Where does the sky become FAA?

[Empiredroneworx]

I don't think this has even been hammered out yet in the courts, but where does the sky come under the jurisdiction of the FAA?

I asked because there is an interesting story over here:
NASCAR teams up with DroneShield to bring down unwanted drones at racing events

Basically NASCAR has contracted DroneShield to take down any drones around the area of a race.

Details are scant but if I can take pictures from public property that overlooks a NASCAR area does the FAA give them free rein to take it down? Or what if a drone is flying at 400' over the area by a FAA 107 licensed pilot. Is that height still NASCAR's that they can demand this? Does the FAA even have say anymore to these corporations?

If your next to a track then your in class airspace, FAA holds bottom dollar or fixen too

 

[Maviac]

Let me put this into perspective. You are in a plane flying to Florida. Someone hijacks that plane (perhaps just to land it in Florida themselves, you don't know). You think you can't do anything about this because the FAA governs airspace?

I very much disagree that a TFR gives the property owner any rights to use the airspace (again, unless the government does that separately). I’m not going to write a legal treatise but there is no authority for that whatsoever. I understand analogies but property ownership provides specific rights, which are inapplicable here.

As to your hijackacking example that is a really inapposite analogy. Aside from the fact that the plane would be my own property, the FAA specifically gives me as PIC ultimate authority over the flight, so I can certainly deal with the hijacker.

 

[Maviac]

I merely added some Real-World experience to your statement (which I again quoted below).



I wasn't arguing or trying to dismiss your point at all. I was TRYING to add to the conversation and help demonstrate that the entity requesting the TFR can have some say-so in who flies within it or NOT.

You’re right. My apologies.

 

[Vegasdad]

I love it we make up [Language Removed by Moderator] to worry about. Are you going to be flying around any races NO so who cares.

 

[bliksem]

One company has figured out how to trigger the RTH in drones, not sure if it is Drone Shield or someone else. The drone just returns to home and lands, no harm no foul.... legal aspects aside. I'm sure if someone like NASCAR is involved then they will have the legal aspect covered.

 

[tcope]

I very much disagree that a TFR gives the property owner any rights to use the airspace (again, unless the government does that separately). I’m not going to write a legal treatise but there is no authority for that whatsoever. I understand analogies but property ownership provides specific rights, which are inapplicable here.

As to your hijackacking example that is a really inapposite analogy. Aside from the fact that the plane would be my own property, the FAA specifically gives me as PIC ultimate authority over the flight, so I can certainly deal with the hijacker.

They are not using the airspace as you mentioned. I have no doubt that their gun has government approval by the FCC. As such, they can broadcast radio waves into the air. That is all6that they are doing.

In my anology, it is not your plane, you are simply a passenger. Point being, you take control of the aircraft who is flying it illegally.

I'm on the fence on what Droneshield does. I see the need for the service and encourage its legal use. However, I can see the tech easily being used illegally.

 

[Aviator]

Now what is to prevent rogue homeowners or property owners to acquire such Droneshiled and blast you while you are flying along over their property? There will be no evidence of it after the fact.
Given time, you will be able to find such equipment on Ali express or such.

 

[tcope]

Now what is to prevent rogue homeowners or property owners to acquire such Droneshiled and blast you while you are flying along over their property?
Given time, you will be able to find such equipment on Ali express or such.

That is what I am worried about. Or more so by any one or companies misusing the tech.

 

[Thomas B]

Now what is to prevent rogue homeowners or property owners to acquire such Droneshiled and blast you while you are flying along over their property? There will be no evidence of it after the fact.
Given time, you will be able to find such equipment on Ali express or such.

1. Not clear if the technique is disable, capture, or exactly what. I bet Droneshield and it’s partners ponied up a lot of cash for permits/legal fees, etc for this and FAA approval to do so

2. My assumption is that since the FAA has control of the air for ground up, standard tort laws would apply over an individual’s home.

3. That said, I have been involved as the “little guy” plaintiff in a suit in AZ. After 7 years, 3 trips to district court, 2 trips to appeals court, and having part of the case heard by the AZ Supreme Court plus attorney fees... I simply abandoned the case to cut my out of pocket at a bit over $150K. At this point the actual tort had never been even considered by the courts.

Bottom line... when two parties square off in non- criminal law our system is manipulated to cost the parties A LOT of money.

 

[Bryce steiner]

They are not using the airspace as you mentioned. I have no doubt that their gun has government approval by the FCC. As such, they can broadcast radio waves into the air. That is all6that they are doing.

In my anology, it is not your plane, you are simply a passenger. Point being, you take control of the aircraft who is flying it illegally.

I'm on the fence on what Droneshield does. I see the need for the service and encourage its legal use. However, I can see the tech easily being used illegally.

Just for clarification from their website:
"DroneGun Tactical has not been authorized as required by the United States Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”)."

