New rule, don't fly over people? Anyone bothered by this?

[rickray]

I know we are all excited that the FAA has finally made it possible for us to get a commercial license to fly our birds without taking a pilot's license with us. But has anyone noticed that the new rules specify that we cannot fly over people?

This seems like the most onerous restriction I have heard out of any rules anywhere. I understand the dangers of flying over big crowds, concerts, stadiums, etc. (see the rules in the UK), but not over people?

This means we cannot fly over a neighborhood, a park, a hiking trail, any roads anywhere, any rivers or lakes with boats, basically anywhere, because if we pass over "people" - even a lone hunter in a remote forest, we could be subject to FAA prosecution?

And getting an exception to this, time after time, will likely be a cumbersome exercise in bureaucracy.

Is anyone else thinking this is a terrible restriction? Or have I somehow misread the intent?

 

[msinger]

All it means is you'll need a 333 exemption in order to fly directly over people. Most commercial operations probably don't involve flying over people, so it shouldn't be a deal breaker for most people.

 

[BigAl07]

It's NOT a new restriction for commercial ops. Those who have been flying commercially have been flying under this restriction since day one. And getting the "Exemption" for flight over people is going to be one of the toughest ones to get IMHO.

 

[WetDog]

Until such time as the manufacturers flight qualify their products (fat chance) this will remain in place. You just have to pick your lines carefully and plan your flight. Yes, it will limit you. No flying over weddings for one. But given the propensity for DJI products to fall right out of the sky it is hard to argue against.

The bigger problem that the new rules don't cover is the fact that UAVs don't necessarily fall straight down. The recent P3 attack on the Canadian spectator shows this graphically - the P3 was about 20-40 feet horizontally displaced from the victim. It tumbled down and clobbered her but it wasn't directly overhead at any time (at least in the video).

When you are flying around people you have to be conservative and careful. Doubly so if you are commercial.

 

[L.Chaney]

How many airliners fly over people and populated areas?
Answer is all of them.


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[msinger]

How many airliners fly over people and populated areas?

Sure, but we're talking about sUAS laws here.

 

[BigAl07]

How many airliners fly over people and populated areas?
Answer is all of them.


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

Each and EVERY one of those airliners have been tested and "Certified" for thousands of flight hours with multiple levels of redundancy built into every system. Each and every Pilot operating those airliners have been trained and have thousands of flight hours in the type of aircraft they are flying.

Not so much with our hobby grade UASs and recreational operators. You're comparing Apples to Oranges.

 

[aerodyn]

This rule affects commercial use only, not hobbyist use. You can see the difference here:

Getting Started

 

[aerodyn]

How many airliners fly over people and populated areas?
Answer is all of them.

Sure, and someday, you'll be able to buy a drone that is certified to the same airworthiness standards as those airliners, and the FAA will allow it to be flown over unsuspecting members of the general public. Until then, you're flying pieces of Chinese-made consumer electronics with no redundancy or consideration for flight safety whatsoever.

 

[m0j0]

honestly, I try not to fly directly over people anyway. I'm sure I have done it mistakenly, e.g. I didn't know someone was on the other side of that tree, but definitely not on purpose. No big deal in my opinion.

 

[ianwood]

This is not new. If you have a 333, you have to maintain 500ft from all people unless you are on a closed set and have it on your exemption along with an MPTOM. And when on a closed set, you still have to maintain 500ft from any non-participating person.

Part 107 will require a waiver for flight directly over people. It at least removes the 500ft minimum so if anything, it's an easing of the rules.

 

[rickray]

I don't think there is any doubt we shouldn't be flying over CROWDS of people but flying over "people" is such a general prohibition that I doubt even the best prepared can avoid it at certain times. I think it would be better to simply advise not to fly over large gathering, as multiple other countries do (UK).

 

[strgazr27]

How many airliners fly over people and populated areas?
Answer is all of them.


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[mmcbain]

In Australia the rule is 30 metres from people, roughly 100 feet. I plan my quadcopter flights pretty carefully. The first consideration is safety. If you have a rotor or engine failure, or if you don't take obstacle management seriously, your 1.5 kg $2.5K plaything is going to plummet out of the sky, as out-of-control as any meteor. I own a house, and [since this is a hobby] I don't have professional indemnity or public liability insurance. That's an easy equation for me to solve.