DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

Golden Gate Bridge - Legal To Fly or Not?

pelagic_one

Wind-Blown Member
Premium Pilot
Joined
Dec 29, 2019
Messages
1,124
Reactions
3,615
Age
58
Location
San Francisco Bay Area, California
I get so tired of articles stating that drone flying is illegal in one way or another. They often misinterpret local regulations stating no launching or landing on restricted property by incorrectly stating it‘s illegal to fly in that airspace.

The Golden Gate Bridge is one such spot. DJI has placed a proper geofence that prevents Mavics from taking off within the restricted zone imposed by the Golden Gate National Recreational Area. But nothing stops us from launching and landing outside the zone, take videos and pictures from a legal distance, then share our footage on social media. None of that is illegal, but uninformed authors will write click-bait articles making us look like criminals.

I came across this San Francisco Chronicle article from February, written by a commercial real estate author who doesn’t seem to know drones and associated regulations very much. He stated some common misconceptions that we’ve even read in this forum; so I commented on his article based on facts I’ve gleaned from reading very informed and valid posts by the professional aviators of our forum.

I am doing this for the sheer fun and slight adrenaline rush of planning that epic flight, capturing awesome images, and sharing with friends, family and fellow flyers. So let me know if you’d ever like to get together and simply fly with me and some other fellow forum members. Some of us have flown from over 75 legal locations around the greater Bay Area in 2020 alone. I didn’t buy these relatively expensive drones to have them sitting in a closet; so if you didn’t either, let’s get out there and enjoy a masked-up, socially-distanced flying experience with our Mavics!

Since this is an open, global forum, I look forward to your varying opinions. I’d also appreciate hearing from our longtime local (and visiting) flyers who fondly recall being able to fly around places like Ocean Beach, East Bay Regional Parks, Big Sur and the Golden Gate Bridge prior to current regulations.
 
Last edited:
I agree with what you're saying, there still appears to be a ton of misunderstanding and ill-will towards drone operators. I think it's due to two reasons:

1. The regulations ultimately aren't straightforward and are constantly evolving. Just look at all the questions in this forum asking about where it's legal to fly. This is where the FAA could actually use its regulatory authority to help clear up things.
2. The actions of a couple of really stupid drone users. e.g. the guy in Pacifica a couple of years who apparently flew close to a SAR helicopter.

Unfortunately with (2) these people have been used to paint all drone operators in a negative light (as is the case with many situations like this) when in reality almost none of us would fly anywhere near a manned aircraft as the regulations clearly state you must not.

But these stories really make for good reading and are sensationalist and so the media is going to naturally gravitate toward them to drive clicks/ad revenue. (as you mentioned, clickbait) I once read an article that said "California was the wild west" when it came to drones, which I thought was laughable considering all the state and local regulations there are here surrounding drones.

While I agree it's probably legal to fly and take photos of the GGB, the only concern I'd have is that most people may not understand this, and wouldn't count on local law enforcement to understand the peculiarities as well. Best to go early, be discreet, and be respectful if approached. (Not saying you haven't)

Edit: Link to the article on archive.is in case you get hit with a paywall: http://archive.is/vmgUm
 
  • Like
Reactions: pelagic_one
I came across this San Francisco Chronicle article from February, written by a commercial real estate author who doesn’t seem to know drones and associated regulations very much. He stated some common misconceptions that we’ve even read in this forum;
Generally newspaper articles are vetted and fact checked before publishing. That is why I wanted to see what misconceptions were stated. I read the entire article and honestly I see no such statements. Yes the article is written in such a way to make it seem to the uneducated reader that pictures of the Golden Gate Bridge by drone are illegal. However, nothing he explicitly states in the article is false. He plainly states that launching and landing from within the boundaries of the Recreation Area is illegal. The article also clearly states that only the FAA regulates airspace. One sentence also mentions that flying over the bridge deck is generally illegal due to FAA regulations preventing flight over people and also moving cars. One could possibly time it just right to traverse across the bridge when there is a gap, but that is a fine line with a very busy bridge.

What is definitely misleading is how he complains about these pictures of the Golden Gate Bridge being posted online and implying that it is illegal. He never actually says it is illegal though. The fear-mongering about drones crashing into various structures isn't really balanced either, but again it's not fiction.

So even though I don't think the tone and implications of the article are fair to the UAS community, I don't see any factually incorrect statements in the article. It is extremely slanted and far from impartial, but it isn't false either.
 
