3 Watch someone breaking the law. Read video comment

[snowghost]

Quoth the Raven “Nevermore.”

 

[hiflyer201]

Seriously???

They’re extremely clever

 

[AusFlyer]

Have you looked in your countries software where you can fly drones and where not ? I am thinking of Airmap and open Sky on your Iphone. That area may have been restricted for other reasons than just the dam, e,g, military or nature reserve. I never fly here in Australia if they area is not clearly defined as allowed. It is so easy to check. If this restricted airpace for mil;tary or nature reserve reason 9there may be rare birds breeding there), and the maps say the area is restricted you can expect a court order and you deserve it.

 

[Jamesz]

As several have pointed out, this is not a great advert for responsible drone operations. No observer, looking soley at the screen without proper situational awareness and having no clearly defined TO/landing area alongside a public highway is hardly good practice. Not terrible by any means, but really showing good judgement if you are publicly complaining about the actions of others.

 

[MS Coast]

Have you looked in your countries software where you can fly drones and where not ? I am thinking of Airmap and open Sky on your Iphone. That area may have been restricted for other reasons than just the dam, e,g, military or nature reserve. I never fly here in Australia if they area is not clearly defined as allowed. It is so easy to check. If this restricted airpace for mil;tary or nature reserve reason 9there may be rare birds breeding there), and the maps say the area is restricted you can expect a court order and you deserve it.

According to the FAA's B4YOUFLY, that area is unrestricted. (I'm not the OP.)

 

[TG3K]

Nice to see some of my old stomping grounds. Nice shots of the reservoir. I lived in Tujunga for about 20 years...almost bought a house in Vogel Flats. (Dodged a bullet on that one, since it was one of the homes lost in the Station Fire a few years later.)

That said, I've got to agree with the others here (even after reading your description of the video on YouTube). There were plenty of spaces to land that didn't involve a public roadway. And yes, the maintenance worker might have been blowing smoke about the restricted airspace, but you were flying over a water reservoir in the mountains above Los Angeles. If I was in his shoes I'd have probably checked you out and documented your vehicle as well.

 

[ericole]

I would have thought flying that close to the dam would be off limits. And within a national forest. Everywhere I went out west the last two years that had federal land or national parks was off limits.

 

[jaswalt]

I agree with all the other comments. Uncle Bob, I like your videos but I really didn't see any problem here unless you were out of battery and worried the drone would crash, which I doubt. Honestly, when I first started the video I thought the "illegal" activity was flying in a National Forest. That's not allow

It's easy to confuse national forests and national wildernesses with national parks. National parks are where the restrictions are highest. National forests or national wildernesses, on the other hand, have far fewer restrictions on things you can do for fun. Where national parks are almost always off limits to drones, or almost all motorized equipment of any kind, national forests are usually only restricted when it's posted. Of course, there are exceptions, and then that's why we check before we fly.

 

[jaswalt]

I would have thought flying that close to the dam would be off limits. And within a national forest. Everywhere I went out west the last two years that had federal land or national parks was off limits.

Park vs Forest is the difference.

 

[jaswalt]

I'm often confused by people who take pictures for a living or hobby getting ruffled when someone takes pictures of them. The same law that allows us to take pictures, allows others us to be captured in other pictures. Basically, anything that can be seen from public property is 100% fair game when it comes to capturing events on film--whether it's of interest to you or you are of interest to others.

 

[Donnie Frank]

You had no area marked off as a drone operation area. Your area of operation was a public road designed for use by ground vehicles. That would be equivalent to me setting up operations on a public highway and expecting everyone to avoid me flying my drone. You are way off base in your interpretation of regulations.

You do have some very nice videos, but this is not a good way to promote your channel.

If you think launching from public property is a problem, try launching from the ONLY alternative; PRIVATE property.

I always launch from public property for the very reason that it's public. Nobody owns it. Nobody is going to tell me to leave. Of course, one must exercise common sense when picking a launch/land area. Obviously landing or launching from the center of a road is idiocy. But there's nothing wrong with launching from a viewing area parking space. But again, common sense. There was one other car. Easily avoidable. No laws broken here.

D

 

[snowghost]

I think the point was about interfering with someone piloting an aircraft, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[LoudThunder]

Palerider was flying his drone over unpopulated areas and from what I guess would be within VLOS guide lines.

I agree that this was a great area to fly, but at 4:20 on the video, you can see the drone gaining attitude to fly over the hill before the parking area (RTH) comes into view, so obviously the drone was FPV for at least part of the trip. And then, when the drone is overhead, on landing appraoch, the pilot is watching his video screen without ever glancing either way to see if it is safe to land, In the beginning of the video, I saw a couple of bicyclists riding on the main road. So, if some bicyclists came into the parking area, he might not have heard them and flown his drone right into them,
(Deleted off topic link)

 

[DoomMeister]

If you think launching from public property is a problem, try launching from the ONLY alternative; PRIVATE property.

