So 400' above ground within the boundaries, correct? Is so... what is the closest that you can legally be from that facility?
[400']
FAA bans....
- Thread starter lickitysplit11111
- Start date
So 400' above ground within the boundaries, correct? Is so... what is the closest that you can legally be from that facility?
[400']
It's "up to 400 ft within the lateral boundaries".
FAA Restricts Drone Operations Over DOE Facilities
The details of the actual NOTAM can be found here: 7/7282 NOTAM Details . Note: This is the actual NOTAM referenced in the new one: 7/6429 NOTAM Details
So in answer to your question, if there are no other restrictions (and in some places there might be) the altitude restriction (surface to 400' AGL) is the only thing applicable.
So in answer to your question, if there are no other restrictions (and in some places there might be) the altitude restriction (surface to 400' AGL) is the only thing applicable.
Well said. There are too many mindless autobots that go along with anything the government decrees.
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2017
- Messages
- 17
- Reaction score
- 7
- Age
- 61
Honestly, I fine with this, as well as for military installations. Large drones can carry explosive payloads. If not, then why not just scale the fence and walk right in...
- Joined
- May 9, 2017
- Messages
- 62
- Reaction score
- 14
- Age
- 62
I think we’re over complicating this.
Things become simple when one puts oneself in the shoes of the security staff of the nuclear facility. They have to manage any & every possible threat regardless of severity and until the popularity of our drones there were probably very few incidents to monitor and react to, as most traffic would be on the ground where the fence stops idiots from entering by mistake.
Nuff said?
Things become simple when one puts oneself in the shoes of the security staff of the nuclear facility. They have to manage any & every possible threat regardless of severity and until the popularity of our drones there were probably very few incidents to monitor and react to, as most traffic would be on the ground where the fence stops idiots from entering by mistake.
Nuff said?
Like a manned balloon or something like that? So we just spend a few billion on these systems when nothing like this has shown to be a threat?
Funny . all they have to do is google it . the drones we fly are no danger to a nuc plant .
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2016
- Messages
- 59
- Reaction score
- 19
- Age
- 76
I would suggest that security does change on a continuous basis
Security may well be 24/7 however the detail of that security such as camera /sensor and feet on the ground could be and should be a consistent variant. That’s why you don’t discuss or provide information to those who are not authorised.
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2017
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 48
- Age
- 41
We live relatively near a nuclear plant . I had see in person the effects of radiation specially in childs when I lived in Cuba and Castro bring hundreds of kids from Chernobyl and give them a better life to what was left.
Broke my heart ;(
Any security applied to these facilities are small to the risk they implied. [Political rant removed] Secure these places because every one depends on it . If one melts down will take everything, millions of life , pain , forget about the country economy for decades . North America will never be the same ...
not just humans entire ecosystem and with the size of these now days entire planet will get hurt ...
Fly the toys somewhere outs and let the security do it's job . Who know how many alarms we had triger with the toys .
Broke my heart ;(
Any security applied to these facilities are small to the risk they implied. [Political rant removed] Secure these places because every one depends on it . If one melts down will take everything, millions of life , pain , forget about the country economy for decades . North America will never be the same ...
not just humans entire ecosystem and with the size of these now days entire planet will get hurt ...
Fly the toys somewhere outs and let the security do it's job . Who know how many alarms we had triger with the toys .
Last edited by a moderator:
I've said this before... what is a drone going to do against such a site? if a done could affect a nuclear waste site or nuclear power plant, then we have much bigger issues. Truth is, it won't do anything. Nuclear power plants are design to resist the impact of planes (jets) and the like. A drone is not going to do anything.
If a jet a 500mph won't do anything, what is a drone going to do.
As has been mentioned above, the NFZ is not because a done could be used to directly attack a nuclear facilities, it's for other reasons. I would agree that it's for security reasons. However, anyone could get the same information without using a drone. I suspect this was done because it was easy to do, not because drones were a big threat.
Last edited by a moderator:
Your right. No trespassing signs have been so successful for decades. I've never seen a kid laugh and jump a fence 5 feet from a no trespassing sign, not once. Same thing goes for those *no concealed weapons* signs. Putting one of those up in your store pretty much *ends* all armed robberies. They see the sign, and, unwilling to break the law give up and walk away. /s
Obviously it doesn't work like this. Regulations like these never stop the actual bad apples, they only put more compliance burden on the good ones.
This isn't a terrible regulation like some of the others, it's just pointless. Our nuclear facilities are not the ones in danger, the ones we should be worried about are the simple substations. Their soft *and* important.
if you are shopping for accurate satellite imagery you can usually buy stuff from the last couple of hours if you are willing to pay a premium - by the time you have got your images home, downloaded/processed/saved them new satellite data will be available to make your images obsolete
Really?if you are shopping for accurate satellite imagery you can usually buy stuff from the last couple of hours if you are willing to pay a premium - by the time you have got your images home, downloaded/processed/saved them new satellite data will be available to make your images obsolete
If sat pics were even close to what a drone could do, most of us here would have no reason to fly commercially.
Theres obviously a huge difference, otherwise we wouldn't have this million dollar industry that a lot of here participate in.
if you are shopping for accurate satellite imagery you can usually buy stuff from the last couple of hours if you are willing to pay a premium - by the time you have got your images home, downloaded/processed/saved them new satellite data will be available to make your images obsolete
But but but, that's not what he's saying. He's saying he worries about a well trained unified force who is in comms with a backline team who is using DJI drones as Arial recon to provide realtime security data and intel to the the interlopers. Of course invading a secure facility is already illegal, using those comms in a criminal manner would also likely be illegal (depending on what specific comms they used just the using the device itself without correct licenses would likely be against regulations).
"Don't do this" laws don't *protect* anything, they only allow after the fact prosecutions to pile on more jail time or larger fines. Just like "No trespassing signs" and "No CCW signs" don't actually stop or protect *anything or anyone* these *regulations* will not stop or protect anything or anyone. It will simply add to the already giant and confusing web of regulations surrounding pretty much everything in modern life and most likely only ever effect innocent flyers and full on idiots (the innocent flyer who wants a cool photo and hasn't digested the giant book of regulations, and the idiot who doesn't care and who buzzes the stacks to see how close he can get). Neither of those people are national security threats to an active or inactive power plant or enrichment facility.
Satellite images are available pretty much as soon as they are taken - if you are willing to pay for them but they are expensive
Hiring a drone is cheaper, provides more flexibility and allows filming movies
