HELP!!! Using 400' AGL as my ceiling hypothetically

[EpicFlight]

I'll write the FAA about this example, with my interpretation and BigAl's and see what they say w.r.t. discretion in enforcement.

Better to have the word straight from the FAA.

 

[BigAl07]

I'll write the FAA about this example, with my interpretation and BigAl's and see what they say w.r.t. discretion in enforcement.

Better to have the word straight from the FAA.

You do realize I am an FAA Safety Team Representative don't you? I'm involved in teaching and helping to liaze with FAA and John Q. Public.

All I can say is, "Whatever floats your boat".

 

[dirkclod]

I'll write the FAA

Sent that letter yet

 

[Rich QR]

If I am correct in saying that it would be illegal for a drone to be made to fly up such a 500ft cliff then the law is the law, you break them at your peril.

What I want to know is, where are you finding this 500' vertical cliff? I don't believe there is such topography within the FAA's jurisdiction.

El Capitan and Half Dome are off limits due to being deep in Yosemite National Park, but if that weren't the case, they would be flyable. They're steep and high, but topo maps reveal that they're not vertical, and would be flyable.

Notch Peak in Utah is perhaps the steepest high cliff in the USA outside a National Park, but the topo maps reveal the contour lines remain distinctly separated and the face is flyable.

 

[Yorkshire_Pud]

What I want to know is, where are you finding this 500' vertical cliff? I don't believe there is such topography within the FAA's jurisdiction.

It's entirely hypothetical, stick in any number that you want that is greater than 400.
Maybe some cliffs listed on
Cliff - Wikipedia
would prove satisfactory.

 

[Paul Stocum]

I’m a few months away from renewing my 107 for the first time, so it’s been a minute since I was far more intimate with the rules. So please correct me if I’m remembering wrong with this hypothetical: If I take off from a 1000’ building, I can legally go 400’ above take off point, 1400’ AGL. Am I also allowed a reasonable circumference around thee building as long as the drone remains within sight?

 

[MS Coast]

I’m a few months away from renewing my 107 for the first time, so it’s been a minute since I was far more intimate with the rules. So please correct me if I’m remembering wrong with this hypothetical: If I take off from a 1000’ building, I can legally go 400’ above take off point, 1400’ AGL. Am I also allowed a reasonable circumference around thee building as long as the drone remains within sight?

During a Part 107 flight, you're allowed to go 400' above a structure as long as you stay within 400' horizontally of the structure.

 

[dronerdave]

I’m a few months away from renewing my 107 for the first time, so it’s been a minute since I was far more intimate with the rules. So please correct me if I’m remembering wrong with this hypothetical: If I take off from a 1000’ building, I can legally go 400’ above take off point, 1400’ AGL. Am I also allowed a reasonable circumference around thee building as long as the drone remains within sight?

IIRC you are also required to follow any LAANC or other special FAA requirements.

 

[Paul Stocum]

During a Part 107 flight, you're allowed to go 400' above a structure as long as you stay within 400' horizontally of the structure.

I was thinking 400’ was the number, but wasn’t 100%.

 

[MS Coast]

IIRC you are also required to follow any LAANC or other special FAA requirements.

Right. Inside controlled airspace with LAANC approval, you're not allowed to increase your altitude above structures. The LAANC approval ceiling is an absolute maximum.

 

[@Rip]

Interesting thread. I wanted clarification on this specific question and took it directly to the FAA for an answer.
Question:

Am I allowed to remain altitude compliant by "hugging the contour" of the mountain while ascending to the destination as long as I am within 400ft AGL in relation to the slope? I think I am answering my own question. (The image is not an accurate representation of VLOS and is merely for illustrating the term hugging the slope")

Response from FAA:

Yes...you are answering your own question. The AGL altitude is the altitude measured from the drone to the terrain beneath it. In the illustration you provide if the flight path line represents 400 ft AGL or less, you are compliant.

The concept should not be confusing. The altitude on Mavic drones I am familiar with is measured from the controller which doesn't take into account variances in terrain. Don't confuse MSL with AGL.
My 2 cents.

 

[smashse]

During a Part 107 flight, you're allowed to go 400' above a structure as long as you stay within 400' horizontally of the structure.

A cliff is NOT a structure.

I did write the FAA, and they said you can traverse a 500' directly vertical cliff under 107. That it is not directly below, just below the drone.

I have the faa emails to back it up, and have posted their response before. But tons of people will say I am wrong in the US even though they haven't asked the faa directly like I did.

 

[@Rip]

A cliff is NOT a structure.

