"Operating" a drone in a space versus just "flying over" a space

[Battlefamed]

I see a lot of regulations that prohibit "taking off, landing, and operating a UAV in X space." However, they do allow UAVs to fly over that space. (And also, the FAA allows UAVs to fly over any non-FAA-regulated space)

What is the difference between "operating" a UAV and simply "flying over" a space?

 

[sar104]

Ground flight operations are takeoff, landing, and, in the case of drones, piloting. So where it is prohibited you cannot takeoff, land, or pilot from that location. "Flying over" is self-explanatory.

 

[Battlefamed]

Ground flight operations are takeoff, landing, and, in the case of drones, piloting. So where it is prohibited you cannot takeoff, land, or pilot from that location. "Flying over" is self-explanatory.

But to "fly over" a space, wouldn't I need to "pilot" my drone?

 

[sar104]

But to "fly over" a space, wouldn't I need to "pilot" my drone?

Yes - but not necessarily from directly underneath it. For example, you can take off from just outside a National Park and legally fly over it, provided that you keep the aircraft within VLOS and don't violate any other rules.

 

[MS Coast]

Yes - but not necessarily from directly underneath it. For example, you can take off from just outside a National Park and legally fly over it, provided that you keep the aircraft within VLOS and don't violate any other rules.

Wow. That's very interesting. Can you explain a little more about the specifics - minimum setback from the boundary for takeoff, altitude minimums over the park property, applicable regs, ...

Thanks.

 

[MA2 317]

Yes - but not necessarily from directly underneath it. For example, you can take off from just outside a National Park and legally fly over it, provided that you keep the aircraft within VLOS and don't violate any other rules.

How about this wording from my County park...

• No person shall operate a drone below the altitude of four hundred (400) feet above the land surface of any park.

A couple of years ago it use to say from the park property, now it's "above the land".



.

 

[sar104]

MA2 317" data-source="post: 1260462" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

How about this wording from my County park...

• No person shall operate a drone below the altitude of four hundred (400) feet above the land surface of any park.

A couple of years ago it use to say from the park property, now it's "above the land".



.

What about it? It's in violation of federal law, obviously, because the county has no jurisdiction over the airspace. That hasn't prevented many local authorities from trying to assert it, though.

 

[sar104]

Wow. That's very interesting. Can you explain a little more about the specifics - minimum setback from the boundary for takeoff, altitude minimums over the park property, applicable regs, ...

Thanks.

There's no setback - you are either on their land or not. As for minimums, there are none of those either, although you might run the risk of them pursuing you for harassing wildlife (or even lowlife) if you fly too low.

There are no applicable regulations other than the relevant FAA rules (14 CFR Part 107), because only the FAA regulates the airspace.

 

[MA2 317]

What about it? It's in violation of federal law, obviously, because the county has no jurisdiction over the airspace. That hasn't prevented many local authorities from trying to assert it, though.

My thoughts exactly.

Thanks.

 

[Vic Moss]

MA2 317" data-source="post: 1260462" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

How about this wording from my County park...

• No person shall operate a drone below the altitude of four hundred (400) feet above the land surface of any park.

A couple of years ago it use to say from the park property, now it's "above the land".



.

Please reach out to me and let me know which park district uses this language. It is federally preempted, and technically illegal. I'll reach out to them.

[email protected].

 

[theDRONEranger]

@sar104 has provided accurate responses.

UAS pilots have a set responsibility to be aware of, and abide by, the FAA (USA), municipality and landowner applicable laws. One should never just assume the flight controller program is the ultimate blessing if the UAS can take off. Know your rights and responsibilities before any takeoff. A safety and privilege checklist may be your best friend! Stealing the phrase: “Know before you Go!”

 

[whicks1]

UAV coach has an interesting post out this week that is topic-adjacent that you might be interested in: Avigation Easement Laws Could Create Toll Roads in the Sky for Drones I think this would mostly concern the commercial/delivery sUAS industry, but a worthwhile read nonetheless.

 

[Vic Moss]

UAV coach has an interesting post out this week that is topic-adjacent that you might be interested in: Avigation Easement Laws Could Create Toll Roads in the Sky for Drones I think this would mostly concern the commercial/delivery sUAS industry, but a worthwhile read nonetheless.

It depends on how the law is worded. Some (TX) did not specify 44809 v. 107. The TX one is dead now however.

 

[MA2 317]

Please reach out to me and let me know which park district uses this language. It is federally preempted, and technically illegal. I'll reach out to them.

[email protected].

I sent a PM to you.

Thank You.

 

[Vic Moss]

I emailed the Park District. I'll report back when I get an answer.

 

[c64-dev]

So, if I understand what @sar104 is saying, you can legally fly a drone over a property like a national park or any other area that claims to not allow drones, so long as you don't take off or land in them?

How would that work in the case of a city? I thought that many cities prohibit drones. If they don't have any jurisdiction over the airspace then you could just go on a small hill or something just outside the city's limits and legally fly VLOS over the city itself?

 

[Vic Moss]

So, if I understand what @sar104 is saying, you can legally fly a drone over a property like a national park or any other area that claims to not allow drones, so long as you don't take off or land in them?

How would that work in the case of a city? I thought that many cities prohibit drones. If they don't have any jurisdiction over the airspace then you could just go on a small hill or something just outside the city's limits and legally fly VLOS over the city itself?

Not many cities outright ban drones. But many do in their parks. And yes, you can fly over their property as long as you’re following all FAA rules.

 

[Ol' Sparky]

Pretty hard to keep 100' from people and 200' from roads while flying over a city without your 107 and permission

 

[Vic Moss]

Pretty hard to keep 100' from people and 200' from roads while flying over a city without your 107 and permission

There is no standoff in the US, 107 or otherwise.

 

[Capt KO]

Operating doesn't mean the drone only where the pilot is operating/standing. I have to fly my local parks lake from a nearby public road. Gots big gators