 

[Bryce steiner]

Now what is to prevent rogue homeowners or property owners to acquire such Droneshiled and blast you while you are flying along over their property? There will be no evidence of it after the fact.
Given time, you will be able to find such equipment on Ali express or such.

Not to mention that it is not that hard to make one with parts around your house. Some PVC, battery pack, get a certain antenna and a microwave oven.
I do wonder if that might have something to do with what brought down the 737 Max planes. Both were just after take off. Both use similar instruments, such as GPS, as drones and why couldn't blasting radio waves do something like that to where the computer starts trying to compensate because it's getting a whole bunch of false information? I know some blame design flaws and that might be but they have thousands of these planes that make 100's of thousands of trips a year that have not had problems.

 

[Thomas B]

Just for clarification from their website:
"DroneGun Tactical has not been authorized as required by the United States Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”)."

We can only hope that it will never be approved. Looks like it may well be a jamming device since FAA is involved.

 

[kadras]

...737 Max planes. I know some blame design flaws and that might be but they have thousands of these planes that make 100's of thousands of trips a year that have not had problems.

The software which may be the cause of the crashes is only on the 737 MAX. This design was first flown in 2016 and the first delivery was in 2017 with about 350 delivered. Now back to the airspace discussion.

 

[Jwelz]

I don't think this has even been hammered out yet in the courts, but where does the sky come under the jurisdiction of the FAA?

That would be in the USA.

 

[FlyGuyNH]

Having shot several NASCAR events at our local track (NHMS), I can absolutely tell you there is a minimum altitude of 3,000' AGL while the event is in progress. ATC has no problem with me flying (a plane) in the area.
That said, any "aircraft" below that would be violating the TFZ, subject to FAA penalties. I do not believe the Feds would allow anyone to usurp their kingdom.

 

[stevietee10]

Airspace starts 1mm above the ground. My guess is the event is a temp restricted airspace (NFZ?).

Does this apply on the UK as well (CAA regs)?
If I test a new build in my back yard and only hover less than 3 metres do the regs still apply ???
Thanks for any views on this
Steve

 

[abartraw3]

The Cardassians may have a caviot to this however, they have applied for a radio station permit. And as per licensing with FCC, many consumer devices, e.g., drones and other radio controlled ‘toys’, have to be able to accept radio interference, including that which causes unwanted results- it states this on the sticker inside our drones:

View attachment 66529

The problem with broadcasting radio interferance, not to mention intentional broadcast as such, is that the frequencies could cause the drone to fly erratically and pose danger to people, buildings and other aircraft. Ive been victim of eratic behavior of a drone surrounded by interferance. This will place liability squarely on the source of the interfering source.

 

[AMann]

The problem with broadcasting radio interferance, not to mention intentional broadcast as such, is that the frequencies could cause the drone to fly erratically and pose danger to people, buildings and other aircraft. Ive been victim of eratic behavior of a drone surrounded by interferance. This will place liability squarely on the source of the interfering source.

Legally, the ultimate responsibility lies with the PIC.

 

[Sgt_Dubie]

Now what is to prevent rogue homeowners or property owners to acquire such Droneshiled and blast you while you are flying along over their property? There will be no evidence of it after the fact.
Given time, you will be able to find such equipment on Ali express or such.

What’s to prevent a rogue homeowners from getting a shotgun and blasting your drone out of the sky in the more traditional sense? Especially in an area where guns can be fired, like most more rural areas... unless you caught the shot on video, you have no evidence something malicious happened... especially since you have no legal right to trespass on this property to search for the down drone without the owners consent, and the local cops aren’t likely to bother getting a warrant for you... ‘but officer, I heard a shot!’ ‘Yeah. Well Billy Bob shoots clay pigeons in his yard nearly every day... so what? We should go tear his place up because you crashed your drone somewhere?’

Bottom line, sure, it can be abused if someone really wants to abuse it. But, so can nearly everything in existence, including drones. Used responsibly and legally, it’s just another appropriate tool to prevent abuses of airspace.

 

[AMann]

What’s to prevent a rogue homeowners from getting a shotgun and blasting your drone out of the sky in the more traditional sense? Especially in an area where guns can be fired, like most more rural areas... unless you caught the shot on video, you have no evidence something malicious happened... especially since you have no legal right to trespass on this property to search for the down drone without the owners consent, and the local cops aren’t likely to bother getting a warrant for you... ‘but officer, I heard a shot!’ ‘Yeah. Well Billy Bob shoots clay pigeons in his yard nearly every day... so what? We should go tear his place up because you crashed your drone somewhere?’

Bottom line, sure, it can be abused if someone really wants to abuse it. But, so can nearly everything in existence, including drones. Used responsibly and legally, it’s just another appropriate tool to prevent abuses of airspace.

It most likely won’t happen- something like that will be confiscated as illegal radio equipment in import if ever seen by customs, is easy to track through it’s transmissions and carries a huge fine and jail time for the operator by the FCC.