Generally newspaper articles are vetted and fact checked before publishing. That is why I wanted to see what misconceptions were stated. I read the entire article and honestly I see no such statements. Yes the article is written in such a way to make it seem to the uneducated reader that pictures of the Golden Gate Bridge by drone are illegal. However, nothing he explicitly states in the article is false. He plainly states that launching and landing from within the boundaries of the Recreation Area is illegal. The article also clearly states that only the FAA regulates airspace. One sentence also mentions that flying over the bridge deck is generally illegal due to FAA regulations preventing flight over people and also moving cars. One could possibly time it just right to traverse across the bridge when there is a gap, but that is a fine line with a very busy bridge.

What is definitely misleading is how he complains about these pictures of the Golden Gate Bridge being posted online and implying that it is illegal. He never actually says it is illegal though. The fear-mongering about drones crashing into various structures isn't really balanced either, but again it's not fiction.

So even though I don't think the tone and implications of the article are fair to the UAS community, I don't see any factually incorrect statements in the article. It is extremely slanted and far from impartial, but it isn't false either.
Good points. Perhaps that is actually the more insidious part of this article, that while nothing it states is factually incorrect it's written in such a way as to imply that the actions involved with the photos are illegal, and uses a lot of weasel wording like "They also appear to be illegal.", then mentioning some related regulations and encouraging the reader to draw an incorrect conclusion.
 
Part of the problem is the more exciting pictures getting really close to famous structures probably break rules about getting too close to people / buildings / vehicles / vessels etc.
Drone footage or stills shot from airspace which isn't blocked off by the FAA (in the US) CAA (here in England) or whichever other national authority applies and at a safe and legal distance should bother no-one, but there's always somebody wanting to complain about drones and their pilots.
 
My name is Danny, I live in Santa Rosa. I would love to talk with you about joining up with you sometime for anything like this in the Bay Area. Also if you ever get up this way feel free to hit me up. Thanks
 
Good points. Perhaps that is actually the more insidious part of this article, that while nothing it states is factually incorrect it's written in such a way as to imply that the actions involved with the photos are illegal, and uses a lot of weasel wording like "They also appear to be illegal.", then mentioning some related regulations and encouraging the reader to draw an incorrect conclusion.
You both have always posted valid and insightful comments on this forum, and you didn’t fall short of your high standards here. Newbies like me absolutely benefit from reading your posts, and can count on folks like you to set records straight.
 
I would love to talk with you about joining up with you sometime for anything like this in the Bay Area. Also if you ever get up this way feel free to hit me up.
Welcome to the forum, Danny...one way or another we’re flying! @MIGUELVM360 is looking to fly around the Pescadero coast tomorrow morning, barring the typical marine layer, but that might be too short notice and quite the drive for you. We’ve also flown at Bodega Bay and Wine Country, with plans to meet up with another forum member some day on the Russian River in Cazadero.

I’ll PM for any specific outings.
 
I get so tired of articles stating that drone flying is illegal in one way or another. They often misinterpret local regulations stating no launching or landing on restricted property by incorrectly stating it‘s illegal to fly in that airspace.

The Golden Gate Bridge is one such spot. DJI has placed a proper geofence that prevents Mavics from taking off within the restricted zone imposed by the Golden Gate National Recreational Area. But nothing stops us from launching and landing outside the zone, take videos and pictures from a legal distance, then share our footage on social media. None of that is illegal, but uninformed authors will write click-bait articles making us look like criminals.

I came across this San Francisco Chronicle article from February, written by a commercial real estate author who doesn’t seem to know drones and associated regulations very much. He stated some common misconceptions that we’ve even read in this forum; so I commented on his article based on facts I’ve gleaned from reading very informed and valid posts by the professional aviators of our forum.

I am doing this for the sheer fun and slight adrenaline rush of planning that epic flight, capturing awesome images, and sharing with friends, family and fellow flyers. So let me know if you’d ever like to get together and simply fly with me and some other fellow forum members. Some of us have flown from over 75 legal locations around the greater Bay Area in 2020 alone. I didn’t buy these relatively expensive drones to have them sitting in a closet; so if you didn’t either, let’s get out there and enjoy a masked-up, socially-distanced flying experience with our Mavics!

Since this is an open, global forum, I look forward to your varying opinions. I’d also appreciate hearing from our longtime local (and visiting) flyers who fondly recall being able to fly around places like Ocean Beach, East Bay Regional Parks, Big Sur and the Golden Gate Bridge prior to current regulations.

