Freefall, safety concerns, overflight proposals

[ThirtyWest]

Good morning,

I'm in the process of preparing for a few overflights to record the high school marching band's halftime routines as they prep for competition in the Fall. We're seeking two or three filmings.

I have my FAA authorizations and developed a proposal paper that covers nearly everything except the subject below.
I have the support of the high school principal, but the stadium manager of the district is against it--citing concerns for patrons, stopped of game for past drone transgressions, etc. He hasn't seen the proposal paper, and I feel he was knee-jerk in his response which is understandable.


Given that my flight is from the track (at the end zone) straight to centerfield (at altitude) and back, there is no overflight of spectators except for the band itself and any staff security on the track at that area.

SO THE QUESTION comes to drone failure / drift. What would you all use for numbers?

• It's about 39m from being on-station directly to the railing where the first rows of seats are;
• Using some kinematics, my altitude of 68m is about 3.7 seconds to cover in free fall;
• That means a horizontal value of about 10.5m/s tailwind would make the free fall a threat to the crowd;
• Setting a limitation on wind values would ensure it falls to the ground and not the stands (the MA2's values are 8.5-10.5 as it is).

But, that's based on a pure gravitational free-fall. What's the drag of a falling drone like. I'd wager longer than 3.7 seconds at that altitude. That means an even lower wind limitation should be used.

And what about a 1/4 failure? What would happen then?

I'm exploring insurance options (because insurance) and will include all that in the proposal, but the subject of contingency as listed above really needs a good work-over.

 

[EsaT]

One possible thing to lower risk from drone falling would be parachute system like VectorSave designed to slow falling speed to less dangerous level.

 

[Clintoops]

I understand your problem.
You see they all look at being sued.
It all comes to that.
Better to say no then to risk something happening bottom line.
We all have seen videos of someone almost being hit by a drone failure in sports .
Not very often but plastered on the news and tv.

 

[Deleted member 103366]

The parachute idea of post 2 seems like a very good one for this situation but would the FAA recognise it?
With a Phantom 3 I saw free fall speeds that varied between 14m/s and 16m/s. That was a deliberate test and the free fall was stable and I was able to restart the motors.
Also have a look at post 26 in Restarting the Mavic Mini 2 Mid-Air after CSC you'd have to work descent speeds out from the video.

 

[BigAl07]

Good morning,

I'm in the process of preparing for a few overflights to record the high school marching band's halftime routines as they prep for competition in the Fall. We're seeking two or three filmings.

I have my FAA authorizations and developed a proposal paper that covers nearly everything except the subject below.
I have the support of the high school principal, but the stadium manager of the district is against it--citing concerns for patrons, stopped of game for past drone transgressions, etc. He hasn't seen the proposal paper, and I feel he was knee-jerk in his response which is understandable.


Given that my flight is from the track (at the end zone) straight to centerfield (at altitude) and back, there is no overflight of spectators except for the band itself and any staff security on the track at that area.

SO THE QUESTION comes to drone failure / drift. What would you all use for numbers?

• It's about 39m from being on-station directly to the railing where the first rows of seats are;
• Using some kinematics, my altitude of 68m is about 3.7 seconds to cover in free fall;
• That means a horizontal value of about 10.5m/s tailwind would make the free fall a threat to the crowd;
• Setting a limitation on wind values would ensure it falls to the ground and not the stands (the MA2's values are 8.5-10.5 as it is).

But, that's based on a pure gravitational free-fall. What's the drag of a falling drone like. I'd wager longer than 3.7 seconds at that altitude. That means an even lower wind limitation should be used.

And what about a 1/4 failure? What would happen then?

I'm exploring insurance options (because insurance) and will include all that in the proposal, but the subject of contingency as listed above really needs a good work-over.

When you say FAA Authorizations that's kind of unclear....

• If you're flying a sub250gr aircraft with proper blade guards that's one thing but are you? This is only possible with a Category 1 aircraft right now. OOP isn't fully ready yet due to RID not available.
• If it's not a sub250gr aircraft you'll have to obtain a ~107.39 which are extremely difficult to get. In fact, only (18) has been issued to date, total.

A falling UAS is a tough thing to figure. It depends on wind, why/how it's falling, direction of travel, horizontal velocity, and many other variables to take into account.

