Unmarked no fly zones

[sar104]

1. Sorry about the geography
2. If it generates power, it is DOE and covered under the restriction I posted.
Ergo, not all those restricted sites are on the FAA sUAS facilities map
Case in point, I believe the South Texas Nuclear is DOE but look, it is not on the FAA sUAS facilities map:
View attachment 94048

That's not how it works. The DOE worked with the FAA to restrict flights over seven specific sites. Those are in the list that is linked in your earlier post, and are all on the FAA facilities map. You can look them up. The location discussed above is not covered. Nor is your Texas location.

FAA Restricts Drone Operations Over DOE Facilities

www.faa.gov

 

[sar104]

I'll make sure to fly over the STNP and send you the fine.
Just because it is not listed does not mean you can.
Since when was the government ever right?

The question was whether overflight is prohibited by law. If this discussion has devolved into "well okay - so it's not prohibited but someone might try to fine you anyway" then I don't have any more to contribute.

 

[AirShark]

I work for the Corp in Massachusetts. I fly drones recreationally and for the Corp. Pt 107 licensed. If you were operating from Corp property you could be politely asked to stop if noticed, and ticketed if you refuse. Nobody's going to grab you and throw you in a van and send you to a extradition site. Having permenent no fly zones is being discussed with the FAA and the process to request them. With the different agencies, reqion's, departments, and changing rules this is unfortunately a slow process. Do your diligence, if notified to cease it's your decision which path to take.

 

[AirShark]

Just for clarification, some parks are NFZ and stated as such. And it's the pilots responsibility to check NOTAMs

 

[AirShark]

There's a facility in NH near Hampton Beach. Small facility looks like a powerplant not bigger than some Walmarts. Was thinking of flying in the area and no restrictions showed up. Upon further investigation I found out it was a nuclear power plant. Not worth the problem especially since I'm trying to protect my security clearance. Everything about drone flying is to avoid hazards. If you BELIEVE you in the right, flying safely, and obeying all laws and common sense have at it. Again, if you're flying on Corp property and asked to leave chose your path. If you're flying over a nuclear power plant and detained....let us know what happens.

 

[sar104]

And it is according to what I have presented.
Are we to advise common sense or would you rather someone get on the news?
The discussion did not evolve as you suggest.
Flights within 400 ft of power stations are prohibited.
Not by the FAA but still prohibited.

No it isn't - you provided no evidence at all, and the FAA restriction of 400 ft is stated, by the FAA, to apply to just those seven sites. Now either provide a cited reference or stop making stuff up.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

or stop making stuff up.

Is about as non technical in terms as I've even seen from you @sar104

Funny, they don't say from SFC to whatever alt they like, just up to 400' (where of course higher is against drone flight rules), or making it simply a total NFZ within the boundaries defined.
Just a weird little thing I noticed all airspace regulators seem to do.

 

[sar104]

I cited my sources yet you argue the places I have listed are not on the list or maps.
Screw the maps and lists.
If the FAA says FAA Restricts Drone Operations Over DOE Facilities then ALL are off limits.
Besides, here is your 400 ft limit from the same source:
"The FAA has banned drone flight up to 400 feet within the lateral boundaries of numerous Department of Energy facilities".

Also many states have adopted the following:

https://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/85R/billtext/pdf/HB01643F.pdf#navpanes=0

So quit passing bad info and err on the side of caution.

You really ought to read before you cite:

The FAA and DOE have agreed to restrict drone flights up to 400 feet within the lateral boundaries of these sites:​

​

• Hanford Site, Franklin County, WA
  • Pantex Site, Panhandle, TX
  • Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM
  • Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID
  • Savannah River National Laboratory, Aiken, SC
  • Y-12 National Security Site, Oak Ridge, TN
  • Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN

The FAA specifies on that very web page the sites over which flights are prohibited. It is not all sites. How much clearer do they have to be for you to understand?

 

[sar104]

Is about as non technical in terms as I've even seen from you @sar104

Funny, they don't say from SFC to whatever alt they like, just up to 400' (where of course higher is against drone flight rules), or making it simply a total NFZ within the boundaries defined.
Just a weird little thing I noticed all airspace regulators seem to do.

