DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

What constitutes "over" a car or person

chakalakasp

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
63
Reactions
38
Age
44
Location
United States
An interesting point was brought up in a Facebook thread by someone who felt confident they had a grasp of drone regulations in which they mentioned that they felt that the "right of way" by a highway was considered to be a part of the highway, and so flying above the right away when cars were driving by was equivalent to flying directly over cars, which is of course a no-no. I can't see to find any real information about what constitutes flying "above" vehicles with people in them or above people -- my common sense approach would be to assume that they mean "anything where there is a significant likelihood the drone would crash into the vehicles or people in the event of an unexpected mechanical failure", but maybe the FAA has it spelled out better somewhere. In my mind, hovering 200 feet up 50 feet to the south of the southernmost lane of an east-west highway is far enough away where you are no longer hovering "over" the vehicles any more, but ultimately what I think doesn't matter, what's law is what matters. What constitutes flying "over" something?
 
  • Like
Reactions: iamcostas
An interesting point was brought up in a Facebook thread by someone who felt confident they had a grasp of drone regulations in which they mentioned that they felt that the "right of way" by a highway was considered to be a part of the highway, and so flying above the right away when cars were driving by was equivalent to flying directly over cars, which is of course a no-no. I can't see to find any real information about what constitutes flying "above" vehicles with people in them or above people -- my common sense approach would be to assume that they mean "anything where there is a significant likelihood the drone would crash into the vehicles or people in the event of an unexpected mechanical failure", but maybe the FAA has it spelled out better somewhere. In my mind, hovering 200 feet up 50 feet to the south of the southernmost lane of an east-west highway is far enough away where you are no longer hovering "over" the vehicles any more, but ultimately what I think doesn't matter, what's law is what matters. What constitutes flying "over" something?
Here is the FAA reg covering it... takes a bit to read.
 
Here is the FAA reg covering it... takes a bit to read.
Thanks! Yeah, that seems just as vague as it used to be, though it seems now that you can transiently fly over cars even if they are occupied by people not a part of the shoot. You just can't "fly sustained" over them, which I assume means no hovering over a busy highway and no flying along the length of a highway while there is traffic. Still, I've never seen anywhere where they constitute what "above" means -- maybe they literally mean "above" as in "were you do draw a line straight down from the drone's current position, that line would intersect the vehicle", which would mean that even hovering 100 ft over the shoulder of the interstate would not put you at risk of violating this rule.
 
Err on the side of safety for all.
Right, but what I want to know is *is there an established codified rule* as to what "above" means as far as the FAA is concerned? Personally I'm not going to fly 5 feet from a highway even if my drone is technically still 5 feet away from being "above" the traffic, but what I want to know is what the rules are.

The rules may very well not be established yet or defined by case law; I imagine if your drone falls onto a moving car you may be found to have violated the rule, regardless of whether you were hovering 20 feet away from the road and the wind blew it there during free-fall.
 
Right, but what I want to know is *is there an established codified rule* as to what "above" means as far as the FAA is concerned? Personally I'm not going to fly 5 feet from a highway even if my drone is technically still 5 feet away from being "above" the traffic, but what I want to know is what the rules are.

The rules may very well not be established yet or defined by case law; I imagine if your drone falls onto a moving car you may be found to have violated the rule, regardless of whether you were hovering 20 feet away from the road and the wind blew it there during free-fall.
Suspect it is by intent. Should prosecution occur it would likely be in the FAA’s favor.
Like you I don’t hover or fly over the length of major thorofares and maintain considerable distance except when crossing.
 
Here is the FAA reg covering it... takes a bit to read.
Note that the quoted page refers to Part 107 flying. If you're flying recreationally, I haven't been able to find anything more specific than the FAA's recreational guide, Recreational Flyers & Modeler Community-Based Organizations which says "Never fly over any person or moving vehicle." There's also reference in the recreational rules to flying under the rules of an established community-based organization's set of safety guidelines, so perhaps the AMA's rules would provide some guidance. See https://www.modelaircraft.org/know-you-fly which says, "Avoid pedestrians, moving vehicles, busy roadways, powerlines, obstacles, deteriorating weather".

