Flying at very low altitudes near airports

[Racklefratz]

Right - but the intent is presumably to afford more protection to IFR traffic than to VFR traffic.

It's moot. "VFR traffic" is NOT scanning the skies, looking for dinky little "drones" - they're looking for "real" airplanes.

None of this nonsense makes any difference whatsoever in the probability of a drone/real airplane midair. However well intentioned, it simply doesn't make a difference. Pilots of real airplanes aren't going to see a drone until it goes through the windshield - that's the dirty little secret.

Closure rates, visibility, and diminutive size of drones make the probability of real airplane pilots seeing these things in time to avoid collision nearly zero, which goes straight to stay the hell away from places where airplanes are coming and going, and even if you do, hope that one of the LEGAL low-altitude aviation operations like medevac or powerline patrol doesn't ruin your day, as well as other innocent peoples' day.

 

[sar104]

It's moot. "VFR traffic" is NOT scanning the skies, looking for dinky little "drones" - they're looking for "real" airplanes.

None of this nonsense makes any difference whatsoever in the probability of a drone/real airplane midair. However well intentioned, it simply doesn't make a difference. Pilots of real airplanes aren't going to see a drone until it goes through the windshield - that's the dirty little secret.

Closure rates, visibility, and diminutive size of drones make the probability of real airplane pilots seeing these things in time to avoid collision nearly zero, which goes straight to stay the hell away from places where airplanes are coming and going, and even if you do, hope that one of the LEGAL low-altitude aviation operations like medevac or powerline patrol doesn't ruin your day, as well as other innocent peoples' day.

You took my point backwards, so I should have been clearer. It's not a question of the aircraft seeing the drones, it's the drone pilots seeing the aircraft, especially if they are descending out of a low ceiling on instruments.

 

[nate104]

I do not no anything about anything, the other day I was at avenida Caesar Chavez and university. At University of New Mexico's football stadium ne quadrant. It's fairly close to the albq international airport..... 2 to three miles. I called the tower who intern gave me the supervisors number. I explained to him I was going to fly my drone not Commercially, but for fun and since I was relatively close to the airport I wanted to see if it was ok. He asked how high I explained to him however high hell let me, he said 50 feet and took my number and told me to call them when I'm done. I don't know why he told me 50 because the lights are way higher than that but didn't argue and flew.

 

[Providian623]

The law IS the law !

 

[Greg75071]

Is there a certain altitude below which the FAA doesn't need your report?

I found on another board that someone contacted the airport about flying their drone in their area and asked if he needed to contact them every time and the controller said not if below 150' AGL.

Unless off the end of a runway, at 200' or lower there shouldn't be any conflicts with manned aircraft as I see it.

Anyway, is there such leeway and if not, should there be and is it in the works?

 

[Greg75071]

Are any good f you guys pilots? Anyone 107certified. I see lots of misinformation and wrong information out here.

 

[sar104]

Are any good f you guys pilots? Anyone 107certified. I see lots of misinformation and wrong information out here.

It would be more helpful if you could be specific as to which information you think is incorrect and then, perhaps, try to correct it. That's one of the key purposes of a discussion forum. Your post, as it stands, contributes nothing since the misinformation has already been addressed.

Reading through this thread again I would say that it is pretty clear who understands the regulations, and I know from other discussions that most of them are Part 107 certified.

 

[Greg75071]

It would be more helpful if you could be specific as to which information you think is incorrect and then, perhaps, try to correct it. That's one of the key purposes of a discussion forum. Your post, as it stands, contributes nothing since the misinformation has already been addressed.

Reading through this thread again I would say that it is pretty clear who understands the regulations, and I know from other discussions that most of them are Part 107 certified.

Here's the first of many.
The maximum allowable altitude is 400 feet above the ground, and higher if your drone remains within 400 feet of a structure.

One guy was upset because he couldn't fly above 400' with a 1600' tower.

I took the above straight off the FAA website. Seems the FAA does not like you making divets in the ground or other things.

The other. Cannot fly in class D. Fist Class D is a tower controlled airport. Limits are 4 nautical miles from the geographical center of the airport not 5. You can fly in that area if you contact the controlling authority I.e. The tower and request permission. The have the authority to grant that permission and will usually be accommodating if approached properly. I.e. Explain the purpose of the flight altitudes etc.

DJI has a policy where you can request a waiver or exception to their policy of not allowing the drone to takeoff in controlled airspace. This can be granted for a period of up to 30 days. I regularly take photos of aircraft at airports with towers. It is not a problem if you know how to do things.

 

[sar104]

Here's the first of many.
The maximum allowable altitude is 400 feet above the ground, and higher if your drone remains within 400 feet of a structure.

One guy was upset because he couldn't fly above 400' with a 1600' tower.

I took the above straight off the FAA website. Seems the FAA does not like you making divets in the ground or other things.

The other. Cannot fly in class D. Fist Class D is a tower controlled airport. Limits are 4 nautical miles from the geographical center of the airport not 5. You can fly in that area if you contact the controlling authority I.e. The tower and request permission. The have the authority to grant that permission and will usually be accommodating if approached properly. I.e. Explain the purpose of the flight altitudes etc.

DJI has a policy where you can request a waiver or exception to their policy of not allowing the drone to takeoff in controlled airspace. This can be granted for a period of up to 30 days. I regularly take photos of aircraft at airports with towers. It is not a problem if you know how to do things.

Maybe I missed it, but I cannot see a post in this thread about a 1600 ft tower. But since you could not be bothered to include a post reference I'm not going to spend much time looking.

Class D radius is generally 4 nm, but it is variable. The nearest Class D airport to me has a 5 nm Class D, for example. You should have checked before making that blanket statement. In any case, that has nothing to do with the 5 sm radius guideline for Part 101 recreational flight, since that was set arbitrarily and is not determined by airspace class.

