We brought this on ourselves.  Los Angeles airport is reporting "near misses" at 6,000 feet WTF?  We are hearing reports nearly daily and this is what it will do.  Nosey a-holes are flying over celeberties' property and taking picture of their private parties.

I know we enjoy this sport but these things are getting very dangerous.  I fear the day someone brings down a commercial aircraft killing dozens.  I am sure the pilot will claim they did not mean it.

Anyway keep handing out badges for the highest and longest and the most daring.

Cessna172 Posted at 2015-9-1 22:47
Ed, the FAA actually has authority over ALL National Airspace from the ground up.
You may be thinkin ...

I think you are getting caught up with the wrong details.  The point was that RC rights are being eroded away.

In regards to your comment, what Ed stated is not wrong and no different than the police having authority over your home, your property.  Ed was stating that you own the airspace above your home up to 500 feet.  Which can still be the case, even with the FAA regulating it.  Just like you can own your home but just because you own it, you aren't excused from the laws of the land within your home.

LICENSED PILOT Posted at 2015-9-3 05:29
"The Begining of all this BULLSHIT started with trappy and we all should thank Trappy "

That's an ...

It's not just this one guy that I have never heard of till today either... It's all of the multi-rotor operators that are not taking to high road and educating anyone that questions there rights in a nice manor.  Most of all the media has been misreporting the truth and getting the masses to fear that the rights are being violated.
This law preposed in Ca. Is a result of the damn idiots that got attention from flying near the wildfires this summer and grounding the fire attack aircraft.  This outraged the public causing them to react unlawfully which the media was all too happy to report and as a result and it being an election year now we have the politicians involved and now we have to fight to keep this hobby.  The law preposed in Ca. effects all flying RC hobby aircraft not just us multi-rotor operators. We need to make sure to ralley all of them as well to create even more people protesting the proposed new law in Ca.

-Dog

Just because a law is proposed, it does not mean that it will be enacted.

If a law is enacted, it does not mean it will stand up in court.

If a law is passed by a state, it may not be legal if it claims jurisdiction over an area that is already under the authority of a federal agency.

While the subject of 'drones' is a current fascination to the media, they will find something else to latch on to soon, the media have a short attention span.

And there was a story doing the rounds that the 'drones' alleged to be interfering with the fire fighting aircraft were being employed by the media to get aerial shots.

Geebax Posted at 2015-9-3 23:31
Just because a law is proposed, it does not mean that it will be enacted.

If a law is enacted, it d ...

Not making excuses for anyone, but do you have evidence that the media is operating UAV's in your area?
I've yet to see any aerial footage from a UAV on any of the wildfires.

Do you have any links to the video's?

That use would require a FAA 333 waiver. The person licensed to operate would know that he shouldn't be in the area. If that station/operator were caught the station could possibly lose their license for both the UAV as well as the station's FCC license.

gregg1r Posted at 2015-9-4 21:03
Not making excuses for anyone, but do you have evidence that the media is operating UAV's in your  ...

This guy is not a member of the media at least I think he is not.  However here is a story in the L.A. Times about this guy who got caught flying by a fire and he did an interview on both news organizations.  http://www.latimes.com/local/lan ... 20140729-story.html another story of the same guy on our local TV station.  Watch both vids. http://www.news10.net/story/news ... el-dorado/13307385/   I have seen this guy's YouTube channel and have to admit he is a risk taker.  He does a lot of flying over crowds and traffic.  He is also running a business doing aerial video work and I don’t think he has a FAA exemption. I kinda doubt that because he could loose that exemption for flying like that.  This is his website AirShotz.com.  If you go to this guys YouTube channel you'll find out that this dingdong also flew over a stadium full of people doting a  professional soccer opening game under the 5 mile rule from Sacramento Executive Airport.  The stadium is Hughes Stadium at Sacramento city college and if you do a Google earth on that and use the ruler and Google Earth's tool pallet you'll see that it's nearly 2 miles from the threshold of the main runway.  This is a very type of person that is ruining this hobby for us.   Send him an email giive him a phone call let him know how you feel about what he's doing. These people need to know that they're wrong and if we let them know that we know what they're doing and we will turn them into the proper authorities, maybe they will stop for fear of getting fined or imprisoned.

