better to stay within the lines if the lines are reasonable. A park is reasonable in the sense there can be collections of people, and it is illegal to fly over groups of people. .

 

[hychewright]

Welcome to the forum from Sweet Home Alabama!

 

[orionshooter]

As a general point, no land owner owns the sky above their property, and can't really mark it as no trespassing: that authority resides with the FAA. But as pointed out earlier in this thread, better to stay within the lines if the lines are reasonable. A park is reasonable in the sense there can be collections of people, and it is illegal to fly over groups of people. .

I agree to the extent you suggest staying within the lines but your response raises another question. What authority exists for the illegality of flying over a group of people if we accept the premise that they do not control or own the airspace above them? Moreover, what constitutes a “group?” Is it 2 or 3 or 100 or somewhere in between? Do they have to be interacting as a group (say on a picnic) or do 30 people all well dispersed over 6 acres of a park constitute a group? Not trying to be argumentative - just looking for the exact legal authority supporting your position.

 

[eEridani]

I agree to the extent you suggest staying within the lines but your response raises another question. What authority exists for the illegality of flying over a group of people if we accept the premise that they do not control or own the airspace above them? Moreover, what constitutes a “group?” Is it 2 or 3 or 100 or somewhere in between? Do they have to be interacting as a group (say on a picnic) or do 30 people all well dispersed over 6 acres of a park constitute a group? Not trying to be argumentative - just looking for the exact legal authority supporting your position.

The FAA owns the skies over US territory, they make that rule. Ask them.

Here's a good starting point: FAADroneZone and https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ (Drones)

ps: Ignorance of the law does not excuse you when you break it. Ask any police officer.

 

[orionshooter]

I agree - the FAA makes the rules. I’m retired law enforcement and spent the last twenty three years as a criminal defense attorney so I understand the whole “ignorance of the law ” thing. That’s precisely why I’m asking questions here and doing the research. In an effort to not be “ignorant,” I reviewed the FAA rules including the link you provided:

49 USC 44809: Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft.

This section of the U.S. Code clearly defines and regulates airspace and restricts that navigable airspace to 400 feet for recreational users. However, it does not prohibit flying over groups. My question to this group was, where is this group rule located?

I’m also reading 14 CFR part 107 as it seems to provide some guidance on the question. However, 107 does not apply to recreational drone use so it is entirely inapplicable to our situation as recreational pilots.

As I said earlier, I don’t intend to argue - just looking for the facts as opposed to conjecture, alternative facts, unsupported legal theories or a “go ask the FAA” response.

 

[MA2 317]

New Denver, CO pilot

Hello from the Crossroads of America orionshooter.

Welcome to the Forum.

 

[thispilothere]

I agree - the FAA makes the rules. I’m retired law enforcement and spent the last twenty three years as a criminal defense attorney so I understand the whole “ignorance of the law ” thing. That’s precisely why I’m asking questions here and doing the research. In an effort to not be “ignorant,” I reviewed the FAA rules including the link you provided:

49 USC 44809: Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft.

This section of the U.S. Code clearly defines and regulates airspace and restricts our navigable airspace to 400 feet. However, it does not prohibit flying over groups. My question to this group was, where is this group rule located? It does appear to be a federal rule so is it a local ordinance, state law, an HOA regulation or is it really not a rule at all but just a common sense guideline we all should follow for very good reason? As responsible and law abiding people, we really should know the difference before we quote something as “the law.”

As I said earlier, I don’t intend to argue - just looking for the facts as opposed to conjecture, alternative facts, unsupported legal theories or a “go ask the FAA” response.

Go here Read Part D - "Operations Over Human Beings"

You'll have to follow other links as listed on the page. Unless you're flying a very light drone, like a Mavic mini, you're in Category 2. Generally, you won't be able to perform "sustained flight" (see quote below) over crowds (or moving cars) but it's okay to traverse the area (and film) as long as you're just passing through. That's basically it but read the whole section and see if you find something different.

Sustained Flight: Sustained flight over an open-air assembly includes hovering above the heads of persons gathered in an open-air assembly, flying back and forth over an open-air assembly, or circling above the assembly in such a way that the small unmanned aircraft remains above some part the assembly. ‘Sustained flight’ over an open-air assembly of people in a Category 1, 2, or 4 operation does not include a brief, one-time transiting over a portion of the assembled gathering, where the transit is merely incidental to a point-to-point operation unrelated to the assembly.