If you look at Airmap, the entire GGNRA is NFZ -as is most of Marin. I have heard they are particularly serious about the GGB. Why can't people accept "no"? I've lived i Marin for over 30yrs. And I hate these rules. But this area is tourist mecca -esp now with covid. Armies of the covid weary inundate The headlands & mt Tam every day -and more on weekends. If they all flew their drones over the GGB, there'd be MA2's & Mini's falling from the skies onto cars & ped's on the bridge. Don't believe me? Read the daily crash & lost bird reports. That's a giant STEEL BRIDGE which would not improve your signal.

I would love to be able to fly over the bridge -and so many other NFZ's in Marin. But every time someone does fly -and get noticed in these high profile/restricted areas, it increases the resolve of authorities towards further restrictions. There are plenty of vantage points to capture incredible GGB/fog/sunrise/sunset shots with camera & tripod. I suggest taking that challenge rather than inflaming more anti drone sentiment, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pelagic_one
If you look at Airmap, the entire GGNRA is NFZ -as is most of Marin.
AirMap is NOT the definitive source of controlled airspace. It can be and frequently is wrong, just like the DJI FlySafe database is very wrong. Please see the previous posts in this thread about airspace authority. Only the FAA can control airspace. The closest controlled airspace to the GGB is SFO and that does not reach to the bridge itself.
The GGNRA has laws preventing anyone from launching or landing a UAS from that land. That's it. No airspace restrictions over that land by the FAA.

Why can't people accept "no"?
No is fine as long as they are actual laws and regulations. There is no such controlled airspace, or long-term TFRs/NOTAMs over or around the GGB. Thus it is legal to fly in the vicinity of the GGB as long as you are following ALL of the FAA regulations.

If they all flew their drones over the GGB, there'd be MA2's & Mini's falling from the skies onto cars & ped's on the bridge.
A bit dramatic but OK. In any case flying over moving vehicles or people IS against FAA regulations so in that regard, drones should not be flown over the GGB unless it is closed to everyone or it is a very rare time that no people or cars are on the roadway.

hat's a giant STEEL BRIDGE which would not improve your signal.
The giant steel bridge would not in any way impact the drone's signal unless you were incredibly close to it (as in a matter of feet or inches). I have flown close (within let's say 50 feet) to large bridges in this area and they have no effect on drones. The same holds for towers and ships. Once you move more than a few feet away, there are no issues at all.

I would love to be able to fly over the bridge
Not over the bridge...in the vicinity of the bridge. Next to it. As long as you are not over cars or people.

But every time someone does fly -and get noticed in these high profile/restricted areas, it increases the resolve of authorities towards further restrictions.
True when they are stupid drone pilots that do not follow the actual regulations and end up crashing onto the bridge deck. However a competent pilot that follows the regulations should not be punished if they are doing things correctly. That is the point of such a slanted article. It was bashing drones and making misleading arguments.

There are plenty of vantage points to capture incredible GGB/fog/sunrise/sunset shots with camera & tripod. I suggest taking that challenge rather than inflaming more anti drone sentiment, etc.
All well and good, but still not the same vantage point of flying over the water at a few hundred feet of altitude NEXT TO the GBB and looking down.
 
I get so tired of articles stating that drone flying is illegal in one way or another. They often misinterpret local regulations stating no launching or landing on restricted property by incorrectly stating it‘s illegal to fly in that airspace.

The Golden Gate Bridge is one such spot. DJI has placed a proper geofence that prevents Mavics from taking off within the restricted zone imposed by the Golden Gate National Recreational Area. But nothing stops us from launching and landing outside the zone, take videos and pictures from a legal distance, then share our footage on social media. None of that is illegal, but uninformed authors will write click-bait articles making us look like criminals.

I came across this San Francisco Chronicle article from February, written by a commercial real estate author who doesn’t seem to know drones and associated regulations very much. He stated some common misconceptions that we’ve even read in this forum; so I commented on his article based on facts I’ve gleaned from reading very informed and valid posts by the professional aviators of our forum.

I am doing this for the sheer fun and slight adrenaline rush of planning that epic flight, capturing awesome images, and sharing with friends, family and fellow flyers. So let me know if you’d ever like to get together and simply fly with me and some other fellow forum members. Some of us have flown from over 75 legal locations around the greater Bay Area in 2020 alone. I didn’t buy these relatively expensive drones to have them sitting in a closet; so if you didn’t either, let’s get out there and enjoy a masked-up, socially-distanced flying experience with our Mavics!