None of this appears to be very specific. I'm not sure exactly where the line is, but I'd guess that, if your drone falls on a moving vehicle, you crossed the line long ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thomas B
NOTE: The NEW rules for flying OVER PEOPLE only apply to Part 107 operations. Recreational Operations are still NO FLYING OVER PEOPLE.

And flying over means exactly that... OVER! Look at it like this... if their was a string/cable hanging down directly under your aircraft (straight line) and it touches a person/car etc you are OVER! Over any portion by any amount is OVER.

Currently the FAA doesn't have a "set-back" from people so if you aren't literally directly OVER you aren't OVER.

But there is another aspect of "people/car" you need to take into account... Aviation is driven by extreme Risk Mitigation. We plan and do everything we can to remove/eliminate risk to our best ability. If you're flying "close to" but not over a person/car and you lose power/control and the aircraft ends up hitting a car/person it could be deemed you were flying in a reckless/careless manner.

Always error on the side of CAUTION because an incident could change things dramatically for all of us.
 
what about crossing over traffic/road/highway?..those few seconds til you make it to the other side?
 
What about just flying 300 ft high in your neighborhood (or actually anywhere else) with the camera facing the horizon as you take video/pics, or even any rural area with the camera not pointing down? Unless you're in a heavily forested area there will be likely be roads and possibly people on sidewalks that you wouldn't see on your screen even if point straight down. Although I've explored on occasion, I normally prefer to go straight up take some shots of sunsets, or distant lightning, take a 360 then come back down because I don't want a malfunction to cause someone harm or lose the MP2. Bottom line: I suspect almost everyone has and does cross roads and could be over someone at sometime without even knowing it. Regarding highways - I flat out, absolutely, won't cross and won't get closer than 300ft for fear of drifting.
 
From a purely sensible viewpoint and regarding the safety of doing so:
by flying “above” is surely indeed about the likelihood of the drone either falling from the sky straight down or falling down within the parabolic curve if it eg cuts out mid flight at max speed. You are ‘above’ anything in that area below, so it won’t be a straight line down unless hovering and even then there will be some drift depending on height.
Without being pedantic if you fly with those thoughts in mind you cannot go far wrong.
So yes, have confidence to fly ‘across’ a road en route to another eg waypoint but you would be irresponsible to fly along the road with cars travelling below.

doesn’t take too much thinking about if you are flying responsibly, bear in mind this is also about clowns flying around indiscriminately which becomes dangerous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pnwpilot
From a purely sensible viewpoint and regarding the safety of doing so:
by flying “above” is surely indeed about the likelihood of the drone either falling from the sky straight down or falling down within the parabolic curve if it eg cuts out mid flight at max speed. You are ‘above’ anything in that area below, so it won’t be a straight line down unless hovering and even then there will be some drift depending on height.
Without being pedantic if you fly with those thoughts in mind you cannot go far wrong.
So yes, have confidence to fly ‘across’ a road en route to another eg waypoint but you would be irresponsible to fly along the road with cars travelling below.

doesn’t take too much thinking about if you are flying responsibly, bear in mind this is also about clowns flying around indiscriminately which becomes dangerous.
Thing is, the clowns aren't going to research any of this or even know these rules exist. The people who actually care about them can't really figure out the legal meaning of them -- we can use our common sense, and in doing so stay safe -- but if you ever get in trouble for anything, common sense takes a backseat to the strict interpretation of the law. And it seems that nobody, outside of maybe a handful of lawyers, really has any idea how the law is to be interpreted.

