- Joined
- May 27, 2014
- Messages
- 2
- Reaction score
- 0
Is it legal to fly at the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco? Any suggestion for a startimg point?
Was just showing em and seen abunch of em in there . I believe all our Locks here on the Ten-Tom are considered the same .You ought to google it:
Increased drone activity around Golden Gate Bridge ramps up security fears
Read more: Increased drone activity around Golden Gate Bridge ramps up security fears
It has been deemed a "critical infrastructure" by Homeland Security. That is all I need to know.
That's a huge strut on your drone! And it looks like you may be over the 400-foot guideline, too...
Here's my thought. If you can readily find drone/uav footage of a special landmark as grand as the Golden Gate Bridge on YouTube (which there are plenty) then leave it alone and avoid the risks that are involved as well the attention you will be bringing to yourself. Enjoy the videos and go find something new and original. Let's face it, the laws and regulations are coming and there will be a lot of no fly zones. I see laws where hobbyist and recreational flyers will be banned from "commercial drone/uav" airspace and that can be pretty much everywhere. Guaranteed!Is it legal to fly at the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco? Any suggestion for a startimg point?
I fly light planes and the hysteria surrounding drones amazes me. Not flying my plane under the bridge would take all my will power. You have to remain 500' above or horizontally from any structure or person. Over sparsely populated areas, ground level is legal. And if you can't fly along comfortably at 50' -- vigilantly of course -- I think it's something you should know how to do. Would 200' UNDER the bridge be legal?
Getting upset over a P3 taking pictures of the bridge from the side is ridiculous.
Off subject: How DO you launch from a boat? I thought level and stationary were important at power up. I'll look for a thread, or make one.
GREAT POST! I have tons of hours in light planes, and when I read about some of these UAV proposals, worries, proposed licensing requirements, even privacy, I like to give an example involving a light plane. "500' (vertical or horizontal) from any persons or structures...1,000' in densely populated areas...in any case, no undue hazard if power unit fails..." So in a "regular" aircraft, 500' beside, or above is totally legal. Just saying... Also an aircraft and a camera with a telephoto lens can violate a lot of privacy too. As can a pedestrian with a cell phone.
I wasn't thinking you were very upset Mario, and I hadn't read your first post on this topic. Sad to say but I think that you are totally spot on with your comments. People appear to have "drone hysteria", and there is no telling what will fan the flames. And yes again, the guy who takes it just a "little too far", can REALLY fan the flames, and hurt it for the rest of us. And what he did might not be so horrible. If you were 50' off to the side in an Inspire (Or even a Phantom 3, but less so), the distraction to a driver could be a hazard all by itself. I'd be looking as fast as anyone! LOL "Drone sighting causes accident on Golden Gate Bridge." That would be just what we need.I'm not upset. It's just that not everyone practices common sense. Of course there is nothing wrong with taking pictures of the bridge from the side but there's always that one guy who takes it a step further and ruins the fun for everyone.