 

[Vic Moss]

I agree - the FAA makes the rules. I’m retired law enforcement and spent the last twenty three years as a criminal defense attorney so I understand the whole “ignorance of the law ” thing. That’s precisely why I’m asking questions here and doing the research. In an effort to not be “ignorant,” I reviewed the FAA rules including the link you provided:

49 USC 44809: Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft.

This section of the U.S. Code clearly defines and regulates airspace and restricts that navigable airspace to 400 feet for recreational users. However, it does not prohibit flying over groups. My question to this group was, where is this group rule located?

Technically 44809 does not prohibit operations over people (OOP). Yet. However, any future Community Based Organization (CBO) will have that language in it since it has to be developed in cooperation with the FAA. And since the CBO requirement isn't fulfilled yet, the FAA requires that recreational flyers continue to fly according to existing CBO rules. And the most used it that from the AMA. Bullet point 4 says that here: https://www.modelaircraft.org/sites/default/files/105.pdf

Advisory Circular 91-57B (https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/Editorial_Update_AC_91-57B.pdf) is what the FAA uses for now to prevent hobbyists from flying over crowds or people.

Also, fellow Denver pilot here (technically Lakewood). We have a drone meetup the last Tuesday of every month (tomorrow) in Golden. If you're on Meetup, join us: Denver Drone Pilots Social Hour (Denver, CO). It's a very informal get together. While it's geared towards 107 Pilots, we welcome any and all drone owners. Regardless of where they are in the industry. Also, if you sign up for tomorrow's meetup, it says it's full. Don't worry about it, just put yourself on the waitlist and then show up.

I’m also reading 14 CFR part 107 as it seems to provide some guidance on the question. However, 107 does not apply to recreational drone use so it is entirely inapplicable to our situation as recreational pilots.

As I said earlier, I don’t intend to argue - just looking for the facts as opposed to conjecture, alternative facts, unsupported legal theories or a “go ask the FAA” response.

Correct, 44809 does not apply to 107 Pilots, nor does 107 apply to recreational flyers.

Hopefully this answers your questions. If not, please feel free to reach out via messages.

 

[orionshooter]

Go here Read Part D - "Operations Over Human Beings"

You'll have to follow other links as listed on the page. Unless you're flying a very light drone, like a Mavic mini, you're in Category 2. Generally, you won't be able to perform "sustained flight" (see quote below) over crowds (or moving cars) but it's okay to traverse the area (and film) as long as you're just passing through. That's basically it but read the whole section and see if you find something different.

I think this is where the confusion comes in:

Part D you quoted is contained in 14 CFR 107 which does not apply to recreational operators.

49 USC 44809 specifically provides an exception for recreational flyers and contains no prohibition on flying over humans.

Again, not saying doing so is a good idea - just looking for the meat in this debate.

 

[Laborous]

Welcome to the forum from the beautiful woods of Maine!

 

[orionshooter]

Technically 44809 does not prohibit operations over people (OOP). Yet. However, any future Community Based Organization (CBO) will have that language in it since it has to be developed in cooperation with the FAA. And since the CBO requirement isn't fulfilled yet, the FAA requires that recreational flyers continue to fly according to existing CBO rules. And the most used it that from the AMA. Bullet point 4 says that here: https://www.modelaircraft.org/sites/default/files/105.pdf

Advisory Circular 91-57B (https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/Editorial_Update_AC_91-57B.pdf) is what the FAA uses for now to prevent hobbyists from flying over crowds or people.

Also, fellow Denver pilot here (technically Lakewood). We have a drone meetup the last Tuesday of every month (tomorrow) in Golden. If you're on Meetup, join us: Denver Drone Pilots Social Hour (Denver, CO). It's a very informal get together. While it's geared towards 107 Pilots, we welcome any and all drone owners. Regardless of where they are in the industry. Also, if you sign up for tomorrow's meetup, it says it's full. Don't worry about it, just put yourself on the waitlist and then show up.


Correct, 44809 does not apply to 107 Pilots, nor does 107 apply to recreational flyers.

Hopefully this answers your questions. If not, please feel free to reach out via messages.

Thank you Vic - I’m just now noticing your post. Thanks for shedding some much needed bright light on the subject. I’ll definitely try to attend the meeting and thank you personally.

 

[Vic Moss]

Thank you Vic - I’m just now noticing your post.

I only posted it about 30 minutes ago... ?

Thanks for shedding some much needed bright light on the subject. I’ll definitely try to attend the meeting and thank you personally.

Awesomee, hope to see you there.

 

[Itzmyobsession]

Welcome aboard from the wild west coast ?

