Marcel Graham

Uavs and Infrastructure Question

Recommended Posts

By now we have all seen this video of the Morning Glory Spillway in California. While the Video is stunning something caught my eye on the video. The pilot put a disclaimer that reads "Do not operate drones within 400' of infrastructure. This Video filmed by professional media UAV pilot"

I am unaware of any regulation that does not allow me to operate within 400' of a dam. It looks to me that this dam is in G airspace and since it just started flowing on Saturday if it was in restricted space there would not be anytime to get a waiver. So my questions are... Is this pilot just blowing smoke about this regulation or does something really exist and if so how does having a P107 exclude you from abiding such a regulation that would have been clearly made for the safety of the dam?

 

Screen Shot 2017-02-22 at 4.11.54 PM.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Marcel Graham said:

I looked but I didn't find one for California. I am right though, there is not a FAA Rule, right?

I don't recall there being a Part 107 rule about flying near critical infrastructure. This website hosts a decent summary of State enacted legislature that might affect flights near critical infrastructure - California is thankfully not listed. He has embedded ads however which means he has monetized his youtube video and that would translate to flying a drone commercially, perhaps he is just warding off potential questions of whether or not he is a licensed pilot. If you are flying as a hobbyist, then the FAA rules for hobbyist flight do say to not fly over/near critical infrastructure.

http://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/drones-and-critical-infrastructure.aspx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Steve, very helpful page.

I encourage any UAV pilot to read the actual statues as websites can be misleading. Better yet, call the cops if unsure.

 

Arizona SB 1449 - (enacted May 11, 2016) Prohibits certain operations of UAS, including operation in violation of FAA regulations and operation that interferes with first responders. The law prohibits operating near, or using UAS to take images of, a critical facility.

 

 

Misleading. The actual statute says" 

B.  It is unlawful for a person to operate or use an unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system to intentionally photograph or loiter over or near a critical facility in the furtherance of any criminal offense.

 

3.  "Critical facility" means any of the following:

(a)  A petroleum or alumina refinery.

(b)  A petroleum, chemical or rubber production, transportation, storage or processing facility.

(c)  A chemical manufacturing facility.

(d)  A water or wastewater treatment facility and water development, distribution or conveyance system, including a dam.

(e)  An electric generation facility, as defined in section 42‑14156, and any associated substation or switchyard.

(f)  An electrical transmission or distribution substation.

(g)  An electrical transmission line of at least sixty-nine thousand volts.

(h)  An electronic communication station or tower.

(i)  An energy control center.

(j)  A distribution operating center.

(k)  A facility that transfers or distributes natural gas, including a compressor station, regulator station, city gate station or pressure limiting station or a liquefied natural gas facility or supplier tap facility.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no regulations that would prevent anyone from shooting this dam.  The only thing that would have restricted this operation would be if it were an emergency and they would have issued a NOTAM about the temporary restriction. 

If this guy we're a professional he would have flown a real camera.  Although the scenery is awesome the quality of the footage is marginal.  People can post whatever stupid disclaimers on their videos they like, but when you pirate copyrighted music and tell other people they can't do this, kind of makes you a hypocrite.  This is YouTube fodder.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" If this guy we're (were) a professional he would have flown a real camera. " I am sure he did his best with what he had, which was pretty good. I'm guessing he wasn't "shooting" for a "best documentary" Oscar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I simply pointed out that this was YouTube bait.  

If this footage was used professionally it wouldn't have been edited to AC/DC.  For YouTube its awesome, but its hypocritical to tell others who might aspire to do the same thing not to do this because they're professionals.

Thanks for correcting my grammar.  I'd like to blame it on spell check...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP was simply sharing a pretty neat video, along with a legal question; discouraging sharing or open discussion is not what this forum is about, particularly from someone who just joined. Just saying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really!?

Actually the OP asked "The pilot put a disclaimer that reads "Do not operate drones within 400' of infrastructure. This Video filmed by professional media UAV pilot"  It was not posted simply to share.  My comments were addressing the legalities, in no way did I discourage sharing or open discussion.

The number of posts on a forum hardly indicate the level of experience of the poster.

Just saying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" If this guy we're a professional he would have flown a real camera.  Although the scenery is awesome the quality of the footage is marginal.  People can post whatever stupid disclaimers on their videos they like, but when you pirate copyrighted music and tell other people they can't do this, kind of makes you a hypocrite.  "

Correct, my fault. In no way did your snide comment about someone you may not even know could be considered an attempt to discourage sharing. My bad.

