Drones
With the kids out of the house we added a patio and hot tub to the backyard. I took the necessary precautions by adding bushes and ornamental grasses to help in blocking the view from the street, and a nearby house. I was even able to do almost all the construction in the buff.
Shortly afterwards a good friend decides my house is an ideal place to fly his drone. It is very nicely equipped with a HD camera, and can be operated from several miles away.
Due to the winter months the patio has seen limited use, but it looks like I may be coming out as a nudist sooner than planed.
Shotgun problem sorted bet you won't see another for quite some time.Any problems you just say I was removing pest birds
I just read that one of the major ammunition companies has come out with a shotgun anti-drone round - it fires a net rather than shot!
Target practice at the drone sounds like fun, but he is a friend and this may just be a good time to fill them in. Its something I've been wanting to anyway.
This is an example of there the Law is lagging behind technology. I've read of a man being sued for shooting down a drone over his own property. Just as a river going thru private property is open to the public IF they do not set foot on land, ( in a boat,or raft) No property rights exist above ones property. Almost every week in the summer I have ultra light aircraft flying low overhead. Seems that a right to privacy law should be updated.
In the US, there is a property right to the sky above your property, but it's limited in height. As far as I know, no court has yet set a hard limit, though. It's pretty clear from the decisions that at 500 feet and above, you have no property right. There's probably a pretty strong right at the top of your roofline and below, but in between it will probably depend on the court that has to decide the question.
For property in sparsely-populated areas, the FAA regulations for manned aircraft just say that the pilot must stay at least 500 feet away from structures, so from the FAA point of view it's legal for somebody to fly lower than 500 feet above the ground as long as the straight-line distance to the nearest structure is 500 feet or more. I don't think drones are covered by that regulation (I haven't looked at the new drone regs published last year), so overall it's still a large grey area.
I just checked. FAR part 103 applies to ultralights. There is no 500 ft limit for clearance from buildings, etc. But there is one paragraph that may pertain:
103.15 Operations over congested areas.
No person may operate an ultralight vehicle over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons.
I think that generally this rule is intended to protect people and property from failure of an ultralight, hence can't fly over an assembly of persons. If a person flying an ultralight is putting people at risk, then I would think there are grounds for a complaint to the FAA.
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!