I don't think this is a project I would undertake.... correction I know it's not one I would undertake because the potential for a negative outcome and a ton of liability. If you make ANY mistakes in your risk analysis etc and there is an incident, your insurance company will probably have an OUT leaving you and your company fully liable with zero protection.

 

[ThirtyWest]

When you say FAA Authorizations that's kind of unclear....

• If you're flying a sub250gr aircraft with proper blade guards that's one thing but are you? This is only possible with a Category 1 aircraft right now. OOP isn't fully ready yet due to RID not available.
• If it's not a sub250gr aircraft you'll have to obtain a ~107.39 which are extremely difficult to get. In fact, only (18) has been issued to date, total.

A falling UAS is a tough thing to figure. It depends on wind, why/how it's falling, direction of travel, horizontal velocity, and many other variables to take into account.

I don't think this is a project I would undertake.... correction I know it's not one I would undertake because the potential for a negative outcome and a ton of liability. If you make ANY mistakes in your risk analysis etc and there is an incident, your insurance company will probably have an OUT leaving you and your company fully liable with zero protection.

It's an Air 2, and it may have come across poorly but I never indicated I was doing OOP. The 107.41 authorization was based on a lat/lon, max altitude, and a nautical mile radius of operation--because I didn't seek to overfly non-participants.

I'm 9 months out from this--going through all the different safety aspects (systems, planning, insurance, etc) to measure viability.

I agree it is difficult to measure falling parameters. My operation would be stationary. Both the school and music director are on board, but I could see a parental waiver possibly going out to certify the students are participants.

 

[ThirtyWest]

Now, I'm never one to kick a hornet's nest--been making a living as a professional aviator for 30 years. I understand policy and procedure as well as how FAA works. Knowing chapter and verse is paramount to survival.

That said, was contact with the district even necessary?

The venue doesn't qualify due to its size;
The airspace authorization was given;
There isn't anything in the county/State that prohibits what is sought;
It's not an OOP;
All participants would know and agree to the filming.

I'm trying to argue the other side's position here to see if its defensible in terms of legality.

The director mentioned to me having to stop games in the past for drone overflights of the game/crowd.

This isn't that.

 

[OkDrone]

Watching.....

Want to see what others add to this. Many of us face similar situations for OOP or close to OOP. There are safety considerations whenever you take off as well as legal responsibilities. This holds true if you were just going to fly in your backyard. It seems we all balance on a line that considerations and decisions always have to be managed.

 

[ThirtyWest]

Watching.....

Want to see what others add to this. Many of us face similar situations for OOP or close to OOP. There are safety considerations whenever you take off as well as legal responsibilities. This holds true if you were just going to fly in your backyard. It seems we all balance on a line that considerations and decisions always have to be managed.

I agree.

With regard to 'close to OOP', that would depend solely on how brief any transitory overflights were. in this case there would be zero.

 

[Clintoops]

You did say maybe band or security did you not

That's flying over someone.I understand you really want to do this. But sadly there are others in charge that don't like the idea.
So it is easy to say no.
Because it's there butt's that's on the line. Works a lot like that when you're working with state or federal.
The higher ups make the decisions.
So the lower person's are allowed too. Most times it's what good are they going to get out of it . Plus did the one that said no get his but bit in the past by saying it was ok then he got in trouble for it later.

 

[ThirtyWest]

You did say maybe band or security did you not

That's flying over someone.I understand you really want to do this. But sadly there are others in charge that don't like the idea.
So it is easy to say no.
Because it's there butt's that's on the line. Works a lot like that when you're working with state or federal.
The higher ups make the decisions.
So the lower person's are allowed too. Most times it's what good are they going to get out of it

The band IS the participant that wants the imaging done. That doesn't constitute flying over someone in the sense of OOP as I read it. The security are a few cops that are at the gates, and those folks would qualify (although they wouldn't be near it) as a brief transit to or from.

Of course the man's concerns are valid. That's why I'm doing research nine months out on parachutes and all other aspects--to see if concerns can be mitigated and an acceptable assessment of risk be reached.

 

[Wade L.]

I don’t know, this just seems so messy to me. At the very least, I would have every single person who you will be flying over (or their parents if they are minors) sign an acknowledgment stating that they understand that they are participants in the operation and include a waiver of liability. If certain individuals will not or cannot provide that signed acknowledgement/waiver, I wouldn’t allow them to participate. My own CYA disclaimer for this post: I am not an attorney, and this is not legal advice.