Here he is flying over traffic and people in a California state park that does not permit flying drones.

http://youtu.be/wjUwk_3KrRY

Here he is flying over a huge crowd at a public fair, I can’t see how he got permission from everyone in this video.

http://youtu.be/eZGx5cHzMKA

Here's the link to the video he shot at the stadium.
http://youtu.be/rv8dmd3TMVg

-Dog

2 Phantom 3 Pros + accs for sale.....might as well   WTF       I will keep my tirade silent

What I have found in researching is that even if there is a federal law, a state can only pass an over-riding law if and only if the state laws pains and penalties are more severe. I think it has something to do with Article IV of the XIV Amendment…….probably wrong but reading law is like a foreign language.

There is a reason the term "Peoples Republic of California" has stuck - it has the ring of truth. So I have to ask - especially directed to Californian P3 owners  - WHO KEEPS VOTING FOR THESE PEOPLE who are eroding the sh** out of your freedom? You cannot blame it all on the media sensationalists and some flyers who do not consider consequences.

This has been going on for decades in CA, NY, Mass, and many other areas. While it IS true that some folks vote multiple times, non-citizens vote, dead people vote, and even pets vote (those illicit groups happen to prevail on the liberal side by the way) - it is mostly real voters as the root cause of this crap, no?

Lately, the greatest number of votes go to the candidates who really despise personal freedom. And they lie about everything under the sun - AND YOU ACTUALLY KNOW IT.  Why??? Is California full of masochists or something?

Please don't come back saying it is the environmental groups or unions or whatever (which surely is a small fraction of the 39 million residents - or 18 million voters - there).  Put some people into office with two brain cells to rub together and who care about freedom.

Why are you not kicking these freedom butchers out of office? That would be a good start.  And when you hear a current politician or someone else say something that leads to erosion of your freedom without benefiting the Public at all, please SPEAK UP! Please Don't just sit there and take it in silently. Please don't be a sheep going along with the herd.

You will find that the path of least resistance (silence) will become very narrow over time.

Dive-N-Dog Posted at 2015-9-4 11:45
This guy is not a member of the media at least I think he is not.  However here is a story in the  ...

I also don't agree with his flying style, but in two cases, the stadium and the airport, he looks to be in the clear.

The Sacramento Executive Airport only has a three mile restriction not a five mile one due to what appears to be a lack of a manned control tower. The DJI link to no-fly-zones, shows a restricted area from Hermosa to the east, and 14th Street to the west.

Pull up the DJI NFZ maps and take a look, the if you use Google maps you can use the distance marker function.

The stadium restriction is if the capacity is 30,000 people or greater unless there is a TFR in place. There is no legal requirement to get permission to overfly people. You better have a lot of insurance is something goes wrong, but not illegal.

The State Park prohibition is probably a lot like the NPS restrictions. No take off and landing, but fly overs are allowed.

AerialLens Posted at 2015-9-4 13:15
There is a reason the term "Peoples Republic of California" has stuck - it has the ring of truth. So ...

Is this the DJI Phantom 3 forum or Faux News?
Take your political rants over to Faux with the other thumbsuckers or STFU.

Carry on.

mgsf@embarqmail Posted at 2015-9-4 14:26
Is the DJI Phantom 3 forum or Faux News?
Take your political rants over to Faux with the other thu ...

Silly person, sometimes it is necessary to determine a root cause before you can fix a problem.  Was not a rant.  Tahoe_Ed was requesting political help;  I cannot sign the petition, but I can offer a suggestion to help prevent this kind of thing down the road.  To suggest that people not be silent should not be considered a rant. You think?

AerialLens Posted at 2015-9-4 14:33
Silly person, sometimes it is necessary to determine a root cause before you can fix a problem.  Wa ...