One of the more frustrating aspects of interactions on these forums is dealing with posters who post demonstrably incorrect information and then simply refuse to accept that they were wrong, no matter how definitive the evidence.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

If the FAA says FAA Restricts Drone Operations Over DOE Facilities then ALL are off limits.

Sorry, but it doesn't say that.

"At the request of U.S. national security and law enforcement agencies, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is using its existing authority under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations § 99.7 – “Special Security Instructions” – to address concerns about unauthorized drone operations over seven Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. "

Then goes on to list just the 7 of them specifically . . .

That seems pretty clear cut and not a total ban . . . but I agree, most would avoid doing such flights as it's not terribly scenic over such places.
I guess some might have special interest in filming industrial type sites if they are into that, I do like old abandoned such places.
Common sense, good altitude, have a plan and make it quick.

 

[pmshop]

One of the more frustrating aspects of interactions on these forums is dealing with posters who post demonstrably incorrect information and then simply refuse to accept that they were wrong, no matter how definitive the evidence.

And you are one of them
Love the ban feature
I am done.
Rather follow someone that follows the rules than argues and bends them.

 

[sar104]

And you really need to quit trying to get people in trouble with your obviously bad info and challenging state of mind.
I do not care how "respected" you are.
CAN'T YOU READ?
Also many states have adopted the following:
https://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/85R/billtext/pdf/HB01643F.pdf#navpanes=0

You are going to get people in trouble!

People, just check all applicable laws when you can.
I can save you some grief in the end.
Just because it is not on the map does not mean it is not restricted.

That law attempts to claim airspace jurisdiction in contradiction of Federal law. It's been debated ad nauseam. And it doesn't apply in Georgia, which was the location of the facility being discussed.

 

[sar104]

And you are one of them
Love the ban feature
I am done.
Rather follow someone that follows the rules than argues and bends them.

Agreed. Welcome to the ignore list.

 

[AirShark]

The FAA website states "Drones are prohibited from flying over designated national security sensitive facilities. Operations are prohibited from the ground up to 400 feet above ground level, and apply to all types and purposes of UAS flight operations." Rather ambiguous but I would think a military base or a nuclear facility might apply. This forum stringently rebukes someone who fly's beyond battery limits so I would guess it would recommend caution flying around sites you question such as nuclear power facilities and such. Use your responsibile judgment as a pilot.

 

[sar104]

The FAA website states "Drones are prohibited from flying over designated national security sensitive facilities. Operations are prohibited from the ground up to 400 feet above ground level, and apply to all types and purposes of UAS flight operations." Rather ambiguous but I would think a military base or a nuclear facility might apply. This forum stringently rebukes someone who fly's beyond battery limits so I would guess it would recommend caution flying around sites you question such as nuclear power facilities and such. Use your responsibile judgment as a pilot.

No - designated means those that are listed. The discussion was not about facilities that it might not be prudent to fly over - it was about which facilities it is illegal to fly over.

 

[pmshop]

The FAA website states "Drones are prohibited from flying over designated national security sensitive facilities. Operations are prohibited from the ground up to 400 feet above ground level, and apply to all types and purposes of UAS flight operations." Rather ambiguous but I would think a military base or a nuclear facility might apply. This forum stringently rebukes someone who fly's beyond battery limits so I would guess it would recommend caution flying around sites you question such as nuclear power facilities and such. Use your responsible judgment as a pilot.

My point exactly!
But people want to argue "well, it is not on the list so its OK"

 

[AirShark]

Or just fly circles over the site above 400' for fun and see what happens. Let this forum know the results we would greatly appreciate it.

 

[sar104]

Or just fly circles over the site above 400' for fun and see what happens. Let this forum know the results we would greatly appreciate it.

Above 400 ft would contravene Part 107.

 

[pmshop]

Or just fly circles over the site above 400' for fun and see what happens. Let this forum know the results we would greatly appreciate it.

Maybe SAR would volunteer???

 

[AirShark]

My mistake, below 400'. Try 50' just for fun. Although I believe the cooling towers might reach to 200'. You facility might vary. Although if you do fly and get in trouble then be careful of posting you results on this forum for you might get chastised for not being a responsible pilot. Ultimately you are the PIC and are responsible for making sound, safe decisions.