Also note that transition flights over non-participants is still not allowed, as the Air 2 (or any other drone, for that matter) is not certified as a Category 2 or Category 3 drone by the FAA.

 

[ThirtyWest]

I don’t know, this just seems so messy to me. At the very least, I would have every single person who you will be flying over (or their parents if they are minors) sign an acknowledgment stating that they understand that they are participants in the operation and include a waiver of liability. If certain individuals will not or cannot provide that signed acknowledgement/waiver, I wouldn’t allow them to participate. My own CYA disclaimer for this post: I am not an attorney, and this is not legal advice.

Also note that transition flights over non-participants is still not allowed, as the Air 2 (or any other drone, for that matter) is not certified as a Category 2 or Category 3 drone by the FAA.

I think with proper planning, approvals, insurance and such it's not that messy. Restrictive? yes. PITA? You bet. I also have it in the paper that a participation waiver needs to be signed by all those on the field. I was thinking of that earlier today too.

Looking at the paraZero company's products. It's going to be a while before they get the declarations done, but the end-state looks like their chute could get an Air 2 down to <= 5 fl-lbs.

 

[shadower360]

Good morning,

I'm in the process of preparing for a few overflights to record the high school marching band's halftime routines as they prep for competition in the Fall. We're seeking two or three filmings.

I have my FAA authorizations and developed a proposal paper that covers nearly everything except the subject below.
I have the support of the high school principal, but the stadium manager of the district is against it--citing concerns for patrons, stopped of game for past drone transgressions, etc. He hasn't seen the proposal paper, and I feel he was knee-jerk in his response which is understandable.


Given that my flight is from the track (at the end zone) straight to centerfield (at altitude) and back, there is no overflight of spectators except for the band itself and any staff security on the track at that area.

SO THE QUESTION comes to drone failure / drift. What would you all use for numbers?

• It's about 39m from being on-station directly to the railing where the first rows of seats are;
• Using some kinematics, my altitude of 68m is about 3.7 seconds to cover in free fall;
• That means a horizontal value of about 10.5m/s tailwind would make the free fall a threat to the crowd;
• Setting a limitation on wind values would ensure it falls to the ground and not the stands (the MA2's values are 8.5-10.5 as it is).

But, that's based on a pure gravitational free-fall. What's the drag of a falling drone like. I'd wager longer than 3.7 seconds at that altitude. That means an even lower wind limitation should be used.

And what about a 1/4 failure? What would happen then?

I'm exploring insurance options (because insurance) and will include all that in the proposal, but the subject of contingency as listed above really needs a good work-

 

[shadower360]

Sir,
I can only comment from my experience on trying to plan missions and providing them with the maximum flexibility available to get approved. They are called COA's or Course of actions.

If you tell me what you are going to do and just argue that point, I take it as slight as you aren't providing me options and Ill just say "No". example "Hey, I'm going to video everyone with this drone, I am going to start here and end here and Ill be over the top of everyone's head...is that cool? WHAT DO YOU MEAN NO!"
VS.
I would like to do the following. Videotape the band from various angles. In this process there will be multiple opportunities to showcase the schools music and marching program, the stadium and school spirit, precision and skill of the members and esprit de corp. Here are 3 different courses of action that would facilitate this process.

COA #1. I have full carte blanche and can determine the best angles to take it from, have some say in band positioning and will have multiple overhead shots that will produce a fantastic result. This will need consent for all parties involved and will only overfly those being photographed.

COA#2 schedule the marching band for a separate Saturday practice where ONLY the band is there and no spectators, concessions or competing teams/ home teams. This is less Ideal as it will miss out on game day spirit and competitive backgrounds will be absent. This is far less risky and offers more flexibility

COA#3. I shoot from an elevated, but perpendicular position from the band and shots will consist of broader and more orbital in nature, away from overhead flights and far less intrusive. This option is the safest option, but offers the least detail and showcasing of the band.

When you offer choices, your chances of getting approval are FAR higher than just saying "I am doing this and its not flexible". remember, they hold the decision.

