Would you report to the FAA a "Certified Drone Operator" flying in Class D 0 AGL airspace? Location is within 0.5 miles of an AF base and routinely has C-130 and CV-22 aircraft flying low enough to read the tail numbers.
Last edited:
Yes why wouldn't you? Certified or not.Would you report to the FAA a "Certified Drone Operator" flying in Class D 0 AGL airspace? Location is within 0.5 miles of an AF base and routinely has C-130 and CV-22 aircraft flying low enough to rad the tail numbers.
Absolutely would and HAVE reported such actions!Would you report to the FAA a "Certified Drone Operator" flying in Class D 0 AGL airspace? Location is within 0.5 miles of an AF base and routinely has C-130 and CV-22 aircraft flying low enough to rad the tail numbers.
If you have the proper waivers/clearances you should not be affected. This is for those who don't!I get waivers all the time to fly in 0' areas in Davis Monthan AFB Class C airspace, sometimes right against the fence. I don't mind someone reporting me for it - the waiver is in the system - but if it impacts me doing my job or causes me issues, I'm not going to be happy about it.
I understand the intent, but how would you know whether one as an airspace authorization? Are you just going to report them anyway?If you have the proper waivers/clearances you should not be affected. This is for those who don't!
You ask... odd concept right!I understand the intent, but how would you know whether one as an airspace authorization? Are you just going to report them anyway?
Class C and Class D have different requirements. This is a class D area and must go through DroneZone.I get waivers all the time to fly in 0' areas in Davis Monthan AFB Class C airspace, sometimes right against the fence. I don't mind someone reporting me for it - the waiver is in the system - but if it impacts me doing my job or causes me issues, I'm not going to be happy about it.
First clue I had was when I mentioned to him it was Class D 0 AGL, he told me to mind my own business. I requested a waiver for this exact spot and was denied, the reason given was that Hurlburt Field, who controls this class D does not want any UAS's operations.You ask... odd concept right!
Are you a LEO requesting to see the waiver? If you are not, I would give you the same answer he did. If he is 107 certified and obtained a waiver for the flight there is no problem.First clue I had was when I mentioned to him it was Class D 0 AGL, he told me to mind my own business. I requested a waiver for this exact spot and was denied, the reason given was that Hurlburt Field, who controls this class D does not want any UAS's operations.
If your daughter was air crew on one of those planes you probably would report them. Someone’s daughter probably is flying on one of those planes.Absolutely would and HAVE reported such actions!
Not sure what you're implying but it seems you're confused as I stated I definitely would report someone and I have already...If your daughter was air crew on one of those planes you probably would report them. Someone’s daughter probably is flying on one of those planes.
Going off the deep end a little? No plane has been crashed by a drone. Take it in perspective. Cars kill people much more. (What an understatement!) Do you turn in every person violating the laws of the road?If your daughter was air crew on one of those planes you probably would report them. Someone’s daughter probably is flying on one of those planes.
Well this thread is regarding drones not cars.Going off the deep end a little? No plane has been crashed by a drone. Take it in perspective. Cars kill people much more. (What an understatement!) Do you turn in every person violating the laws of the road?
Sorry, you are right. No it's not about cars. Lol. I was trying to use an analogy to try to make it easier to see a prospective point. It was directed toTimothy Smith. Again, sorry you didn't get it.Well this thread is regarding drones not cars.
Oh I got it...Sorry, you are right. No it's not about cars. Lol. I was trying to use an analogy to try to make it easier to see a prospective point. It was directed toTimothy Smith. Again, sorry you didn't get it.