It's weird and I don't like it but eventually this stuff is going to need to be locked down at the firmware level for most consumer drones. Drones will get more and more popular, and working in IT I can tell you that most people who buy technology as a toy will immediately try to get that tech to do the baddest-assest they can think of without bothering to read the manual, let alone a manual of FAA regulations. I'm surprised people aren't slamming their drones into the sides of skyscrapers on a regular basis already.
 
we can use our common sense, and in doing so stay safe
That is all that it takes. Do not fly along with traffic over a roadway, do not hover over or fly around people who are not directly involved with you. Do not hover over neighbors houses. We all fly across roads and over people with just about every video we take unless as stated you live in the woods or mountains. Just use that common sense. Even the new changes in the law that will allow drones to deliver packages or whatever will fly over roads and people the same as you. It's impossible not to if we are going to fly at all.
 
No matter what, you are simply responsible for your actions. So if you fly over someone and do damage, you are responsible even if it's questionable whether or not you were actually directly over someone. I quit flying over populated areas after the 2018 rule change. I do fly over empty roads without fear and even adjacent to roadways at times. I do know if I lose control I might not be directly over someone and in compliance but if I hit them I'm still responsible. It's another rule that people argue about similar to VLOS or max height rules. How can one prove they weren't directly over someone if your aircraft falls from the sky and hits them? If I fly 100 feet above myself, I can't say I'm actually directly over my head or slightly off to one side or another. Really it doesn't matter unless I hit someone or something. I doubt anybody will be enforcing this rule unless bystanders complain and even then unless you are bothering someone, or something bad goes down, who will know?
This is another thread that goes round and round where some try to justify their flights are absolutely safe because they claim they were following the rules as specified and can't be held liable because they were flying in compliance. Kinda more about risk management IMO.
 
Kinda brings up another question. We get drone insurance for the loss of our drone. Does anyone have, or can you get liability insurance for an accident? I would assume you can, but I haven't looked at any insurance as of yet.
 
How can one prove they weren't directly over someone if your aircraft falls from the sky and hits them?
I don't believe they can.

Notice the rule uses the term "over", not "directly over". If there's no other definition in the law, the ordinary definition of the word would apply. I can't say how a court would rule, but if I were on the jury, I'd say that if a drone hit someone from above, it had definitely been flying "over" the person it hit, regardless of whether wind or the drone's horizontal momentum played a part in its trajectory.

The rule isn't merely "avoid crashing into people or moving vehicles" it's "avoid flying over" them. The obvious intent is to avoid endangering innocent bystanders by giving them a wide berth, and if you crash into them, you've failed your responsibility.
 
I don't believe they can.

Notice the rule uses the term "over", not "directly over". If there's no other definition in the law, the ordinary definition of the word would apply. I can't say how a court would rule, but if I were on the jury, I'd say that if a drone hit someone from above, it had definitely been flying "over" the person it hit, regardless of whether wind or the drone's horizontal momentum played a part in its trajectory.

The rule isn't merely "avoid crashing into people or moving vehicles" it's "avoid flying over" them. The obvious intent is to avoid endangering innocent bystanders by giving them a wide berth, and if you crash into them, you've failed your responsibility.
I agree but I do feel there are ways to fly over streets when the area is more void of people where it lessens the risks. It's a choice. I do fly around people such as in parks or maybe do an early morning run when most are sleeping. I never try to hide from people but if I fly out of my suburban home, I ascend to a reasonable distance in altitude to keep drone haters from saying I'm spying. I've done some evening shots from a buddies field to capture traffic but never close enough to be considered over the traffic. Overall even in a rural areas I still have a chance of something going wrong but the risks are much lower hence a lower chance of being sued if I do crash into someone. So now days I avoid city flying unless it's something special I want to capture. The 4th of July comes to mind. But I usually try to keep risk minimal whenever possible. If I was 107 and my flights required to be around a more populated region, I'd definately have specific insurance for the jobs.
 
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,585
Messages
1,554,095
Members
159,585
Latest member
maniac2000