Local Restrictions, Does anyone other than the FAA have the right?

[sar104]

Aha. Well, that makes sense.

At least it does until I think about the National Parks. They National Park Service prohibits drone operations in the parks, as US Fish & Wildlife Service prohibits them in the NWRs. Both a part of the Department of the Interior. DJI Geo doesn't flag National Parks, but B4YouFly does, showing them in red with "Restricted Operations" flags.

What's the logic there? Thanks, by the way.

That does look like an inconsistency. It may be because the NPS has made its position on sUAS explicitly clear, whereas the USFWS position derives just from the 50 CFR prohibition on all aircraft operations.

So B4UFLY reflects that for NPS:

 

[rolling56]

I was in a county run nature pressure and politely asked if they are OK with drones. I was told it was not allowed, although I did not see anything on B4UFLY, they couldn't show me the restriction written anywhere nor were there any signs posted. I politly gave them the only the FAA can restrict drone traffic speech and they said go ahead at your own risk. Do local governments have the authority to restrict, fine, arrest or charge a permit fee?

Your answer is YES plain and simple.

 

[LA 2020]

I was in a county run nature pressure and politely asked if they are OK with drones. I was told it was not allowed, although I did not see anything on B4UFLY, they couldn't show me the restriction written anywhere nor were there any signs posted. I politly gave them the only the FAA can restrict drone traffic speech and they said go ahead at your own risk. Do local governments have the authority to restrict, fine, arrest or charge a permit fee?

Yes

 

[Tim40]

One other point of contention I think we all face is the common belief a drone is not considered an aircraft as governed by the FAA. Here's what the FAA is saying about that.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/resources/policy_library/media/FAA_UAS-PO_LEA_Guidance.pdf

A UAS is an Aircraft that Must Comply with Safety Requirements

A UAS is an “aircraft” as defined in the FAA’s authorizing statutes and is therefore subject to regulation by the FAA. 49 U.S.C. § 40102(a)(6) defines an “aircraft” as “any contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate or fly in the air.” The FAA’s regulations (14 C.F.R. § 1.1) similarly define an “aircraft” as “a device that is used or intended to be used for flight in the air.” Because an unmanned aircraft is a contrivance/device that is invented, used, and designed to fly in the air, it meets the definition of “aircraft.” In addition, on December 16, 2015 the FAA the FAA promulgated an Interim Final Rule (80 Fed. Reg. 78594) that defined Unmanned Aircraft, Model Aircraft, Small Unmanned Aircraft and Small Unmanned Aircraft System in 14 C.F.R. § 1.1. The FAA has promulgated regulations that apply to the operation of all aircraft, whether manned or unmanned, and irrespective of the altitude at which the aircraft is operating. For example, 14 C.F.R. § 91.13 prohibits any person from operating an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

Whether manned or unmanned - an aircraft is an aircraft. Calling an aircraft a drone is like saying jet, fixed wing, or rotor craft: just another type of aircraft. Sure -lots of differences, but bottom line is they are all aircraft in the eyes of the FAA.

The FAA is so slick/sick - they include Tinywhoops under their egregious domain - and never ever ever has a tinywhoop brought harm to anyone - or anything. But our FAA - it doesn't want to hear that. I lost respect for the FAA during the Boeing MAX debacles - and it has done nothing since to regain ig.

 

[rolling56]

The FAA is so slick/sick - they include Tinywhoops under their egregious domain - and never ever ever has a tinywhoop brought harm to anyone - or anything. But our FAA - it doesn't want to hear that. I lost respect for the FAA during the Boeing MAX debacles - and it has done nothing since to regain ig.

It has nothing to do with that. Idiots have been flying in places not allowed and I've watched my hobby/job flying freedom go down the tubes because of those idiots. They're the ones to blame not the FAA

 

[snowghost]

I used to work in West Hollywood and occasionally fly there. One day a co-worker said the city just enacted new drone ordinances. You needed to submit a permit application, register it with the city, show proof of FAA registration. And the drone had to be brought to City Hall for inspection and to have a sticker placed on it. Plus a host of other restrictions.

So yes, local governments do have the authority to restrict, fine, arrest or charge a permit fee. The only reason my co-worker knew about it, is she has a good friend in the FAA. Needless to say, I never flew there again.

 

[rolling56]

I used to work in West Hollywood and occasionally fly there. One day a co-worker said the city just enacted new drone ordinances. You needed to submit a permit application, register it with the city, show proof of FAA registration. And the drone had to be brought to City Hall for inspection and to have a sticker placed on it. Plus a host of other restrictions.

