Can I fly over my own car?

[PhoenixOne]

Section 107.25 Operation from a moving vehicle or aircraft.
No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft system—
(a) From a moving aircraft; or
(b) From a moving land or water-borne vehicle unless the small unmanned aircraft is flown over a sparsely populated area and is not transporting another person’s property for compensation or hire.

Ive posted that before but no one listened... lol so as long as its not a cab.. limo.. or uber your ok. Jk. But idk im lost on it all but Weston my best bet would be like you said. Use maybe some gopro type cameras and mounts and then incorporate drone footage as well. Im pretty excited for on the business idea i was wanting to go a similar direction with the action. Everyone does cinematic. Fields rivers. Beaches.

 

[skymonkey]

107.39 is for operations over human beings and is the only reg as far as I know where it states anything about flights over vehicles. So if I get a waiver for 107.39 would it specifically state that I could fly over human beings as long as they are not in a moving vehicle? Just asking for clarification.

Did my own research and here is what I found on the last 107.39 waiver issued.

 

[chascoadmin]

One more that you can take up with the Field Guide and Drone U...

"Essentially, you want to make sure that everyone in the flight area is somehow involved in the production of the footage and is aware of the camera’s place in the sky at all times.
Because those inside of cars traveling through moving traffic are not involved in the production of your shot and therefore aren’t participants in the flight, you cannot fly of them. However, if there are people in cars that are participants in the flight, feel free to safely fly your drone right over them."

 

[sar104]

Ive posted that before but no one listened... lol so as long as its not a cab.. limo.. or uber your ok. Jk. But idk im lost on it all but Weston my best bet would be like you said. Use maybe some gopro type cameras and mounts and then incorporate drone footage as well. Im pretty excited for on the business idea i was wanting to go a similar direction with the action. Everyone does cinematic. Fields rivers. Beaches.

You have misunderstood that provision. It is saying that you cannot operate an sUAS from a moving vehicle unless the sUAS is flying over a sparsely populated area and the sUAS is not transporting property for compensation or hire. It has nothing to do with the status of the vehicle from which it is being operated.

 

[chascoadmin]

You have misunderstood that provision. It is saying that you cannot operate an sUAS from a moving vehicle unless the sUAS is flying over a sparsely populated area and the sUAS is not transporting property for compensation or hire. It has nothing to do with the status of the vehicle from which it is being operated.

Transporting property as in a payload right?

 

[sar104]

Transporting property as in a payload right?

Yes.

 

[chascoadmin]

Yes.

While it may not directly relate to the post this did come up in conversation so I thought it might be a good clarification. Thanks for the input!

 

[Adamborz]

Just think how does Hollywood get all their shots flying over moving cars... not counting the CG stuff? Waivers?

I know I’m going to get flamed for this but I think people way over think some of this stuff.

If Hollywood needs THE shot, would it be safer with their drone or a full size helicopter getting the shot? And yes I realize they use closed course for the crazy action shots...

I’m not sure exactly what your end goal is, but you can always zoom in post to make the drone appear to fly close or over the moving car, and speed up the footage to appear to be moving faster than you are.

Certainly don’t turn any damage claims into your auto insurance company ?

107.39 says not to fly over people unless the are in a stationary vehicle.... use some creative editing to achieve what you want.

 

[Ken from Canada]

So I have a question. I know it is illegal to fly over roads with traffic on them. But I want to go out on rural roads in the morning when nobody is driving. There's lots of places like that where I live. I want to have a friend drive my car, while I stand on the side of the road and fly my drone directly over and behind and next to my car. Is it legal to fly over a car participating in the video you are making? And is it only illegal to fly over non-participating cars? Or is the law just plain you can't fly over cars?

Do not fly over your car if your drone weighs over two tons. It may crush your car. Happy Flying

 

[chascoadmin]

So what do you guys think about what does it technically mean to fly directly over a car? How literally should the regulation be enforced? And what is the acceptably interpreted definition of "directly over"? If you fly at near 400ft AGL and are slightly off from being directly over the vehicle with the right camera perspective it will look like you are.

 

[sar104]

So what do you guys think about what does it technically mean to fly directly over a car? How literally should the regulation be enforced? And what is the acceptably interpreted definition of "directly over"? If you fly at near 400ft AGL and are slightly off from being directly over the vehicle with the right camera perspective it will look like you are.

