Max Altitude Limit for USA

[Clapper]

Ok. Fine. I will add the risks of flying with guys who will not hesitate to fly a drone over 500' AGL.

Got it. Thanks.

You're welcome.
I will put up with every rich jerk private pilot who does a ridiculously low pass over my house just because they want to impress someone by buzzing mountains, because yes, there is no rule that says they cannot do so and it is just my opinion that they should not do so. I will probably skip going on their chat board and telling them what jerks they are for not following my preference as if it were a rule becaue well that would just be a waste of time.

 

[jeplane]

Actually, anybody from a drone pilot to a Space shuttle commander who is careless and reckless certainly deserves to be called a jerk.

I am both a pilot who makes a living at flying, and a hobbyist photographer who uses a drone as an extra camera. So I am certainly aware of the both side of the coin.

I would appreciate a mutual understanding of how we can all share the airspace, and I will certainly continue to cringe when I see in this forum how some fly "above the clouds" or tell other that the Mavic can climb to 1500' after all. To me, this is just as bad as a pilot buzzing your house...

 

[dwallersv]

Actually, anybody from a drone pilot to a Space shuttle commander who is careless and reckless certainly deserves to be called a jerk.

I am both a pilot who makes a living at flying, and a hobbyist photographer who uses a drone as an extra camera. So I am certainly aware of the both side of the coin.

I would appreciate a mutual understanding of how we can all share the airspace, and I will certainly continue to cringe when I see in this forum how some fly "above the clouds" or tell other that the Mavic can climb to 1500' after all. To me, this is just as bad as a pilot buzzing your house...

You can be generally safe from DJI drones if you stay above 1500' AGL, and that's the majority of drones that realistically might be above 500'.

Seems every bit as reasonable as demanding that sUAV pilots stay below 400'. In fact, it is your safety at stake here, so it seems even more incumbent on you to make accommodations, rather than demand that thousands of others do so.

By the way, for others reading I'm Mr. "Above The Clouds".

 

[jeplane]

Unfortunately we have operators going above 1500' too, so that won't work.

I give up.

You guys continue to fly witout line of sight, above clouds, altitude to whatever your drone can do and let's all hope for the best. As a pilot, I will hope to never have your Mavic in my windshield, and as a drone operator, I will hope to never end up in one.

Alas I fear that it is only a matter of time...

 

[Thirdy]

it all boils down to common sense

 

[Glenn Goodlett]

I think the altitude rules may become more restrictive in the USA. Do you think DJI can limit altitude (height over take off point really) in just a few keystrokes? If they start going through windshields, I bet things change rapidly. About our only hope that I can think of is ADS-B. I think we may see some form of ADS-B starting with the Phantom 5 or maybe the Mavic 2. I sure hope so, because the odds are getting shorter everyday.

 

[dwallersv]

Unfortunately we have operators going above 1500' too, so that won't work.

I give up.

You guys continue to fly witout line of sight, above clouds, altitude to whatever your drone can do and let's all hope for the best. As a pilot, I will hope to never have your Mavic in my windshield, and as a drone operator, I will hope to never end up in one.

Alas I fear that it is only a matter of time...

Perhaps. However, the fact that it hasn't happened yet, with the number of sUAVs out there, over the last 3 years or so, speaks well of all pilots, their situational awareness, and steps taken to be cautious and safe.

Maybe your fears are exaggerated.

 

[dwallersv]

If they start going through windshields, I bet things change rapidly.

I agree.

Thing is, they're not going through windshields. Sure, the potential risk seems really big and scary, but then actual experience isn't lining up.

So maybe we poorly understand the full scope of the risk environment and what mitigates the risk. Perhaps we are over-estimating the risk, and under-estimating the skill and competence of pilots, both manned and unmanned.

I don't know, just thinking it through, as results don't seem to support the theory.

About our only hope that I can think of is ADS-B. I think we may see some form of ADS-B starting with the Phantom 5 or maybe the Mavic 2. I sure hope so, because the odds are getting shorter everyday.

I agree completely. This is the solution, and DJI has every incentive to find ways to liberate our flying rather than restrict it, lest they destroy their position in the market.

 

[TxArch DroneGuy]

Are you sure? I've never heard this.

Clapper is absolutely right.

 

[TxArch DroneGuy]

Clapper is absolutely right.

But also absolutely unsafe; no reason for a hobbyist to exceed 400'

 

[Pathogen]

worst thread of 2017 contender, we have here

 

[TomMcW]

FYI there is no altitude limit for US hobbyist flights. No FAA or other US legal altitude limit for non-commercial drones under 55 pounds. As per Public Law 112-95 Section 336, the FAA may not make any such rules applying to "model aircraft", and all common recreational drones fall within the definition of "model aircraft" under that law. For commercial drone flights the FAA altitude limit is 400 feet above the ground or above any structure within 400 feet of the drone.

I don't agree with this. The way the laws are written is terribly unclear and the recent lawsuit that eliminated the registration requirement is a good indication that the regs are not at all settled right now. But currently the Special Rule for Model Aircraft is what is in effect. It does not lay down many specific rules, instead it requires that "The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines."
Clear as mud.

So basically the FAA has pushed the rule making off onto unnamed "community-based organizations." At least, now, the FAA has gotten together with two such organizations, AMA and AUVSI, and put together the Know Before You Fly website which lays out the AMA's rules which now include a 400 ft altitude limit.

