Mavic 3 Range test - 30,000 ft - REPORTED TO FAA

[fiddlepilot]

There is no rule anywhere about your height relative to the launch point.
All height rules are based on the drone's height above the ground below it.

It’s more complex and more generous than that.

Assuming this site is correct. See link below at end of post. If you climb a 1000 ft tower and launch the Drone, you are now immediately at 1000ft above the ground. You are free to fly to 1400ft if you stay within 400ft radius of the 1000ft tower.

It’s common sense because planes will make sure they are well above that 1000ft tower for a good distance. You can fly in that envelop.

I assume it’s true if you didn’t launch from the tower as well

400 AGL

 

[Meta4]

It’s more complex and more generous than that.

It's as simple as I said.
There's no need to complicate things by talking about towers.
I was pointing out that where you launch and the drone's height relative to that, is irrelevant to regulations about height of the drone.

 

[fiddlepilot]

It's as simple as I said.
There's no need to complicate things by talking about towers.
I was pointing out that where you launch and the drone's height relative to that, is irrelevant to regulations about height of the drone.

Your first sentence is true. Not relative to your launch point.

But according to that link, your second sentence, although simple, is not right.

If you are near a tall structure or say a cliff you can go above it even if the ground (directly below) is well above 400ft. As long as you stay within 400ft radius of that tall structure.

Sorry but you do need to take tall structures into account. If you fly off a 500ft cliff you are not in immediate violation. And you are not about to hit a low flying plane. Which your simple explanation and you are reiterating says to ignore.

It makes perfect sense.

 

[Meta4]

Your first sentence is true. Not relative to your launch point.

But according to that link, your second sentence, although simple, is not right.

If you are near a tall structure or say a cliff you can go above it even if the ground (directly below) is well above 400ft. As long as you stay within 400ft radius of that tall structure.

And I still stand by what I've written.
It is completely accurate.

You are unnecessarily complicating things.

 

[BigAl07]

Your first sentence is true. Not relative to your launch point.

But according to that link, your second sentence, although simple, is not right.

If you are near a tall structure or say a cliff you can go above it even if the ground (directly below) is well above 400ft. As long as you stay within 400ft radius of that tall structure.

You're quoting Part 107 Regulations and ~44809 do not have the STRUCTURE allowance.

And a Cliff is NOT a structure so that does NO count!

 

[fiddlepilot]

You're quoting Part 107 Regulations and ~44809 do not have the STRUCTURE allowance.

And a Cliff is NOT a structure so that does NO count!

I don’t think if it’s natural or man made the rules change. I’d like to see a reference on that.

 

[BigAl07]

I don’t think if it’s natural or man made the rules change. I’d like to see a reference on that.

I'm not doing your legwork for you. A hill/mountain/cliff isn't a structure.

The FAA stated "Structures" and they don't use that word by accident. Go ahead and look up the definition of a Structure and let me know.

The FAA defines ground and terrain clearly and that doesn't include "Structures".

Also you didn't mention the reference to Part 107 vs ~44809 in regards to the above allowances. If you're going to try and quote rules & regulations publicly you need to know the facts inside and out or you're giving bad advice.

 

[BigAl07]

Call your local FSDO and run your statement "re:cliff" by them and get their official statement.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/bos/

Phone: (781) 238-7500
Fax: (781) 238-7550

Better yet email them so you have it in writing for safe keeping:

>>>>> Contact FSDO by email <<<<

 

[fiddlepilot]

You're quoting Part 107 Regulations and ~44809 do not have the STRUCTURE allowance.

You’re right

If you have 107 you can fly 400 ft above a structure.

If you don’t have 107 you can’t.

What Happens If You Fly A Drone Above 400 Feet? - Pilot Institute

Stricter rules on drone flight may seem jarring for pilots who have been flying their drones for close to a decade, but the current climate created by increased accessibility to drones have made them necessary. Not only are drones normally restricted from flying in controlled airspace, but they...

pilotinstitute.com

 

[fiddlepilot]

I'm not doing your legwork for you. A hill/mountain/cliff isn't a structure.

The FAA stated "Structures" and they don't use that word by accident. Go ahead and look up the definition of a Structure and let me know.

The FAA defines ground and terrain clearly and that doesn't include "Structures".

Also you didn't mention the reference to Part 107 vs ~44809 in regards to the above allowances. If you're going to try and quote rules & regulations publicly you need to know the facts inside and out or you're giving bad advice.

So should the person that quoted the AGL rules.

 

[dirkclod]

So should the person that quoted the AGL rules.

Meaning ?

 

[fiddlepilot]

Meaning ?

Mavic 3 Range test - 30,000 ft - REPORTED TO FAA

I agree the 1.2 miles is generous but at the same time if somebody own a large drone like hexacopters will apply the same rule and probably they have to have a baseline that I agree is super generous for a Mavic 3.

mavicpilots.com

Click the link above and will take you to the post. The preview that this forum put there is a bit confusing.

I didn’t know the 400 ft rule varied. This post was vague. As was the site I was referencing. I don’t think it mentions Part 107 either.

I appreciate @BigAl07 correction.

 

[dirkclod]

Mavic 3 Range test - 30,000 ft - REPORTED TO FAA

I agree the 1.2 miles is generous but at the same time if somebody own a large drone like hexacopters will apply the same rule and probably they have to have a baseline that I agree is super generous for a Mavic 3.

mavicpilots.com

Click the link above and will take you to the post. The preview that this forum put there is a bit confusing.

I didn’t know the 400 ft rule varied. This post was vague. As was the site I was referencing. I don’t think it mentions Part 107 either.

I appreciate @BigAl07 correction.

Well if you fly from a cliff that’s say 500’ you could go up 400’.
Now if you were to fly off that cliff straight out you would be 100’
to high.

 

[dirkclod]

And guys we seemed to have got off topic. Let’s try and stay
on the main topic of this thread.
Thanks.

 

[BigAl07]

I've contacted that site owner and suggested they add the MISSING information in their statement. They need to be factually correct if they're going to be coming off as a Subject Matter Expert.

 

[fiddlepilot]

And guys we seemed to have got off topic. Let’s try and stay
on the main topic of this thread.
Thanks.

It wasn’t that far off topic. Initially @zeusfl thought he was following the rules. He learned that he wasn’t. And the 400 ft rule came up and I suspect a few folks (including me) learned something about that rule. As well as informing a web site that was misleading.

All good, no?

 

[dirkclod]

It wasn’t that far off topic. Initially @zeusfl thought he was following the rules. He learned that he wasn’t. And the 400 ft rule came up and I suspect a few folks (including me) learned something about that rule. As well as informing a web site that was misleading.

All good, no?

No and your pushing it. I would stop while I was ahead.

 

[fiddlepilot]

No and your pushing it. I would stop while I was ahead.
View attachment 141408

If you can’t see this thread, with its bumps, wasn’t a positive thing then this site has little hope. No wonder the post activity is so low here.

 

[zeusfl]

Well.... Is higher than DJI Forums and you can find much better information here. Nothing personal.

 

[zeusfl]

Well going back to the topic. The FAA officer will be sending over the mail some documentation and mention to keep a paper he is going to send me in case another officer try to contact me, show that document. I am not sure what he is talking about. I assume will be the warning.