Surely it's obvious what it means; if the aircraft fails is there a significant chance that it will fall on the vehicle?

 

[chascoadmin]

Surely it's obvious what it means; if the aircraft fails is there a significant chance that it will fall on the vehicle?

That's why I specifically used the word interpretation... d b a d If you are flying backwards even in front of the vehicle and it fails there is a good chance it could land on it.

 

[sar104]

That's why I specifically used the word interpretation... d b a d If you are flying backwards even in front of the vehicle and it fails there is a good chance it could land on it.

Part 107 doesn't use the word "directly". 107.39 says:

§107.39 Operation over human beings.​

No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft over a human being unless that human being is:​

​

(a) Directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft; or​

​

(b) Located under a covered structure or inside a stationary vehicle that can provide reasonable protection from a falling small unmanned aircraft.​

​

(b) makes it clear that the intent is to avoid being hit if the aircraft falls.

 

[chascoadmin]

Yep this has been posted several times. You just stated, and my point is, that nowhere does it ever say over a moving vehicle. You can see this ASSUMED all over the web and in different articles, but never an official regulation. We have looked for years and noone has ever been able to provide it. If you have it please share.

I have no reason to do this and would never condone it, it is just an example of the horrible vagueness of specific common and very dangerous situations that the regulators need to clean up. It is way to hard for people to understand clearly. Otherwise there wouldn't be a thread like this... and there shouldn't be.

FAA Proposal from earlier this year...
"Fourth, although part 107 currently does not allow operations over people in moving vehicles (§ 107.39), the FAA proposes a new section that makes clear that such operations are expressly prohibited. There is more information on operations over moving vehicles in Section IV.B.12.b)."

 

[sar104]

Yep this has been posted several times. You just stated, and my point is, that nowhere does it ever say over a moving vehicle. You can see this ASSUMED all over the web and in different articles, but never an official regulation. We have looked for years and noone has ever been able to provide it. If you have it please share.

I have no reason to do this and would never condone it, it is just an example of the horrible vagueness of specific common and very dangerous situations that the regulators need to clean up. It is way to hard for people to understand clearly. Otherwise there wouldn't be a thread like this... and there shouldn't be.

107.39 says that you cannot fly over people unless they are protected by a structure or a stationary vehicle. Therefore you cannot fly over people in a moving vehicle. That conclusion is the simple application of logic - it follows directly from 107.39 (b). It's not an assumption of any kind. What part of that are you questioning?

 

[Weston Ney]

Usually those shots are done with a car crane, but I don't have that kind of budget. Also I think Hollywood movie makers can do whatever they want... They have enough money they can get whatever shot they want.

Just think how does Hollywood get all their shots flying over moving cars... not counting the CG stuff? Waivers?

I know I’m going to get flamed for this but I think people way over think some of this stuff.

If Hollywood needs THE shot, would it be safer with their drone or a full size helicopter getting the shot? And yes I realize they use closed course for the crazy action shots...

I’m not sure exactly what your end goal is, but you can always zoom in post to make the drone appear to fly close or over the moving car, and speed up the footage to appear to be moving faster than you are.

Certainly don’t turn any damage claims into your auto insurance company [emoji41]

107.39 says not to fly over people unless the are in a stationary vehicle.... use some creative editing to achieve what you want.

 

[sar104]

Usually those shots are done with a car crane, but I don't have that kind of budget. Also I think Hollywood movie makers can do whatever they want... They have enough money they can get whatever shot they want.

No - they have to follow FAA regulations too.

 

[Weston Ney]

No - they have to follow FAA regulations too.

They probably can get waivers more easily than the common Joe though.

 

[chascoadmin]

107.39 says that you cannot fly over people unless they are protected by a structure or a stationary vehicle. Therefore you cannot fly over people in a moving vehicle. That conclusion is the simple application of logic - it follows directly from 107.39 (b). It's not an assumption of any kind. What part of that are you questioning?

I just posted that it is still a proposed clarification for you and as it has not been passed. You cannot "therefore" state fact on assumption.

 

[skymonkey]

If there is a person anywhere on the ground including in a moving car you cannot fly over the person unless that person is inside a protected structure including a stationary car. You could get waiver to fly over the person but waiver will have this environmental provision.