I did write the FAA, and they said you can traverse a 500' directly vertical cliff under 107. That it is not directly below, just below the drone.

I have the faa emails to back it up, and have posted their response before. But tons of people will say I am wrong in the US even though they haven't asked the faa directly like I did.

I agree. Which is why I asked the FAA for clarification for my specific question which applies to OP's original post in this thread.

 

[LoudThunder]

I'm not a part 107 holder, and strictly a recreational flier and want to stay within the rules. When I set my maximin altitude on my controller, I set it to 350', just to be what I thought was safe. I've got 40 acres of property at my home, and I'm just wondering. If I want to fly the perimeter of my property from a the max altitude

Ok, there has been some discussion about oppressive enforcement and I do not think you have to worry about this in your neck of the woods, especially on your 40 acres.

Think about driving down the road and I'm guessing Iron River is not some Speed Trap and if it's not, you will probably find yourself driving 30 in a 25 zone, 40-45 in a 35 zone and even doing 60 plus on the 55 MPH roads…

The FAA does not have the resources to go to small communities like yours to look for the occasional "Scoff Law" flying their drone over people, vehicles, beyond the visual line of sight, and over the 400 ' limit. Let's be honest, how many drones are there in your community and how often do they fly. If they did decide to run a task force out there, it might be three-years in the making that they would be in the area to be in the right place at the right time…

So, you will most assuredly not be tracked down, and arrested for flying your drone over the 400' limit while flying on your land. There are no local airports or other facilities that have any controlled airspace in your area, you only have to worry if there are crop-dusters or other aircraft that might fly at treetop level just because they can…

If the FAA receives reports that they perceived as important, enforceable situations, they might make a few phone calls to the local police to see if they had received reports.

Now, I cannot speak for your neighbors, perhaps they do not want you flying on the property line at 400' where you could see and photograph all the "agricultural crops" they might not be too happy about the public knowing or other activates only an overhead view would expose…

Remember, it might not be a neighbor that you have to worry about, but a relative/friend/client renting the use of their land that might be for nefarious purposes.

Finally, flying at 400' is some fun if you want to look really far off into the distance, but if you want to see anything of note, you'll probably find flying at 200' (make sure it's over tree/tower,etc…) a more pleasing experience…

Fly Safe…

 

[MS Coast]

A cliff is NOT a structure.

I did write the FAA, and they said you can traverse a 500' directly vertical cliff under 107. That it is not directly below, just below the drone.

I have the faa emails to back it up, and have posted their response before. But tons of people will say I am wrong in the US even though they haven't asked the faa directly like I did.

No, a cliff is certainly not a structure. The response you quoted was to the question from @dronerdave about flying over a building. See post #32 and below.

• Today at 10:54 AM

I’m a few months away from renewing my 107 for the first time, so it’s been a minute since I was far more intimate with the rules. So please correct me if I’m remembering wrong with this hypothetical: If I take off from a 1000’ building, I can legally go 400’ above take off point, 1400’ AGL. Am I also allowed a reasonable circumference around thee building as long as the drone remains within sight?

 

[MS Coast]

A cliff is NOT a structure.

I did write the FAA, and they said you can traverse a 500' directly vertical cliff under 107. That it is not directly below, just below the drone.

I have the faa emails to back it up, and have posted their response before. But tons of people will say I am wrong in the US even though they haven't asked the faa directly like I did.

Please clarify what you mean here. "That it is not directly below, just below the drone."

If you've posted the information from the FAA previously, can you provide a link to that post?

 

[dirkclod]

I’m Misunderstand this whole thread. If I was to take off from my
house. ( not being part 107) and flew a circle around my land at 100’ from take off , if I had a 1000’ drop off 100’ from my house that went whatever would I be illeagle Which would put me at
1100’ I would be illegal. I say yes I would.

 

[BigAl07]

A cliff is NOT a structure.

I did write the FAA, and they said you can traverse a 500' directly vertical cliff under 107. That it is not directly below, just below the drone.

I have the faa emails to back it up, and have posted their response before. But tons of people will say I am wrong in the US even though they haven't asked the faa directly like I did.

Please link your quotation and please indicate the FAA employee who stated you could fly 500' AGL over the edge of a cliff (Part 107 or not). If you'd rather do it in PM that's fine but I would like to address it because that employee told you 100% wrong information.

Regardless which rules you fly under, If you fly over a cliff and your 400' hypothetical string isn't touching the ground directly under your aircraft, you are no long LEGAL.

 

[EpicFlight]

Wow. Really?

 

[dirkclod]

Wow. Really?

Yes really.