DJi blocking you from flying near an airport

[Rynocity]

I did a distance run just before the update and chickened out at 10000' and went home. After the update I made the same run and got a GEO warning at about 9800' and of course turned around and went home. I can't remember the wording, but the jist of the warning was that I would lose control of they aircraft imminently. The changed something, that's for sure.

Before you all jump on me for being unsafe around airports. I'm well aware of this airport(one dirt runway), I never cross the flight path and never thought I was getting near it. I follow the river valley, my path must barely touch the edge of the safety radius. I'm looking for a new place to distance run.

 

[WilliamM]

I love this community and i never said im going to fly near an airport. Just wanted to know the limitations of my drone. I hVe seen ppl doing stupid things n ruining this hobby for everyone. I just asked a question and i think thats why we have this forum? Dont get angry and post stupid replies.

That's those self-appointed UAV police out there.

Sent from my HTC 10 using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Wolfiesden]

Its not illegal to fly in an airport control area. All you have to do in the USA is make sure your drone is registered and then request clearance from the tower in advance either by radio, phone or email to fly in the controlled airspace.

Some minor corrections...
1. You do not have to request clearance, you simply need to notify. Being polite in the notification is a definite bonus.
2. Its illegal for you to attempt to use any radio transmission device on an aircraft band unless you are licensed and authorized to do so. This is covered in many threads elsewhere here. Radio notification is not appropriate. Doing so would invite the FAA and the FCC to be knocking on your door.

 

[Donw35]

Had I known about any of this before "upgrading" the firmware I would not have, because of this I do not recommend the DJI Quads, to many restriction imposed by the company and not in step with consumer desires. I live 4.9 miles from a major airport and cannot fly over my house or around my property with the Phantom. To do this I have a KX X380, not as cool and techie as the Phantom but its in the air.

My 2 cents

 

[WilliamM]

Had I known about any of this before "upgrading" the firmware I would not have, because of this I do not recommend the DJI Quads, to many restriction imposed by the company and not in step with consumer desires. I live 4.9 miles from a major airport and cannot fly over my house or around my property with the Phantom. To do this I have a KX X380, not as cool and techie as the Phantom but its in the air.

My 2 cents

First off I thought this update kicked in at 1.5 miles from the airport only, only limited your altitude to the 5 miles. Next, I for one are mostly against this new FCC rules. But the airport thing is not one of them. Why would someone fly a drone within 1.5 miles of an airport, that's just dumb. How many times do we need to here about a drone buzzing a jetliner on the news. If one of these drones ever take down a jetliner or plane, then talk about FCC rules!! They could just make it illegal to fly any drones for recreation use, or make it that you need a licence of some type.

 

[NoWheels498]

Throw an open ended question to the entire world, and then challenge the manner in which it's answered. Fk me....

It was a exact opposite of a open ended question. It was a Yes or No question.

 

[Donw35]

First off I thought this update kicked in at 1.5 miles from the airport only, only limited your altitude to the 5 miles. Next, I for one are mostly against this new FCC rules. But the airport thing is not one of them. Why would someone fly a drone within 1.5 miles of an airport, that's just dumb. How many times do we need to here about a drone buzzing a jetliner on the news. If one of these drones ever take down a jetliner or plane, then talk about FCC rules!! They could just make it illegal to fly any drones for recreation use, or make it that you need a licence of some type.

I agree, 1.5 or even 2.5 miles from the airport is acceptable to me, safety first but 4.9 miles, I am ok with altitude restrictions of maybe 200 feet but come on, at 4.9 miles, if a jetliner is 500 feet from the ground it is having a major problems is going to hit other things first before coming into the path of a quadcopter buzzing around.

 

[Wolfiesden]

First off I thought this update kicked in at 1.5 miles from the airport only, only limited your altitude to the 5 miles. Next, I for one are mostly against this new FCC rules. But the airport thing is not one of them. Why would someone fly a drone within 1.5 miles of an airport, that's just dumb. How many times do we need to here about a drone buzzing a jetliner on the news. If one of these drones ever take down a jetliner or plane, then talk about FCC rules!! They could just make it illegal to fly any drones for recreation use, or make it that you need a licence of some type.

I am sorry you think that. Throwing out a blanket statement that its dumb to fly within 1.5m of an airport is myopic at best. Within 1.5m (or any distance up to the perimeter fence) there are many areas where a drone COULD fly safely and pose absolutely no risk to aircraft. Within the 5mi ring of an airport there can be towers, water towers, power lines, trees, buildings and other hazards to aircraft navigation that would prevent any safe flight of large scale manned aircraft.

