Flying Over Busy Streets

Joined
Dec 2, 2016
Messages
185
Reaction score
30
Age
68
I have to photograph an industrial plant in a busy urban area. To get good images from some angles, I'll have to put the drone over the street (probably at about 200' to 300').

Is it technically illegal to fly over moving autos? Just curious if anyone else has had to deal with this and whether they had any qualms about positioning the drone over a street or highway.
 
I never fly over traffic. Not sure if it is illegal or not, I just would not want to be the cause of an accident because I caused a diversion. I would not want to be held Ethically and or financially liable.
 
I would first take it up to over 200' before moving it into position. I don't think it would be a distraction way up there and wouldn't be noticed. I am more concerned about causing an accident because of a drone crash. On the other hand, I've taken thousands of aerial photos from planes and helicopters while flying over streets and they can sometimes fall out of the sky and do a lot more damage than a drone.

Anybody know the chance of a phantom 4 pro failing and falling?
 
I have to photograph an industrial plant in a busy urban area. To get good images from some angles, I'll have to put the drone over the street (probably at about 200' to 300').

Is it technically illegal to fly over moving autos? Just curious if anyone else has had to deal with this and whether they had any qualms about positioning the drone over a street or highway.

There is nothing "technically" illegal about it - It is FLAT OUT a violation! Either move to the opposite side of the road to launch and shoot, or scrub the job unless you can get a waiver (good luck with that!). Why put your certification in danger, along with endangering the general public? Do it right, or don't do it at all.
 
Under your Part 107 Certification (we are assuming this is what you're flying under) it states:

You can’t fly a small UAS over anyone who is not directly participating in the operation, not under a covered structure, or not inside a covered stationary vehicle. No operations from a moving vehicle are allowed unless you are flying over a sparsely populated area.
 
There is nothing "technically" illegal about it - It is FLAT OUT a violation! Either move to the opposite side of the road to launch and shoot, or scrub the job unless you can get a waiver (good luck with that!). Why put your certification in danger, along with endangering the general public? Do it right, or don't do it at all.

No need to preach. I'm just asking.
 
Under your Part 107 Certification (we are assuming this is what you're flying under) it states:

You can’t fly a small UAS over anyone who is not directly participating in the operation, not under a covered structure, or not inside a covered stationary vehicle. No operations from a moving vehicle are allowed unless you are flying over a sparsely populated area.

If all the cars are stopped at a light while being over the street, I presume that would count as being a "stationary vehicle"?

Almost every youtube drone video involves flying that violates this rule. They are always crossing streets and highways.

Anyway, I don't intend to push the envelope but I think I made a good point that it's ok to fly a helicopter or fixed wing over a street so I don't see that it's that much of a risk to do so with a drone unless there is an unacceptable probability of a failure.
 
If all the cars are stopped at a light while being over the street, I presume that would count as being a "stationary vehicle"?

Almost every youtube drone video involves flying that violates this rule. They are always crossing streets and highways.

Anyway, I don't intend to push the envelope but I think I made a good point that it's ok to fly a helicopter or fixed wing over a street so I don't see that it's that much of a risk to do so with a drone unless there is an unacceptable probability of a failure.
To the extent you seek to afford guidelines applicable to fixed wing/helicopters to your operation (if this is even sustainable) you would need to maintain an altitude allowing a safe emergency landing without undue hazard to person or property on the ground. Not something you might be reasonable comfortable in doing with a flying toy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigAl07
If all the cars are stopped at a light while being over the street, I presume that would count as being a "stationary vehicle"?

Almost every youtube drone video involves flying that violates this rule. They are always crossing streets and highways.

Anyway, I don't intend to push the envelope but I think I made a good point that it's ok to fly a helicopter or fixed wing over a street so I don't see that it's that much of a risk to do so with a drone unless there is an unacceptable probability of a failure.


Let's get this straight...
* First you ask the question that you probably already knew the "legal" answer to but hoped someone would tell you that you're good to go.

* Then you state "If all the cars are stopped at a light while being over the street, I presume that would count as being a "stationary vehicle"?"

* Then when people try and tell you the correct answer but it doesn't fit your agenda you get defensive.

* Then you come back with "they do it on YT" as a rebuttal which is silly at best.

* Lastly you state "I think I made a good point that it's ok to fly a helicopter or fixed wing over a street so I don't see that it's that much of a risk to do so with a drone".
Seriously?

With your cars at a light reply.... you're trying to split hairs and I can tell you from first hand experience that doesn't work with the FAA.

In response to your "helicopter/fixed wing" comment: There is almost no correlation between manned aircraft and our TOY grade UAS. Manned aircraft have multiple levels of redundancy, strict altitude restrictions, insanely tedious inspections and reporting, TRAINED operators who train in EMERGENCY procedures, and they have some degree of ability to control flight in the event of an engine/power system failure. Our TOY grade UAS have none of these and a single component failure usually results in tumbling out of the sky with no control what so ever. That's like saying, "My kid got a plastic fake FBI badge from the internet so now I'm an FBI agent." That''s not how it works.

It's not ethical or legal to do so if operating under Part 107. Either you abide by the rules and don't fly over the road or you do what you want to do, which is exactly what you had planned to do regardless, and fly over the road as needed and just hope you don't have an incident. It's really just that simple.
 
I'm pretty sure there are other angles you can take the shot from without violating any rules and compromise your certification. A good photographer is creative and thinks outside the box.
 
I just got a little bit "defensive" about the tendency of some on the internet to use any excuse to preach or tell someone off.

I intend to do what is safe and legal. I did read that rule but I wanted to know if there are other ways it can be interpreted. Also I see no reason to criticize the thinking that flying over stopped vehicles on a street would be operating within the rule.