I always launch from public property for the very reason that it's public. Nobody owns it. Nobody is going to tell me to leave. Of course, one must exercise common sense when picking a launch/land area. Obviously landing or launching from the center of a road is idiocy. But there's nothing wrong with launching from a viewing area parking space. But again, common sense. There was one other car. Easily avoidable. No laws broken here.

D

Totally agree with using public property, but not in the middle of the road of the overlook. Directly in front of his vehicle or behind it would have made a much better area. Always best to mark off your operations area if in public also.

 

[NG Wildman]

I have to agree with the others: you took off and landed from a public road/parking area and at no point did the worker interfere with your flight. What I did see is that from 6:28 in the video, until landing (in the roadway) 24 seconds later, you had no situational awareness (head down so you only saw what we see in the video) - you even support this by stating in your caption 'I thought he left', meanwhile the truck was still there. As pilots it is our job to have that situational awareness at all times for this very reason.

§ 107.31 Visual line of sight aircraft operation.​

(a) With vision that is unaided by any device other than corrective lenses, the remote pilot in command, the visual observer (if one is used), and the person manipulating the flight control of the small unmanned aircraft system must be able to see the unmanned aircraft throughout the entire flight in order to:

(1) Know the unmanned aircraft's location;
(2) Determine the unmanned aircraft's attitude, altitude, and direction of flight;
(3) Observe the airspace for other air traffic or hazards; and
(4) Determine that the unmanned aircraft does not endanger the life or property of another.

Not trying to be too critical but since you made the point about rules. . . . .

View attachment 142190

I agree completely. It appears there was no conversation at all. I see no interference, however I do see a poorly chosen take off and landing spot not marked out at all and lack of situational awareness. I have no problem with someone documenting the vehicle and channel. If a pilot is doing nothing wrong there is no big deal. If, however, there was to be an incident, there is now documentation to be used as a lead to follow up on. Just because we are not intentionally breaking the law, it does not mean that we are above suspicion or general safety checks by officials. It really looked to me like the driver just checked out what was up and recorded info without trying to bother the pilot.

 

[kjonyou]

I would almost bet the dam and reservoir is considered critical infrastructure. That lake is in Los Angeles National Forrest.

CA law says Drones are currently allowed in State Parks, State Beaches, State Historic Parks, State Recreational Areas, and State Vehicular Recreation Areas except where prohibited by a District Superintendent’s posted order. But prohibit in state parks wilderness areas, cultural preserves, and natural preserves.

So I am confused, where does the National Forrest fall in this equation?

 

[DoomMeister]

I would almost bet the dam and reservoir is considered critical infrastructure. That lake is in Los Angeles National Forrest.

CA law says Drones are currently allowed in State Parks, State Beaches, State Historic Parks, State Recreational Areas, and State Vehicular Recreation Areas except where prohibited by a District Superintendent’s posted order. But prohibit in state parks wilderness areas, cultural preserves, and natural preserves.

So I am confused, where does the National Forrest fall in this equation?

Most National Forest lands are open to fly unless posted. This means no launch/control/recovery from that property if posted as no drones.

Someone likely reported seeing the drone and the employee took photos in case their was some issue.

 

[DarkCircle]

You had no area marked off as a drone operation area. Your area of operation was a public road designed for use by ground vehicles. That would be equivalent to me setting up operations on a public highway and expecting everyone to avoid me flying my drone. You are way off base in your interpretation of regulations.

You do have some very nice videos, but this is not a good way to promote your channel.

Maybe he thinks you have to land were your homepoint is?

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

And yes, the maintenance worker might have been blowing smoke about the restricted airspace, but you were flying over a water reservoir in the mountains above Los Angeles.

I would almost bet the dam and reservoir is considered critical infrastructure.

This is possible, though I could find no info on that particular dam and drone flight restriction.
Sometimes it is buried in some literature online somewhere about use 'on' the property.
But not sure it can apply to over as well.

Interestingly, just about ALL reservoir / dam infrastructure here in Australia seems to be off limits to drones, and some I have investigated are very isolated . . . a few are suburban, have public access, and clear 'no drone' rules.

With remote dams, I don't think it'd be a possible pollution thing if a drone happened to crash into the water etc, too much other stuff goes into (or goes on in) the water to worry about a bit of plastic and maybe some battery remnants / chemical over time.