Height rulesi

[Dan cutter]

is a vertical rock face considered the ground? I watched the video of the drone filming the guy changing a light atop a 1500 foot tower. Apparently he was contacted by authorities for flying over 400 feet. It got me thinking--I like to fly in the mountains and frequently hit 500 meter limit though I'm never more than 50 feet from the mountain side. I know the "rule" says 400 feet above the takeoff point so as not to interfere with air traffic. I am just curious---I know I'm not presenting a danger to airplanes (unless they are about to hit the mountains).

 

[msinger]

I know the "rule" says 400 feet above the takeoff point

It's 400 feet AGL in the US. That means the distance between the aircraft and the ground below it should not be more than 400 feet.

 

[GMack]

Rule is within 400 feet of a structure so he was legal under 107 and he could fly up to 1900 feet as long as he was within 400 feet of the tower. Same for mountains, buildings, etc.

 

[Darren Roach]

In the UK it is 400 feet from ground level. That said, if you were to fly down a hill side you must then lower your altitude accordingly. Aircraft needs to be no more than 400 feet relative to the ground it is above.
Flying out from a hill side across a valley you will be above 400 feet as the valley falls away and be in breach of to 400 feet rule.
This would technically true if flying from a building out into open space.

 

[Philltayl]

In the UK it is 400 feet from ground level. That said, if you were to fly down a hill side you must then lower your altitude accordingly. Aircraft needs to be no more than 400 feet relative to the ground it is above.
Flying out from a hill side across a valley you will be above 400 feet as the valley falls away and be in breach of to 400 feet rule.
This would technically true if flying from a building out into open space.

not correct.....