So yes, local governments do have the authority to restrict, fine, arrest or charge a permit fee. The only reason my co-worker knew about it, is she has a good friend in the FAA. Needless to say, I never flew there again.

ya I used to live in Anaheim and moved back to Missouri at the right time (2004). I doubt I could have taken off there now since all the idiots messed it all up Casey you were the worst. Youtube videos of them doing stupid stuff. It wouldn't be like this if "they" hadn't ruined it for us so the FAA had to do what they did.

 

[Marbles99]

I was at the port of Galveston flying and getting footage of the Carnival Vista coming back to Texas. I was told by the Port police to land my aircraft and gladly fly it 50 feet to the east. I did look at b4you fly I was in the right away to fly and get some footage. I really didn't want to get a ticket or my girlfriend was scared that I was going to jail because of it.

 

[rolling56]

I was at the port of Galveston flying and getting footage of the Carnival Vista coming back to Texas. I was told by the Port police to land my aircraft and gladly fly it 50 feet to the east. I did look at b4you fly I was in the right away to fly and get some footage. I really didn't want to get a ticket or my girlfriend was scared that I was going to jail because of it.

b4uoufly isn't a set in stone so to speak. They don't have all their info locally wherever you fly so don't look at b4youfly for that stuff.
Do some research before you fly someplace like that before you even get ready to fly there. That's one of the problems, people don't research the places first.

 

[snowghost]

What I like to do is look at SkyVector VFR Sectionals, then DJI Geo Map, AirMap, and B4UFLY.

You may be in the right, but at the end of the day Barney Fife can take your drone away or lock you up.

Edit: and of course try and find out the local rules. All the above showed me a nice park to fly in. I called them up and was told no drones.

 

[rolling56]

What I like to do is look at SkyVector VFR Sectionals, then DJI Geo Map, AirMap, and B4UFLY.

You may be in the right, but at the end of the day Barney Fife can take your drone away or lock you up.

I totally agree and this forum is not a or the Commercial pilot forum so most here are not 107 intelligible. So they don't think like that ....yet.

 

[smashse]

What I like to do is look at SkyVector VFR Sectionals, then DJI Geo Map, AirMap, and B4UFLY.

You may be in the right, but at the end of the day Barney Fife can take your drone away or lock you up.

Edit: and of course try and find out the local rules. All the above showed me a nice park to fly in. I called them up and was told no drones.

Unfortunately Sky Vector and b4UFly are about airspace, not about ground. UAS have both, and whereas they can't restrict or enforce any laws about where your drone flies, because the FAA has sole authority over the air, they can restrict where you take off, land and stand while flying. And because that could be established by some township, not even at the city or county level, it would be near impossible to get a database of every drone ordinance for every municipality for every state. In Michigan alone there are thousands, and ordinances can change on a weekly basis, I'd hate to think what California or Texas have for local muni's.

Once nice thing is I contacted my local DNR office about flying in state parks and forests. They actually sent me the document they sent out to park rangers on how to determine if drone flights were legal, and how to determine if they could or should cite. The funniest part is it actually told me how to get away with it, however I won't, and only fly with permission, especially Rec. Commercial I will stand my ground a little bit, but then the business can pay the legal fees as well.

Anyway, Michigan and many other states have state laws that say local municipalities can't set their own drone ordinances. They local guys do anyway, and as snowghost said, any barney fife can do whatever they please, and unless it is commercial, I am not going to fly in places where the locals have said not too. I seem to be lucky, around me there aren't a whole lot.

 

[rolling56]

Unfortunately Sky Vector and b4UFly are about airspace, not about ground. UAS have both, and whereas they can't restrict or enforce any laws about where your drone flies, because the FAA has sole authority over the air, they can restrict where you take off, land and stand while flying. And because that could be established by some township, not even at the city or county level, it would be near impossible to get a database of every drone ordinance for every municipality for every state. In Michigan alone there are thousands, and ordinances can change on a weekly basis, I'd hate to think what California or Texas have for local muni's.

Once nice thing is I contacted my local DNR office about flying in state parks and forests. They actually sent me the document they sent out to park rangers on how to determine if drone flights were legal, and how to determine if they could or should cite. The funniest part is it actually told me how to get away with it, however I won't, and only fly with permission, especially Rec. Commercial I will stand my ground a little bit, but then the business can pay the legal fees as well.

Anyway, Michigan and many other states have state laws that say local municipalities can't set their own drone ordinances. They local guys do anyway, and as snowghost said, any barney fife can do whatever they please, and unless it is commercial, I am not going to fly in places where the locals have said not too. I seem to be lucky, around me there aren't a whole lot.

ya I agree. People need to plan ahead and find/call or whatever needs to be done to make sure so Barney doesn't come running. Don't just use an app/skyvector to see if you can fly there.