For an example, in my area there is a 300' water tower half a block away. There are 200' tall cell towers about 2 blocks away. There are power lines 150' up along behind the houses. There are trees 75-80' along our streets. So, tell me what manned aircraft is going to be flying below the water tower? How about ones below the power lines? How about which ones would be flying below treeline? Well, I mean manned aircraft that don't have pilots in the process of yelling "Brace brace brace!" into the intercom and having the aircraft shredded by surrounding obstacles as they crash. None of them would have any worries about hitting a drone before the plane hit the tree next to the drone, the power lines above the drone, or the water tower well above all that. And tell me why a drone can't fly safely above a house here videoing Halloween or Christmas lights at 50' to 100'? Could that same drone fly at 400' safely? No probably not. I certainly would not.

The problem with everyone's logic is that they assume there is absolutely a complete bare scorched earth disk 5mi in radius around every airport. That is not always, and I submit, its rarely the case. There are, in fact some pretty substantial buildings within 2mi of the control tower of O'hare airport and I think we all can agree thats a pretty major airport and not some poduk dirt strip.

Your blanket statement is like saying every road in the country should have only a 25mph speed limit because because that single road over there can't be safe at faster speeds. That doesn't account for actual conditions any more than your statement does. Or DJI's. There are places where its dangerous over 25mph and other places where its completely safe to do 70mph just like there are places where its safe to fly a drone at a low altitude within 1.5m of an airport and places where it is not.

 

[WilliamM]

I am sorry you think that. Throwing out a blanket statement that its dumb to fly within 1.5m of an airport is myopic at best. Within 1.5m (or any distance up to the perimeter fence) there are many areas where a drone COULD fly safely and pose absolutely no risk to aircraft. Within the 5mi ring of an airport there can be towers, water towers, power lines, trees, buildings and other hazards to aircraft navigation that would prevent any safe flight of large scale manned aircraft.

For an example, in my area there is a 300' water tower half a block away. There are 200' tall cell towers about 2 blocks away. There are power lines 150' up along behind the houses. There are trees 75-80' along our streets. So, tell me what manned aircraft is going to be flying below the water tower? How about ones below the power lines? How about which ones would be flying below treeline? Well, I mean manned aircraft that don't have pilots in the process of yelling "Brace brace brace!" into the intercom and having the aircraft shredded by surrounding obstacles as they crash. None of them would have any worries about hitting a drone before the plane hit the tree next to the drone, the power lines above the drone, or the water tower well above all that. And tell me why a drone can't fly safely above a house here videoing Halloween or Christmas lights at 50' to 100'? Could that same drone fly at 400' safely? No probably not. I certainly would not.

The problem with everyone's logic is that they assume there is absolutely a complete bare scorched earth disk 5mi in radius around every airport. That is not always, and I submit, its rarely the case. There are, in fact some pretty substantial buildings within 2mi of the control tower of O'hare airport and I think we all can agree thats a pretty major airport and not some poduk dirt strip.

Your blanket statement is like saying every road in the country should have only a 25mph speed limit because because that single road over there can't be safe at faster speeds. That doesn't account for actual conditions any more than your statement does. Or DJI's. There are places where its dangerous over 25mph and other places where its completely safe to do 70mph just like there are places where its safe to fly a drone at a low altitude within 1.5m of an airport and places where it is not.

Your quote, "For an example, in my area there is a 300' water tower half a block away. There are 200' tall cell towers about 2 blocks away. There are power lines 150' up along behind the houses. There are trees 75-80' along our streets. So, tell me what manned aircraft is going to be flying below the water tower?"

The answer is none should be. But these are fixed structures, they don't move. And pilots would be aware of them being there from memory or just from visual observation. Not so with a drone, you can fly it up to 500m (1640') with just a push of a stick on the controller. Yes that's 1240' over the legal limit. But it's very easy for someone to do if they want. Also a pilot in a plane can see these structures pretty well during daylight and some have lights on top for night time visibility. But again a drone is small and would only be seen at the last moment going as fast as a plane or jet does. So the bottom line, "GO FLY ELSEWHERE" You have the whole world to fly your drone at, what's the big deal about the need to fly close to a airport. I have a few where I live, and I can and do stay 5 miles out. I have checked it online and know that the places I frequent are outside this line. Like I said before, some of these new FAA laws are dumb for the most part. Some not all, and this is one of them that does make sense.

 

[Wolfiesden]

Ever consider the fact that what you may wish to photograph or video is not located ELSEWHERE? I may not wish to video Christmas lights in the next freaking county. I may wish to video the ones here. A plane (or heli) can't fly through trees, towers, and buildings. Whats the big deal in drone flying below those? Seems like the ultimate in separation to me. If I am flying where they can't, they can't hit me, I can't hit them. As long as the plane sees the tower(s), it isn't going to hit a drone below the tower, if it does its hitting the tower too.