Since this is an open, global forum, I look forward to your varying opinions. I’d also appreciate hearing from our longtime local (and visiting) flyers who fondly recall being able to fly around places like Ocean Beach, East Bay Regional Parks, Big Sur and the Golden Gate Bridge prior to current regulations.

Hello Pilots,
My name is Anel.
I am a relatively new pilot and moved to Pleasanton 4 years ago. I am having difficulty figuring out where to legally fly my drone in the Bay Area. I would love to meet up with you more experienced pilots at some point and fly.
 
If you look at Airmap, the entire GGNRA is NFZ -as is most of Marin. ... There are plenty of vantage points to capture incredible GGB/fog/sunrise/sunset shots with camera & tripod. I suggest taking that challenge rather than inflaming more anti drone sentiment, etc.
Thanks to all who’ve responded, as this is certainly a teachable thread for newbies like me. I respect laws, rules, guidelines...just raised that way. My intent was to encourage new hobbyists, and certainly not to hurt the hobby, so I’m good with the safe and legal spots moving forward. I’ll stick to the okay spots in Sausalito, will head up and take great shots from up there without breeching GGNRA.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MavicPeter
I get so tired of articles stating that drone flying is illegal in one way or another. They often misinterpret local regulations stating no launching or landing on restricted property by incorrectly stating it‘s illegal to fly in that airspace.

The Golden Gate Bridge is one such spot. DJI has placed a proper geofence that prevents Mavics from taking off within the restricted zone imposed by the Golden Gate National Recreational Area. But nothing stops us from launching and landing outside the zone, take videos and pictures from a legal distance, then share our footage on social media. None of that is illegal, but uninformed authors will write click-bait articles making us look like criminals.

I came across this San Francisco Chronicle article from February, written by a commercial real estate author who doesn’t seem to know drones and associated regulations very much. He stated some common misconceptions that we’ve even read in this forum; so I commented on his article based on facts I’ve gleaned from reading very informed and valid posts by the professional aviators of our forum.

I am doing this for the sheer fun and slight adrenaline rush of planning that epic flight, capturing awesome images, and sharing with friends, family and fellow flyers. So let me know if you’d ever like to get together and simply fly with me and some other fellow forum members. Some of us have flown from over 75 legal locations around the greater Bay Area in 2020 alone. I didn’t buy these relatively expensive drones to have them sitting in a closet; so if you didn’t either, let’s get out there and enjoy a masked-up, socially-distanced flying experience with our Mavics!

Since this is an open, global forum, I look forward to your varying opinions. I’d also appreciate hearing from our longtime local (and visiting) flyers who fondly recall being able to fly around places like Ocean Beach, East Bay Regional Parks, Big Sur and the Golden Gate Bridge prior to current regulations.
Yes we have had lots of fun flying here in the bay area. Fly smart and follow rules, Very simple, get out and have a great time. Hopefully this covid is over soon and we can get out to fly as a group again
 
That's a giant STEEL BRIDGE which would not improve your signal.
The giant steel bridge would not in any way impact the drone's signal unless you were incredibly close to it (as in a matter of feet or inches). I have flown close (within let's say 50 feet) to large bridges in this area and they have no effect on drones. The same holds for towers and ships. Once you move more than a few feet away, there are no issues at all.
Both of you are confused.
Steel can have an effect on the compass (if it's close enough) but the only way it can affect signal is by blocking signal if you fly behind a large solid steel object.
 
Info is on the VFR sectional and Airmap, paints an easy enough situation.

Can you photograph the GGB? Yes, you can. (Safe distance, so no flying over it and taking 90° down photos, tisk tisk)

Here's the hard part, good luck finding a TAKEOFF point close enough to maintian VLOS, the whole coast around the bridge is a National Park. San Fran has UAS laws all over the city and the populace is better informed than most. You won't get away with a quick out of VLOS flight to snap a pic. I also don't recommend it, there is so much air traffic in the area the risk isn't worth it.

If I really wanted a pic I'd pay someone with a boat to take me close enough for a few flights followed by a tour of the bay.Screenshot_20200727-213955_AirMap.jpgScreenshot_20200727-214155_Firefox.jpg
 
If I really wanted a pic I'd pay someone with a boat to take me close enough for a few flights followed by a tour of the bay.
Thanks for the chart info, Chris. The author of the article states that the only legal way to capture images of the GG Bridge are from a boat. I’ve flown from our sailboat in that area, but was hoping to show there’s more than one way, especially for those without a boat.
 
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,585
Messages
1,554,095
Members
159,586
Latest member
DoubleBarS