If you are flying recreationally within 5 sm of an airport, independent of the airspace class unless it is surface Class B, then the requirement is to notify the airport operator and tower. They cannot grant permission, but they may object to the proposed flight.

If you are flying under Part 107 then the requirements are only determined by airspace class: flights in Class G are allowed; any other airspace class requires an FAA authorization or waiver, which they have stated must be requested through the online portal, and will not be granted by local ATC.

Since you did not state whether you are flying Part 101 or Part 107 your statement is somewhat ambiguous, but either way it is also incorrect in at least one detail.

The ability to request an exception to the DJI geofence has absolutely nothing to do with airspace class or FAA regulations - it relates to a somewhat arbitrary attempt by DJI to restrict inadvertent flights near larger airports or airspace restricted for National Security reasons.

And I'm still not clear what misinformation you are objecting to.

 

[Greg75071]

Looks like you know a little bit. I have been flying for 45 years ATP an CFII with over 10000 hrs. Total time. In various platforms and types aircraft. I'm finding lots of errors in the thinking. When the FAA went to ICAO standards thing switched from statue to nautical miles to define lateral limits to airspace. I live within 1/2 mile of an uncontrolled field. In any event there is one fellow lamenting about crashing on an an RTH command and crashed. He was under the 400' operating limits.

 

[sar104]

Looks like you know a little bit. I have been flying for 45 years ATP an CFII with over 10000 hrs. Total time. In various platforms and types aircraft. I'm finding lots of errors in the thinking. When the FAA went to ICAO standards thing switched from statue to nautical miles to define lateral limits to airspace. I live within 1/2 mile of an uncontrolled field. In any event there is one fellow lamenting about crashing on an an RTH command and crashed. He was under the 400' operating limits.

This discussion is pointless. Your qualifications, flight history and where you live are irrelevant if you don't understand current regulations, and clearly you don't. You haven't made a cogent argument on a single point yet, and instead just keep going on evasively about misinformation and errors, but with so few specifics or references that it is impossible to understand either what you think is wrong, or what you think would be correct. The few specific statements that you have made have, themselves, been mostly incorrect.

I recommend that before you engage any further, you take the time to read the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, Part 101, Part 107, and the current FAA interpretations, especially of 101. Then you will find additional information in the sUAS section of the FAA website that further clarifies their implementation of those regulations.

 

[Greg75071]

Funny thing. I feel the same about you. Good luck.

 

[BigAl07]

Likely a lag. It syncs with the number of waivers I've heard in other venues, which I think is currently around 330. So maybe there's been a Part 107.41 waiver in the last two months! I'll keep watching.

Go to Part 107 Waivers Granted

and scroll through or type 107.41 n the search field. Many have been granted.

 

[Helihover]

Here's the first of many.
The maximum allowable altitude is 400 feet above the ground, and higher if your drone remains within 400 feet of a structure.

One guy was upset because he couldn't fly above 400' with a 1600' tower.

I took the above straight off the FAA website. Seems the FAA does not like you making divets in the ground or other things.

The other. Cannot fly in class D. Fist Class D is a tower controlled airport. Limits are 4 nautical miles from the geographical center of the airport not 5. You can fly in that area if you contact the controlling authority I.e. The tower and request permission. The have the authority to grant that permission and will usually be accommodating if approached properly. I.e. Explain the purpose of the flight altitudes etc.

DJI has a policy where you can request a waiver or exception to their policy of not allowing the drone to takeoff in controlled airspace. This can be granted for a period of up to 30 days. I regularly take photos of aircraft at airports with towers. It is not a problem if you know how to do things.

Pics or it never happened.

 

[THA]

When you guys post something you do know or think you know, please state whether flying is under 101 or 107. Big differences as in the 400 ft rule, upps, not rule but suggestion. Oh, wait, maybe I need to clarify 101 or 107. Under 101 400 ft is only a recommendation, not a legal limit. As is notifying the tower or airfield control. Only notify, not ask permission. They can only recommend not flying and should not put any restrictions on you but beware if they recommend no and something happens.

 

[Helihover]

When you guys post something you do know or think you know, please state whether flying is under 101 or 107. Big differences as in the 400 ft rule, upps, not rule but suggestion. Oh, wait, maybe I need to clarify 101 or 107. Under 101 400 ft is only a recommendation, not a legal limit. As is notifying the tower or airfield control. Only notify, not ask permission. They can only recommend not flying and should not put any restrictions on you but beware if they recommend no and something happens.

They can in fact deny you if they feel it's unsafe.

Cmon Greg, let's see some pics.....

 

[THA]

They can in fact deny you if they feel it's unsafe.

Cmon Greg, let's see some pics.....

My understanding is they cannot deny but advise you unless it has been declared a TFR or other published restriction. Again, this is 101 not 107

 

[Helihover]

My understanding is they cannot deny but advise you unless it has been declared a TFR or other published restriction. Again, this is 101 not 107

Nope. An airport operator can deny you if they feel the flight would be unsafe.

 

[sar104]

Nope. An airport operator can deny you if they feel the flight would be unsafe.

Technically, as the FAA states it, the airport operator can object, but not deny:
Can an airport operator object to model aircraft flights near an airport?
Yes, an airport operator can object to the proposed use of a model aircraft within five miles of an airport if the proposed activity would endanger the safety of the airspace. However, the airport operator cannot prohibit or prevent the model aircraft operator from operating within five miles of the airport. Unsafe flying in spite of the objection of an airport operator may be evidence that the operator was endangering the safety of the National Airspace System. Additionally, the UAS operator must comply with any applicable airspace requirements.