"The number of posts on a forum hardly indicate the level of experience of the poster" Correct again; but their tone may indicate a certain level of immaturity..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Av8Chuck said:

Really!?

Actually the OP asked "The pilot put a disclaimer that reads "Do not operate drones within 400' of infrastructure. This Video filmed by professional media UAV pilot"  It was not posted simply to share.  My comments were addressing the legalities, in no way did I discourage sharing or open discussion.

The number of posts on a forum hardly indicate the level of experience of the poster.

Just saying. 

Hey @Av8Chuck, we're a good-natured, consultative, helpful group over here, each doing our best to ask and answer questions and to  push the drone community forward in a friendly, community-oriented manner. You raise some good points in your posts above, but I ask of you to consider the tone and approach you're taking, and how to @Uaviator53's point that might discourage folks from asking good questions and putting themselves out there like @Marcel Graham, one of our most active and helpful community members, is doing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In no way was my comment in to Marcel's initial response negative towards this discussion.  I pointed out that the originator of the video was making irrelevant claims and that this happens all the time on YouTube.  

When people take a Phantom [or similar type product] out of the box, hang out a shingle calling themselves a professional and tell others not to do it, that's what I find offensive.  Do you think doing so is good natured or promotes community oriented behavior?

Yes, my tone is now negative because I think you both are asking for an apology from the wrong person.  If somehow my post offended Marcel then I would apologize, being told to shut up because I'm new here hardly needs an apology.  From me anyway.

Being rude with a smile or more posts, doesn't mean its not rude, then pointing out being on topic is always being polite, i don't know, you guys will decide who took this off topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Av8Chuck said:

Yes, my tone is now negative because I think you both are asking for an apology from the wrong person.  If somehow my post offended Marcel then I would apologize, being told to shut up because I'm new here hardly needs an apology.  From me anyway.

Being rude with a smile or more posts, doesn't mean its not rude, then pointing out being on topic is always being polite, i don't know, you guys will decide who took this off topic.

Not asking for an apology. Just asking you to watch your tone. Doing our best to foster a supportive group over here.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, I go to work for a few days and POW all heck broke loose.

Thank you all for your responses. Just to clarify, I asked the question for a few reasons. First, after checking Skyvector i didn't see any reason a person couldn't fly there. After checking for a state law, I didn't see any reason that a person couldn't fly there. I was checking because I didn't know if there was some magical powers with the PART 107 that would allow us to fly in an area we shouldn't be. I don't think there is since the P107 is considerably more restrictive than a recreational flyer at this point. More importantly this is how you learn about stuff. @Uaviator53's break down of Arizona UAV law for example is what I am talking about. I came across this exact layout (below this paragraph) in my research. But after reading it would not have devised that is small reservoir dam would fall under this category. I would've come to the conclusion that this would apply to the Hoover dam or something along those lines. A small reservoir dam I would not figure as a "Critical Facility" but according to the explanation "(d)  A water or wastewater treatment facility and water development, distribution or conveyance system, including a dam." It is clearly off limits if this dam was in Arizona but since it is in California that is a different ball of wax all together. 

Arizona SB 1449 - (enacted May 11, 2016) Prohibits certain operations of UAS, including operation in violation of FAA regulations and operation that interferes with first responders. The law prohibits operating near, or using UAS to take images of, a critical facility.

 

 

 

While it is Youtube click bait it was picked up by several news agencies, that is how I came across it. I felt all along that this guy is just trying to keep people off his "Turf" but posting the disclaimer but I wanted to check. 

Keep it real gentlemen, and thanks for the info. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Marcel Graham said:

...it was picked up by several news agencies, that is how I came across it....

Its interesting you mention that - I saw it on Gizmodo first, then was watching the news with my wife a night after that and the same video was shown on the news station and I said to wife, drone video! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Steve Bennett said:

Its interesting you mention that - I saw it on Gizmodo first, then was watching the news with my wife a night after that and the same video was shown on the news station and I said to wife, drone video! 

My kid said the same thing! Came across this. http://lakeberryessanews.com That seems to be the source of the Video. Still confused on the Copyrighted music on a news site. Maybe they have their ASCAP fees payed up. Who knows. 

All things set aside. That dam is a power plant. I would stay away. 

Edited by Marcel Graham
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.