Banned from flying over the river HELP

[CarlJ]

There are no federal laws that apply to drones, period. You might want to review dronelawjournal.com since it is all explained there. You are referring to issues, laws and restrictions that apply to full-size, manned aircraft, not drones.

Each reply to you was a statement of fact― legal fact. Although I don't understand how statements of fact can ever be considered "encouragement," you are completely entitled to whatever opinion you wish. I stick with facts.

I've seen your site...

Thank you for so kindly allowing me to have an opinion, your permission means everything. The restrictions are referring to manned craft because quads were not available then, and while I have no idea how they might encompass quads, I don't want to find out. Park Service is simply saying that it is not their jurisdiction to police air space, and that restrictions and regulations are already in place. That's good enough for me...

And just to get all the "facts" out, how many cases have you successfully litigated against the FAA?

 

[petersachs]

There are no federal laws that apply to drones, period. You might want to review dronelawjournal.com since it is all explained there. You are referring to issues, laws and restrictions that apply to full-size, manned aircraft, not drones.

Each reply to you was a statement of fact― legal fact. Although I don't understand how statements of fact can ever be considered "encouragement," you are completely entitled to whatever opinion you wish. I stick with facts.

I've seen your site...

Thank you for so kindly allowing me to have an opinion, your permission means everything. The restrictions are referring to manned craft because quads were not available then, and while I have no idea how they might encompass quads, I don't want to find out. Park Service is simply saying that it is not their jurisdiction to police air space, and that restrictions and regulations are already in place. That's good enough for me...

And just to get all the "facts" out, how many cases have you successfully litigated against the FAA?

If you had actually read my site, you'd have known that I don't represent anyone in any legal matter, ever. I do free public interest law only. So by definition the answer to your question about personal litigation against the FAA, the answer is none.

However I am represented by the same attorney who won the first drone case, and I am confident he will win this one as well. As for your other remarks, saying you're entitled to your opinion is not a grant of "permission." It's yet another fact. Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion.

It's clear you're looking to engage in an argument. Sorry, not interested. I have more important things to do. So I'll just make it easy and concede. I know nothing about this topic and you know it all.

 

[CarlJ]

It's clear you're looking to engage in an argument.

No, not at all, I just think you and those of your ilk are dangerous.

So by definition the answer to your question about personal litigation against the FAA, the answer is none.

Right...

I have more important things to do. So I'll just make it easy and concede. I know nothing about this topic and you know it all.

Yes, well, I was just rendering something out in Cinema 4D for a client, but YOU'RE the busy one. I never claimed to understand the law, never claimed to understand the complexity of the ever evolving legal terrain that is drone law. I'm just absolutely certain that flying in a National Park is a bad idea...because it's banned, and you're JUST the type of person that I was warning the OP about.

Like I said, dangerous.

 

[BaldEagle]

"Can we all just get along...?" :shock:

 

[CarlJ]

I really doubt any of us are investing any emotional energy over this, at least I sure hope not.

 

[CRankin]

Be that as it may it is unconscionable to encourage our members to commit an "overflight" over a National Park which is banned by the FAA in many of the parks already, and for good reason. They risk being fined and/or imprisoned if the flight is successful, god only knows what they'd face in the event of a crash.

My understanding is that one individual who made such an overflight over the Great Falls park in Northern Virginia within the past month or so was only subjected to a $70 fine. This was after over-reaction by authorities which called a helicopter in to try to force the drone into the river (unsuccessfully).

If that's all that people are going to be fined for doing this type of stuff, perhaps we should all organize some sort of "civil disobedience day" and take to the skies over our national parks just to prove the point of how idiotic and short-sighted their policy actually is.

 

[srandall25]

Be that as it may it is unconscionable to encourage our members to commit an "overflight" over a National Park which is banned by the FAA in many of the parks already, and for good reason. They risk being fined and/or imprisoned if the flight is successful, god only knows what they'd face in the event of a crash.

My understanding is that one individual who made such an overflight over the Great Falls park in Northern Virginia within the past month or so was only subjected to a $70 fine. This was after over-reaction by authorities which called a helicopter in to try to force the drone into the river (unsuccessfully).

If that's all that people are going to be fined for doing this type of stuff, perhaps we should all organize some sort of "civil disobedience day" and take to the skies over our national parks just to prove the point of how idiotic and short-sighted their policy actually is.

Found the Great Falls video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smxql2PXehI

 

[MapMaker53]

If that's all that people are going to be fined for doing this type of stuff, perhaps we should all organize some sort of "civil disobedience day" and take to the skies over our national parks just to prove the point of how idiotic and short-sighted their policy actually is.

A "civil disobedience day" is actually the last thing this sport needs.

 

[slothead]

If that's all that people are going to be fined for doing this type of stuff, perhaps we should all organize some sort of "civil disobedience day" and take to the skies over our national parks just to prove the point of how idiotic and short-sighted their policy actually is.

A "civil disobedience day" is actually the last thing this sport needs.

I really don't know, but do you have another alternative MapMaker?

 

[skyhighdiver]

please read very first post for a update

 

[srandall25]

read your update.. Great to hear! Congrats on your ability to deal with this in the most mature manner and getting the appropriate outcome in accordance with existing state laws and ordinance.

 

[MapMaker53]

Happy to read the update, skyhighdiver. Nice example of how calm minds can prevail. My only advice now is to keep an eye out for any incoming low-flying tour helicopters while your bird is over the river. Sounds like that could be a little dangerous. I'm surprised the original ranger didn't use that as a reason you couldn't fly there.

 

[Foosy]

I just returned from a trip to Canada, and have experienced the same reactions. Many people passing by and commenting: "This is illegal to fly in parks", and "I will report you to the park ranger".
It is clear that nature lovers see this bird as a nuisance. The noise it makes, especially when departing and landing is more than what people are willing to accommodate. And it is not that we are not nature lovers, we are - but in the eyes of the others - we are playing games in 'their parks', we are disturbing the animals, we are bothering the people and we are 'careless' as we will do anything for the shot.

The problem is that the law is not clearly defined at this point. We are at the forefront of a disruptive technology, and laws will have to be made, challenged and adapted.
Until then, we can try to enjoy those drones as much as possible, because rules are going to get significantly tighter before they are relaxed again. :ugeek:

 

[skyhighdiver]

Happy to read the update, skyhighdiver. Nice example of how calm minds can prevail. My only advice now is to keep an eye out for any incoming low-flying tour helicopters while your bird is over the river. Sounds like that could be a little dangerous. I'm surprised the original ranger didn't use that as a reason you couldn't fly there.

well on that issue My cool mind is not so cool, Im 7 miles from an airport and over a river I will do my best to come down and avoid . But I will make it known to the pilot that drones are in the area so he better also be on the look out. And stop the 100ft high speed passes over the river and dam :roll:

 

[Morgas Resnak]

I am near the Sioux City area now. Are you still in the area?