 

[Saladshooter]

There is still a loophole waiting to be closed. FAA Advisory Circular AC 91-57B provides interim guidance to recreational flyers allowing a hobbyist to choose the set of rules that they are flying under and be prepared to tell the FAA or Law Enforcement which rules they are using.

The wording of section 7.1.2 gives two different examples of rules you can choose to follow. One is an existing CBO's rules and suggests using the AMA's guidelines where operations over people are not allowed. But the second example says you can use the FAA's existing safety guidelines for recreational flyers where there is no mention of operations over people. Here is the excerpt:

1. 7.1.2 The Aircraft is Operated in Accordance With or Within the Programming of a CBO’s Set of Safety Guidelines That are Developed in Coordination With the FAA. Once the FAA has developed the criteria for recognition of CBOs and started officially recognizing CBOs, those CBOs’ safety guidelines will be available for use. During this interim period, the FAA offers two means to satisfy this statutory condition. Recreational flyers should be able to explain to an FAA inspector or law enforcement official which safety guidelines they are following.
   1. 7.1.2.1 The FAA acknowledges that existing aeromodelling organizations have developed safety guidelines that are helpful to recreational flyers. An example is the AMA safety guidelines, which have previously been reviewed by the FAA as part of the organization’s Recognized Industry Organization (RIO) status for participation in the National Aviation Events Program (refer to FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 5, Chapter 9, Section 6, Issue/Renew/Reevaluate/Rescind an Air Boss Letter of Authorization). These or existing safety guidelines of another aeromodelling organization may be used for recreational operations, provided the guidelines do not conflict with the other statutory conditions of 49 U.S.C. § 44809(a).
   2. 7.1.2.2 The FAA has existing basic safety guidelines for recreational operations, which are available on its website
      (https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_fliers/) that may be used.

 

[wjkrysak]

Welcome to the forum. We look forward to your participation and your view of the world.

 

[tlswift58]

One of our park districts here is Northern CA has a ban in place for drone operations. It specifically says that the policy prohibits the use of drones on or over any property managed by the district.

I would suggest seeing if you can find the policy in question and check the verbiage.

With that said, I think I'd avoid such areas as the rules of where you fly are usually put in place for a reason and flying through loopholes might not reflect well upon the UAS Community as a whole. But that's just my two cents worth.

Not really when the FAA - the federal agency that covers ALL US airspace. If that park district wants people to not fly in it's airspace - it needs to get with the FAA to create a no fly zone based on reasonable restriction reasons.

Case in point - Pro Sports Stadiums. A drone pilot can fly around / over most any sports stadium "as long as there is not a game going on" with thousands of people who can be hurt should a drone go kamikaze. Always check one of the many apps to make sure there are no restrictions and get permission when necessary.

Many states have rules / laws about drones taking off & landing on their properties. That is legal and fine, as they do own the land. That does not stop a pilot from flying over said park, as long as they do not take off or land in it. Even National Parks are same rules - unless special permission is given - can't T/O or land; yet I can fly in the airspace above.

I'm going to Denver, CO soon and have advance looked at several apps about flying around Denver and they have given me differing info on fly and no fly zones. I will be making sure to check when I get there to make sure I do fly legally and not in specific zones - which most tend to be airports or around helicopter zones. Yet, many places that are fully legal.

Will have to see if DJI has some "geofence zones" set up that are not showing in the apps when ready to fly.

 

[Vic Moss]

Not really when the FAA - the federal agency that covers ALL US airspace. If that park district wants people to not fly in it's airspace - it needs to get with the FAA to create a no fly zone based on reasonable restriction reasons.

Case in point - Pro Sports Stadiums. A drone pilot can fly around / over most any sports stadium "as long as there is not a game going on" with thousands of people who can be hurt should a drone go kamikaze. Always check one of the many apps to make sure there are no restrictions and get permission when necessary.

Many states have rules / laws about drones taking off & landing on their properties. That is legal and fine, as they do own the land. That does not stop a pilot from flying over said park, as long as they do not take off or land in it. Even National Parks are same rules - unless special permission is given - can't T/O or land; yet I can fly in the airspace above.

I'm going to Denver, CO soon and have advance looked at several apps about flying around Denver and they have given me differing info on fly and no fly zones. I will be making sure to check when I get there to make sure I do fly legally and not in specific zones - which most tend to be airports or around helicopter zones. Yet, many places that are fully legal.

Will have to see if DJI has some "geofence zones" set up that are not showing in the apps when ready to fly.

There are no official NFZs in Denver. Outside stadium TFRs obviously. The only drone regulation about this is from Denver Parks. There is no flying from their property. Sidewalks and such are fine. And you can fly over park property.