 

[BigAl07]

Some minor corrections...
1. You do not have to request clearance, you simply need to notify. Being polite in the notification is a definite bonus.

While it's true you're not asking for clearance you can be denied access and they are within their Congress mandated rights to do so IF... and I do mean IF they believe it can cause any type of "Safety" issue. If they deny you access they are "supposed" to also provide sound reasoning why. I know of some that simply say "No because it causes a safety problem with traffic on runway 36..." and that's their right even though it might just be because they don't like drone operations because they watch too much media input about drones.

 

[BigAl07]

Your quote, "For an example, in my area there is a 300' water tower half a block away. There are 200' tall cell towers about 2 blocks away. There are power lines 150' up along behind the houses. There are trees 75-80' along our streets. So, tell me what manned aircraft is going to be flying below the water tower?"

The answer is none should be. But these are fixed structures, they don't move. And pilots would be aware of them being there from memory or just from visual observation. Not so with a drone, you can fly it up to 500m (1640') with just a push of a stick on the controller. Yes that's 1240' over the legal limit. But it's very easy for someone to do if they want. Also a pilot in a plane can see these structures pretty well during daylight and some have lights on top for night time visibility. But again a drone is small and would only be seen at the last moment going as fast as a plane or jet does. So the bottom line, "GO FLY ELSEWHERE" You have the whole world to fly your drone at, what's the big deal about the need to fly close to a airport. I have a few where I live, and I can and do stay 5 miles out. I have checked it online and know that the places I frequent are outside this line. Like I said before, some of these new FAA laws are dumb for the most part. Some not all, and this is one of them that does make sense.

I agree with you. Many of the "items" listed above are actually listed on Sectional charts and others would be noted in the NOTAM if they are new or temporary. Those things can be dealt with easily but the drone darting around is a whole other ball of wax that is much harder to deal with.

 

[skiptv]

Some minor corrections...
1. You do not have to request clearance, you simply need to notify. Being polite in the notification is a definite bonus.
2. Its illegal for you to attempt to use any radio transmission device on an aircraft band unless you are licensed and authorized to do so. This is covered in many threads elsewhere here. Radio notification is not appropriate. Doing so would invite the FAA and the FCC to be knocking on your door.

I should have stated once the part 107 kicks in and you are a licensed pilot, you will be able to contact the tower with a VHF radio "which you will need an FCC license for "notifying infers they have to let you, and they don't" "requesting" is a much better tactic

 

[N017RW]

I should have stated once the part 107 kicks in and you are a licensed pilot, you will be able to contact the tower with a VHF radio "which you will need an FCC license for "notifying infers they have to let you, and they don't" "requesting" is a much better tactic

Can you please link to this information? (emphasis added by me)

 

[Multicoptertec]

Yea, I want to see this link also. Where do people come up with these "facts"??

 

[N017RW]

Yea, I want to see this link also. Where do people come up with these "facts"??

Hear, hear! I actually don't think there is any truth in that post at all.

Without an 'N' number there's no FCC call sign.

No c-sign, no talkie.

 

[Multicoptertec]

I could only imagine the radio chatter:

Pilot:
“Tower, this is Phantom 123 Heavy.”

Controller:
“Phantom 123 Heavy.”

Pilot:
“Phantom 123 Heavy, requesting vector to Best Buy, have info Charlie.”

Controller:
“Phantom 123 Heavy, turn left heading 190, maintain altitude 4. Winds zero two zero at five. Altimeter three zero decimal one zero. Squawk three four zero two.

Pilot:
Huh?

 

[Numone]

I flew earlier this week, and got the warning that I was flying in a "recreational aircraft zone" and to "beware of other aircraft". Frankly I think it's all amazing!

 

[BigAl07]

I could only imagine the radio chatter:

Pilot:
“Tower, this is Phantom 123 Heavy.”

Controller:
“Phantom 123 Heavy.”

Pilot:
“Phantom 123 Heavy, requesting vector to Best Buy, have info Charlie.”

Controller:
“Phantom 123 Heavy, turn left heading 190, maintain altitude 4. Winds zero two zero at five. Altimeter three zero decimal one zero. Squawk three four zero two.

Pilot:
Huh?

That's one of the best comments I've read all week long. I'm not afraid to admit I snorted some laughing at it LOL.

 

[tcope]

While it's true you're not asking for clearance you can be denied access and they are within their Congress mandated rights to do so IF... and I do mean IF they believe it can cause any type of "Safety" issue.

I agree with this completely but the FAA did not do themselves any favors by stating it two different ways and not being clear on this _big_ issue.

But hey, that's the FAA... the same people who told us getting the drone was not an issue, it was then matching the drone to the owner that was the problem.