 

[66427cobra]

Good morning,

I'm in the process of preparing for a few overflights to record the high school marching band's halftime routines as they prep for competition in the Fall. We're seeking two or three filmings.

I have my FAA authorizations and developed a proposal paper that covers nearly everything except the subject below.
I have the support of the high school principal, but the stadium manager of the district is against it--citing concerns for patrons, stopped of game for past drone transgressions, etc. He hasn't seen the proposal paper, and I feel he was knee-jerk in his response which is understandable.


Given that my flight is from the track (at the end zone) straight to centerfield (at altitude) and back, there is no overflight of spectators except for the band itself and any staff security on the track at that area.

SO THE QUESTION comes to drone failure / drift. What would you all use for numbers?

• It's about 39m from being on-station directly to the railing where the first rows of seats are;
• Using some kinematics, my altitude of 68m is about 3.7 seconds to cover in free fall;
• That means a horizontal value of about 10.5m/s tailwind would make the free fall a threat to the crowd;
• Setting a limitation on wind values would ensure it falls to the ground and not the stands (the MA2's values are 8.5-10.5 as it is).

But, that's based on a pure gravitational free-fall. What's the drag of a falling drone like. I'd wager longer than 3.7 seconds at that altitude. That means an even lower wind limitation should be used.

And what about a 1/4 failure? What would happen then?

I'm exploring insurance options (because insurance) and will include all that in the proposal, but the subject of contingency as listed above really needs a good work-over.

Leave yourself an "out" in your contract in case weather gets ugly. A good stiff wind could push you over the spectators who would not be considered participants.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

One possible thing to lower risk from drone falling would be parachute system like VectorSave designed to slow falling speed to less dangerous level.

This would / should / could REALLY mitigate the the stadium managers concerns.
Also allay any special event insurance you may seek, and concern that parents of the band members that may have about a liability release to sign.

There are plenty of parachute options for drones, including some well known manufacturers, and even ebay sellers.

A quick google search for > drone parachutes

I take it the band or school want a dead vertical video of the band, and that would look pretty awesome if they were coordinated as expected, other wise a decent crane or scaffold might have sufficed to get an elevated view from one position.

A parachute could set you up for future work where risk of a drone failure could result in some sort of bad incident.
I would like to think rather than our Mavic sized drones falling with a fairly damaging speed / inertia / mass etc to potentially create (particularly) human injury, it might be more like someone dropping an unopened can of drink onto someones head from the row behind.

Not 100% sure how these chutes work, could be tilt, could be fall rate, worth a read to see if that suits a loss of battery, loss of gps, some sort of imu / compass discrepancy etc, other that might causing a fly away.

 

[Meta4]

The band IS the participant that wants the imaging done. That doesn't constitute flying over someone in the sense of OOP as I read it.

How certain are you of this?
a remote pilot in command may only operate a small unmanned aircraft over people if:

• The small unmanned aircraft does not maintain sustained flight over any person unless that person is participating directly in the operation

You are pinning a lot on your interpretation of what participating directly in the operation means.
If it doesn't mean what you think/hope it does, nothing else matters.

 

[ThirtyWest]

How certain are you of this?
a remote pilot in command may only operate a small unmanned aircraft over people if:

• The small unmanned aircraft does not maintain sustained flight over any person unless that person is participating directly in the operation

You are pinning a lot on your interpretation of what participating directly in the operation means.
If it doesn't mean what you think/hope it does, nothing else matters.

If your subject is a marching band on a field and you’re imaging a -90 gimbal the entire time I would think those below are participating. And a clear path to move over the field would satisfy that.

In this particular event there aren’t any courses of action other than a top down angle to view. It’s just expressly for the directors to evaluate their rank and file.

It’s not for compensation so it costs me nothing to not do it.

I agree that options can massage an opportunity into existence.

Given that it could be done with no legal prohibition, the onus is on me to satisfy the concerns of the venue that matter most to them.

I don’t wish for tenacity to be confused with obstinance here.
Between chutes, signed waivers, insurance and assurances, I think there is room to build a safe model here. When the contrary begins to outnumber ways to ensure a safe outcome—the risk assessment is over.

 

[ThirtyWest]

So much focus on overflying the wrong folks, I suspect waking out to the field, launching straight up, and letting the band do their thing would eliminate any persons on the ground being mistaken as a participant. Land straight down when they’re off.