I fly around my neighborhood a lot and I have 1 (one) that yelled at me saying don't fly over my house you %&@%& and I just waved back and didn't go back his way.

There was a news story on the local TV station and some home owner was mad because someone was flying their drone and could see his backyard. He said he didn't mind them flying in his front yard????? so some people are just not drone friendly.

 

[CX500C82]

I believe you have accurately described the FAA definition of "aircraft".

I just realized that I started designing and building aircraft when I was folding sheets of notebook paper in the back of my third grade classroom. I believe my paper airplanes fit the FAA's definition of "aircraft" as quoted above.

If the FAA ever tries to enforce regulations against the operator of a paper airplane, I want to go to the courtroom and watch the proceedings!

Especially court cases involving rubber band powered airplanes vs. pointy nosed paper airplanes.

 

[CX500C82]

I believe you have accurately described the FAA definition of "aircraft".

I just realized that I started designing and building aircraft when I was folding sheets of notebook paper in the back of my third grade classroom. I believe my paper airplanes fit the FAA's definition of "aircraft" as quoted above.

If the FAA ever tries to enforce regulations against the operator of a paper airplane, I want to go to the courtroom and watch the proceedings!

Especially court cases involving rubber band powered airplanes vs. pointy nosed paper airplanes.

 

[Tim40]

It has nothing to do with that. Idiots have been flying in places not allowed and I've watched my hobby/job flying freedom go down the tubes because of those idiots. They're the ones to blame not the FAA

They are to blame for what they do - the FAA is to blame for what it is doing. Banning even proven safe aircraft such as tinywhoops. The FAA is wrong to do that. And the FAA is wrong when it tries to determine what we can and cannot post. Neither interfering with our personal communications, nor banning proven safe aircraft are about safety - begging the question - what is the FAA about these days?

 

[BigAl07]

They are to blame for what they do - the FAA is to blame for what it is doing. Banning even proven safe aircraft such as tinywhoops. The FAA is wrong to do that. And the FAA is wrong when it tries to determine what we can and cannot post. Neither interfering with our personal communications, nor banning proven safe aircraft are about safety - begging the question - what is the FAA about these days?

Where are you digging up your facts? The FAA doesn't care or govern what you post LOL! They only care about the SAFETY/LEGALITY of the flight itself. If you're lacking enough to post the evidence of an illegal flight online, everything that happens after that is completely on you.

It has been noted MANY times that the FAA doesn't say what you can post online.... it's the INTENT OF THE FLIGHT that matters and nothing more.

 

[snowghost]

There is a YouTuber that did a tutorial on using LAANC to get permission to fly in controlled airspace. He flew his drone while sitting in his car, zero VLOS. And he submitted the request as a Part 107 Pilot.

I was tempted to report it.

 

[Tim40]

Where are you digging up your facts? The FAA doesn't care or govern what you post LOL! They only care about the SAFETY/LEGALITY of the flight itself. If you're lacking enough to post the evidence of an illegal flight online, everything that happens after that is completely on you.

It has been noted MANY times that the FAA doesn't say what you can post online.... it's the INTENT OF THE FLIGHT that matters and nothing more.

I notice you came down hard on me for the posting part - but let the FAA slide for the tinywhoops part - so - let's say I say - hey yeah - the FAA doesn't care what we post - how could I have been so mistaken - but what of the tinywhoops - what justification does the FAA have for criminalizing those ... if used for spotterless FPV or BVLOS? Do you still agree - that the FAA is right about those? I am so curious. Keep in mind that they are ducted quads, and typically weigh just over an ounce. And they have been bumping into people, pets and things for 3 years now - without incident.

 

[BigAl07]

I notice you came down hard on me for the posting part - but let the FAA slide for the tinywhoops part - so - let's say I say - hey yeah - the FAA doesn't care what we post - how could I have been so mistaken - but what of the tinywhoops - what justification does the FAA have for criminalizing those ... if used for spotterless FPV or BVLOS? Do you still agree - that the FAA is right about those? I am so curious. Keep in mind that they are ducted quads, and typically weigh just over an ounce. And they have been bumping into people, pets and things for 3 years now - without incident.

The FAA (which I am a representative) has made rules & regulations for sUAS from 55lbs down. They have not merely selected Tinywhoops etc but they happen to fall into the category of sUAS so they are governed. Maybe in the future there will be "Categories" for sUAS (like there are for RID, but until them they are all lumped together. It is what it is.