Permission to fly!

[articandy]

Here's a question if you don't land or walk on private property why do we need permission from the landowner to fly above their land?

Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[LuvMyTJ]

Answer - In the US you don't. You appear to be in the UK?

 

[Domikk]

nice car

 

[Kevin M]

Here's a question if you don't land or walk on private property why do we need permission from the landowner to fly above their land?

Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

Just rip the sign down and fly!!!
They don't own the sky!!

 

[LuvMyTJ]

Just rip the sign down and fly!!!
They don't own the sky!!

No but they do own the land below it and they have the right to limit what activities happen on land. If they say no take offs & landings then abide by it. Ignoring it only make more restriction on the hobby.

 

[Traveler]

I recently flew over a historic location, Castle Hot Springs, Arizona. The point of my flight was to take pictures of the historical landscape and buildings, thus it was the focus and cause for me being above their property, not just a location that I would be traveling over. For this reason I felt compelled to request their permission, and in my case permission was given. Not to the extent I wanted, but otherwise all parties were amenable. Point being, I gave respect and got respect, and that is how I prefer to approach a like question. I also understand that persons don't control airspace, the governing agency, i.e., FAA, has that responsibility, but again, for me, I try to respect the personal rights of those that are seeking privacy. When a person builds a high wall to keep prying eyes away, we should give the same respect we would expect.

 

[Kevin M]

No but they do own the land below it and they have the right to limit what activities happen on land. If they say no take offs & landings then abide by it. Ignoring it only make more restriction on the hobby.

Yes, understood your point about flying on there land and take offs also.
But if I live 1/2 mile away and take off on my land, and fly OVER there land,(which is the sky above) there can't do sh_t about it. THE FACTS....

 

[skyhighdiver]

No but they do own the land below it and they have the right to limit what activities happen on land. If they say no take offs & landings then abide by it. Ignoring it only make more restriction on the hobby.

As stated if you dont take off or land on there property you are free to fly.

 

[Leenanj]

As stated if you dont take off or land on there property you are free to fly.

What about national parks like Yosemite, Yellowstone, Mt Rushmore to name a few?

Cannot fly in there airspace no matter where you take off from.

 

[Imabiggles]

What about national parks like Yosemite, Yellowstone, Mt Rushmore to name a few?

Cannot fly in there airspace no matter where you take off from.

as regulated by the FAA. however I dont think there are no-flys over national parks

 

[Zerone]

Here's a question if you don't land or walk on private property why do we need permission from the landowner to fly above their land?

You don't need permission to fly over private property, you just need permission to take off or land on it. The image you show is for Eastbourne Downland (I think ), which is managed by a byelaw. Section 18, related to RC Aircraft, but specifically limits itself to Take-Off and Landing only.

http://www.eastbourne.gov.uk/EasysiteWeb/getresource.axd?AssetID=228146&type=full&servicetype=Inline

 

[Not A Speck Of Cereal]

Yes, understood your point about flying on there land and take offs also.
But if I live 1/2 mile away and take off on my land, and fly OVER there land,(which is the sky above) there can't do sh_t about it. THE FACTS....

The facts now. But without respect, it make not be a fact tomorrow. Don't be an asshat -- if someone doesn't want you to fly over their property, don't do it.

 

[Traveler]

Clearly the laws vary from state to sate or country to country, but for me, I would always consider intent. If I wanted to get from point A to C, but I would need to pass over B, I would if I could do so without removing a reasonable personal expectation of privacy. That being said, not all person are reasonable and so its true that "you can please some of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time". You may have legal right, but is what your after worth the battle. I fly to a lake in my local community and yes the shortest distance for me would be to fly over many homes, but in my case I was able to plot a path (via Litchi) that skirts all the homes and still gets the job done. We are operating in a time where laws are being forged based upon our actions, I for one don't want to be the reason for another one. Sounds like this is a case for personal choice and personal accountability.
Good luck, fly safe.



Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[skyhighdiver]

What about national parks like Yosemite, Yellowstone, Mt Rushmore to name a few?

Cannot fly in there airspace no matter where you take off from.

You cant get close enough to film mt rushmore from private land talke unless you have a multi battery craft anyway. I was told by the head of northwest regional national parks that as there rule states. you may not take off from or land on national park lands . He said I cant control what you do from private property as also stated clearly in this report

Illegal flights persist despite national park drone ban

. Airspace in most national parks is designated FAA territory, so a person could theoretically stand outside of park boundaries and fly over or into the park — if they keep the drone within sight.

Final FAA regulations are still in the works. For now, if park officials want to use the devices for park purposes, such as wildlife tracking and topographic mapping, they have to get explicit FAA permission. That's because they would be piloting them from within the park boundaries, whereas a visitor standing outside and flying in isn't breaking any rules.

 

[Not A Speck Of Cereal]

Well said BV. We already have laws and rules changing all around us. We should avoid doing things that will just make it tougher for us in the long run.

 

[tech_fan]

Recently there was some legislation passed in some states in the United States making it legal for someone to sue you if you fly over their land without permission and/or take videos of their house or property.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Not A Speck Of Cereal]

And so it begins ...

 

[articandy]

Yes it was beachy head zerone I went at 06:00 so there was no one about did a few videos but it was too windy so gave up back to the car and saw the sign I don't understand what the issue is its public land no one about I have public liability insurance for £5million so if I took off from the road and filmed the cliff would that be ok? Also does this cover the beach it self?


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Traveler]

Honestly there are too many unknown variables to give a conclusive answer to your question. Does this sign come with any official statute (law) or explanation for why the are is restricted. Perhaps it is a simple as a nature preserve and they don't want anyone with a quad to disturb migrating or nesting birds. Last week I did a hike to the north end of Lake Pleasant, Az, with the intention to visit Indian ruins, when I arrived to the normal parking lot for this hike I observed many no trespassing signs that indicted the area was closed due to nesting Eagles. A quick search on google confirmed that this section of land was closed from December thru mid June. Now the sign didn't specifically say no drones, but in this case, it was in my opinion a common sense answer; if they were so protective of eagles from the ground, they certainly wouldn't want a quad flying around the area. I packed my quad and my bottom back to the car and concluded that I will just have to wait for Mother Nature to have its turn. I later found out that this vast area of land that was closed to all visitors contained only two Eagles' nest. Clearly they care for their well being and as a proud citizen, so do I. Point, if you really want to fly here, do some investigation for why that sign is there, could be a big deal, could just be left behind from a past event, or even just some overzealous nut case who thinks he owns the beach.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Sabalon]

Looking at the bylaws the Zerone posted, it appears you can't do much on the land there - no bathing, climbing, grazing But keep in mind, even if you don't take off/land etc, there is this little bit in section 17.1
cause or permit to be made any noise which is so loud or so continuous or repeated as to give reasonable cause for annoyance to other persons on the land.