Thanks guys.
 
Also I see no reason to criticize the thinking that flying over stopped vehicles on a street would be operating within the rule.

Why would you assume this? Read the paragraph again.

You can’t fly a small UAS over anyone who is not directly participating in the operation, not under a covered structure, or not inside a covered stationary vehicle. No operations from a moving vehicle are allowed unless you are flying over a sparsely populated area.

1) No flying over people not involved in operation.
2) You cannot fly while you, yourself, are under a covered structure.
3) You cannot fly while you, yourself, are inside a covered, stationary vehicle.
4) You cannot fly while inside a moving vehicle unless flying over a sparsely populated area.

Nowhere in there does it even hint at you being allowed to fly over stationary vehicles. How could you interpret that so wrong?
 
I just got a little bit "defensive" about the tendency of some on the internet to use any excuse to preach or tell someone off.

I intend to do what is safe and legal. I did read that rule but I wanted to know if there are other ways it can be interpreted. Also I see no reason to criticize the thinking that flying over stopped vehicles on a street would be operating within the rule.

Thanks guys.

A "STOPPED" vehicle is NOT a "STATIONARY" vehicle. There are many things that you can do, have, or possess within a stationary vehicle, that are illegal withing a stopped vehicle. It isn't open to interpretation. Go seek well informed legal council before you go assuming things that could get you into a lot of trouble.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shammyh
Stopped and stationary. I don't see any difference. Does the rule make a distinction between the two?

I think the intent of the rule is that a drone not crash into a moving vehicle. A stopped or stationary vehicle is not moving.

In this case, however, I opted to photograph the facility using a helicopter, flying over moving vehicles and people.
 
Stopped and stationary. I don't see any difference. Does the rule make a distinction between the two?

I think the intent of the rule is that a drone not crash into a moving vehicle. A stopped or stationary vehicle is not moving.

In this case, however, I opted to photograph the facility using a helicopter, flying over moving vehicles and people.

Again, you err by not having an understanding of case law. There is such a huge difference between stopped and stationary, that it is hardly worth the breath to discuss the matter. Stopped simply means, to pause, for a short period of time. A vehicle stopped at a traffic signal is only paused for a moment, and is still running and arguably still in gear. Even if you are stopped at a traffic light, you can still be charged with driving under the influence, even though you are not moving. Stationary means not able to move, which means not running, and not in gear, and usually also with the keys out of the ignition. If you are drunk in a stationary vehicle, you are not guilty of drunk driving.

Why the difference? If you crash into a parked car that is not moving, you may dent the car. Crash into a car that is only stopped at a traffic light and the driver could panic, and with the simple twitch of a foot, seriously injure or kill someone. THAT is the difference between "stopped" and "stationary". Ignore the difference at your own peril.

Again, seek legal council before assuming that you understand how to interpret the law. That is all.
 
We're not discussing case law and traffic laws but what the FAA deems to be "stationary." I think a stopped car is stationary. You have defined it otherwise. I'm not obliged to to follow the rule according to your definition. I'm interpreting the rule in a way that makes sense to me.

If there is a traffic jam, cars are stopped for a long time. It is safe to fly a drone over them as I see it. The people inside the cars are as sheltered as they would be if the car were stopped in a parking lot. It behooves the FAA to clarify this point if they don't intend it to include stationary cars on a road.

If you have something from the FAA that supports your position, please post it.
 
We're not discussing case law and traffic laws but what the FAA deems to be "stationary." I think a stopped car is stationary. You have defined it otherwise. I'm not obliged to to follow the rule according to your definition. I'm interpreting the rule in a way that makes sense to me.

If there is a traffic jam, cars are stopped for a long time. It is safe to fly a drone over them as I see it. The people inside the cars are as sheltered as they would be if the car were stopped in a parking lot. It behooves the FAA to clarify this point if they don't intend it to include stationary cars on a road.

If you have something from the FAA that supports your position, please post it.

Fly at your own risk, due to ignorance. How YOU see it has nothing to do with it. Good luck to you.
 
You have your way of seeing it too. How is it that your way trumps my way? You have not backed up your position with anything but your opinion.

"You can’t fly a small UAS over anyone who is not directly participating in the operation, not under a covered structure, or not inside a covered stationary vehicle."

Vehicles on a highway in a traffic jam are "stationary." Tell someone stopped for a half hour in a traffic jam that his car is "moving" and is not "stationary." Likewise if there is heavy traffic at a stop light and cars are stopped for a long time.

I'm not telling you what to do. Fly your drone according to how you see it. For me, I see nothing wrong with my interpretation, unless there is some documentation from the FAA that I don't know about that forbids flying over stopped cars on a road or a street.
 
Why would you assume this? Read the paragraph again.

You can’t fly a small UAS over anyone who is not directly participating in the operation, not under a covered structure, or not inside a covered stationary vehicle. No operations from a moving vehicle are allowed unless you are flying over a sparsely populated area.

1) No flying over people not involved in operation.
2) You cannot fly while you, yourself, are under a covered structure.
3) You cannot fly while you, yourself, are inside a covered, stationary vehicle.
4) You cannot fly while inside a moving vehicle unless flying over a sparsely populated area.

Nowhere in there does it even hint at you being allowed to fly over stationary vehicles. How could you interpret that so wrong?

I interpret the referenced paragraph differently than you for your #'s 2 & 3.
The reference to "NOT under a covered structure & NOT inside a covered stationary vehicle" are not referring to the pilot, they are referring to the "anyone' in the paragraph, that can not be flown over.
 
Now I understand the confusion. He thought the rule was applying to the drone pilot and from where he could fly the drone.

I hadn't read him carefully enough.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,358
Members
104,936
Latest member
hirehackers