In the News... (what is going on in Florida)

[Outta Control]

Seriously.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/ne...s-flying-over-winter-park-back-yards/32820188

Thoughts...thoughts...

 

[Mazz]

Just a whiny neighbor. There will always be the crabby old lady down the street. That aviation attorney seems to have a crazy sense of the law. You own the airspace above your house to 400 Feet? Mrs. Kravitz needs to relax.

 

[Outta Control]

Just a whiny neighbor. There will always be the crabby old lady down the street. That aviation attorney seems to have a crazy sense of the law. You own the airspace above your house to 400 Feet? Mrs. Kravitz needs to relax.

Interesting. I've search for such info. Link?

Never mind I finally found it and it is very interesting.

Greater than 500 feet = Public Airspace.
Less than 83 feet = Private Property

Case = United States v. Causby

 

[Mazz]

You found a link saying you own the airspace 500ft above your house in the USA? This I need a link for.

 

[Mazz]

Thats more like it (after the edit )

 

[Outta Control]

You found a link saying you own the airspace 500ft above your house in the USA? This I need a link for.

"...In 1926, Congress created what we now call the FAA, and declared that the air above 500 feet is the public domain..."

US Supreme Court Case

 

[Outta Control]

Thats more like it (after the edit )

You bet.

Now go back to watching that video.

 

[Mazz]

Just looking at that case. This is our sentence of victory:
"What resulted from this set of circumstances, though, was a triumph for aviators. The Court affirmed that "the air above the minimum safe altitude of flight... is a public highway and part of the public domain." Poor Causby and his chickens were out of luck. "

This is different for different people then. It says for reasonable enjoyment. I fly a quad and need all 400ft. Does that mean I own all 400?

 

[Mazz]

Now go back to watching that video.

You are out of control.

 

[Outta Control]

...I fly a quad and need all 400ft. Does that mean I own all 400?

I am not a lawyer nor I play one on TV but from my interpretation the answer is Hell Ya.

Which means you, me, the Flying Circus, the little kid that flew of from a balloon, and the Harlem Globe Trotter's super airball shot owns it.

 

[Mike Gravo]

If you read the comments posted by people in the news article link posted above, it sounds like there are a lot of trigger happy gun owners who plan to shoot drones out of the sky if they see one over their property. Dumb.

 

[Ferdi]

How entertaining are those "dramatic re-enactments"!! "Attack of THE DRONE PILOTS"!! Ahhhh!! Run away, run away!!!

I was testing the new new firmware on Saturday flying at my local park and a woman approached me, curious about the the privacy issue. Most people seem to believe these cameras can zoom great distances and spy on them. When I showed her just how close I need to get to get a proper "nude" image of someone, she relaxed a bit.

In August a law will pass here in New Zealand forcing us to obtain permission when flying over private property.

 

[Raider]

I'll agree with the lady in the red hat, I wouldn't want a drone flying through my backyard. I'm taking away someone's privacy at that point.

When I do test flights in my back yard I don't got above the fence line, I have neighbors with kids and some older folk around me. Last thing I would want is someone flying a drone over my house when I'm outside playing with my 3 year old. So I give them the same courtesy.

There are enough issues with flying these thing, last thing I want is a vocal neighbor starting an uproar in my city and getting the stuff banned altogether.

 

[Soflms]

"what if there was a gun on there"? lady...are you kidding me? lol get over yourself everyone in florida packs heat...and it's not on their drones, I promise you. And I love how the news station clearly flew a drone around all the houses for the "drone footage" now that's fighting fire with fire

 

[Eddie Crosby]

The following provisions are being proposed in the FAA’s Small UAS NPRM... I also undrstand that if you operate below 175' you are invading personel air space unless you have permission from landowner.

 

[Outta Control]

The following provisions are being proposed in the FAA’s Small UAS NPRM... I also undrstand that if you operate below 175' you are invading personel air space unless you have permission from landowner.

I have view the attached document I do not see any of your statement being documented. Are you assuming this?

 

[JimPA]

The following provisions are being proposed in the FAA’s Small UAS NPRM... I also undrstand that if you operate below 175' you are invading personel air space unless you have permission from landowner.

Keep in mind "This rulemaking proposes operating requirements to allow small unmanned aircraft systems (small UAS) to operate for non-hobby or non-recreational purposes. "