So, in effect, the AMA's guidelines become law. It doesn't have to specifically be the AMA, but you have to be able to show that you are operating under guidelines from a national CBO. So at this point, unless you can find another CBO that the FAA will accept and has different rules, 400 feet is the limit. (As a side note, the AMA rules used to say 400 feet only within 3 miles of an airport. But now that they have teamed up with the FAA and published the KBUF site that has changed to a blanket 400 feet. So, obviously somebody thinks that number is important.)

 

[NaiveFlight]

I have fun at just under 400 ft., well above any tree, great sights... I don't need further higher. I do however love flying long distance, I cant wait to try 3miles. I know the mavic can do 1600ft/500m, I wish it could do 1500m but I still wouldn't try it. But the available liberty is a cool thing I think

 

[UAFuzz]

I don't agree with this. The way the laws are written is terribly unclear and the recent lawsuit that eliminated the registration requirement is a good indication that the regs are not at all settled right now. But currently the Special Rule for Model Aircraft is what is in effect. It does not lay down many specific rules, instead it requires that "The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines."
Clear as mud.

So basically the FAA has pushed the rule making off onto unnamed "community-based organizations." At least, now, the FAA has gotten together with two such organizations, AMA and AUVSI, and put together the Know Before You Fly website which lays out the AMA's rules which now include a 400 ft altitude limit.

So, in effect, the AMA's guidelines become law. It doesn't have to specifically be the AMA, but you have to be able to show that you are operating under guidelines from a national CBO. So at this point, unless you can find another CBO that the FAA will accept and has different rules, 400 feet is the limit. (As a side note, the AMA rules used to say 400 feet only within 3 miles of an airport. But now that they have teamed up with the FAA and published the KBUF site that has changed to a blanket 400 feet. So, obviously somebody thinks that number is important.)

Excellent post, I read it this way as well. The way 336 of 112-95 is written, it would seem that if you aren't operating along the lines of "community-based set of safety guidelines" you are now outside the statutory criteria that prohibits the FAA from applying rules to your aircraft and are now subject to 107.

 

[KBerrah]

I'm throwing a stupid question:
- There are rules for certain regions (for example near airports) where drones are not welcome and a risk for any manned flying vehicle. What about the opposite ? what not proposing some flying area for drones only ? for example regions where flying with a helicopter/plane can be dangerous (cliff, bridges, hills) but not with a drone ? Maybe having a local drones pilots association submitting a "Drones Only Zone" with a "24h in advance announcement of Drone flights" might be a win-win situation, with "radius and height of the flying zone" subject to negotiation with the local Drone Association and the local airport?

 

[msinger]

So basically the FAA has pushed the rule making off onto unnamed "community-based organizations." At least, now, the FAA has gotten together with two such organizations, AMA and AUVSI

On the Know Before You Fly website (here), the FAA states the following:

"Follow community-based safety guidelines, as developed by organizations such as the Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA)."

I'm no lawyer, but it seems you can follow the rules of any community-based organization. I've never seen the FAA specifically list the approved organizations. Nor does the FAA explain in detail what "community-based organization" means. It seems like you and I could create our own organization today, draft a set of rules, and follow them.


Some related/interesting links regarding community-based organizations (CBOs):

• This guy started his own CBO
• Rich Hanson (leader of the AMA Government and Regulatory Affairs) describes what he thinks CBO means here
• Loretta Alkalay (an Aviation attorney & previous FAA employee) explains she does not know what CBO means here
• Peter Sachs (an attorney) believes the AMA is the only CBO the FAA recognizes (as of today) in his article here
• The Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft states a CBO includes any groups that "meet the statutory definition"
• Public Law 112-95, Section 336 states you only need to follow the rules of a CBO (you don't need to be a member of it)

 

[Slayerstwin]

I'm not sure what the big deal is but I have my controller set at 120 m that lets me get to about 393 feet that's fine with me I don't need to max altitude to take some pictures.

 

[Clapper]

This debate or disagreement is like many others, guns for example. Fearful people who see no evil in controlling others because they know they know best and think more strict rules are fine because only a jerk would do more anyway. People who think government and know what's best for everyone types should not be allowed to impose their opinions on the freedoms of others will always reject such sanctimonious dictates. I am in the middle, and I am a lawyer. I follow the law as written. I don't follow someone's reading that spins it one way or the other. Advisory or aspirational language on the FAA website is not enforceable law folks. The actual law was quoted above. One last thought - fearful people tend to see limiting freedom as a no brainer. They want to regulate the world into being danger free. They mean well, but they always go too far. Eventually people reject their control because a totally safe life is not worth living. If you disagree, that is your right. But don't kid yourself that your truth is absolute. You're just scared of things that have statistically minimal chances of happening. With you, the terrorists always win.

 

[msinger]

I am in the middle, and I am a lawyer. I follow the law as written.

As a lawyer who follows the law as written, can you explain how you're following this law?

"the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization"

 

[True fly]

Ok what about if you want to check out a waterfall on the side of a mountain that is 700m up because we are restricted to 500m we can't send our drone up and get some nice footage of it because we are limited to 500m but the mountain is 1200m high but if I fly my MP from the top of that mountain I can go 400ft up from there or as the MP max setting is 500m witch if I did that the MP would be actually 1700m high that's why I think we should be able to set our MP to 5000m witch is what there originally able to do I for one wouldn't go to 5000m but there is a couple of places that are from 500m to 1000m that I would like to check out but can't because it is limited to 500m but at the end of the day my MP if I was flying there would be only 150 to 300 ft of the ground as I would be following the contour of the mountain so I would be staying with in the safety regulations