Your post is a rant, devoid of anything remotely resembling a "solution".
We get it. You're special...you have a way of seeing all the bogeymen among us. Pffft!
As stated, take your ad hominem laden politics over to the Faux News romper room or STFU.

Carry on.

suqsid.bobmail Posted at 2015-9-1 22:10
Will this apply to all of Mexico or just California?

Time to review your geography...

gregg1r Posted at 2015-9-4 23:03
Not making excuses for anyone, but do you have evidence that the media is operating UAV's in your  ...

I am not in the US, I am in Australia, and yes, the television networks over here use UAV's quite often, and even feature them in their programs. The BBC in the UK even has a dedicated UAV Department of licensed flyers and equipment.

And before they had their own gear over here, they hired people to do it for them. Fortunately we are spared the paranoia being generated over 'drones' that you are suffering in the US.

I have been searching to see where I read the report suggesting that the craft mentioned in the fire fighting were operated by the news media, but cannot find it at present.

Geebax Posted at 2015-9-4 19:21
I am not in the US, I am in Australia, and yes, the television networks over here use UAV's quite  ...

GeeBax,
   I don't know how the media operates in Australia, but here in the USA, they have gotten down to a two person crew for most stories. One face puppet and the camera person. News is no longer a money making operation for stations when the internet can use Twitter and such.

New isn't what it used to be. Instead of flying drones (sorry about that rayrokni ) all of the major markets fly helicopters with ultra high powered cameras lenses. They require an operator to run. At least in the Baltimore Washington DC area, most of the helicopter pilots flying for the TV stations were former police pilots that retired to get on the gravy train. It's a very close knit group of people. The pilot I used had 30,000 hours of flight time before his death. RIP BW.

I don't think the local TV market here will catch on to using UAV's as the cost of the unit and the fast paced nature of news, means that they would need 6-8 units and someone to maintain them.  If they were to start falling out of the sky, that would end the program.

gregg1r Posted at 2015-9-5 10:02
GeeBax,
   I don't know how the media operates in Australia, but here in the USA, they have gotten ...

The news crews are much the same over here, cheapskates. These days a news crew consists of a 20 year old bimbo, an iPhone and a selfie stick.

But in the case of the wildfires in CA recently they would not have been able to get a copter anywhere near the area because of the fire fighting aircraft, so they might conceivably have hired someone with a UAV to get the shots for them.

I am not saying they did, but that was what I read somewhere (still looking to see where it was).

However they do work spectacularly well for big sporting events, although you notice from the shots that they do not stray over the playing fields or anywhere there are spectators. They used to use small tethered blimps at one stage, the Brits still do use them, but they are now using UAVs to get the high angle shots. Here and in the UK the sport of Cricket uses them quite frequently, as it is one of the few sports where a wide, high angle shot of the field is informative during the game.

Again, in the bill, there is no mention of airports, stadiums, national parks, no-fly zones, beaches, open lands, forest fires, golden gate bridges or white house lawns ... it literally ONLY addresses flying over private residences - period.  So stop buzzing around your neighbor's houses, and everything will be fine.  Or, take off from your own driveway and go straight up 350', then do whatever you want.  When it's time to land, fly back over your yard, and descend straight down into your own property.  

This is 100% about voters imaginary right to privacy.  And even though everyone knows there is no privacy any more, they also know there's nothing they can do about it; every keystroke on your computer is being recorded, every website you visit, every person you call on your cell, every text you send, every street corner you drive by are all being recorded by someone.  So, this is nothing more than a political move to try and give back to the voters some feeling of control.  

"Look how awesome I am", said the Governor, "I gave you back your privacy."  And the crowd cheered ...

Unfortunately, we're the sacrificial lamb so that doctors and credit card companies and police and Facebook can all continue chipping away at people's privacy.  The only difference is, the items just mentioned give something back to the voters, like medicine, money, safety and communications.  To the masses, drones don't give back - there's nothing to offset their imaginary loss of privacy.  Once drones start creating real value on a massive scale, then they'll start leaving us alone.        

gregg1r Posted at 2015-9-5 01:53
I also don't agree with his flying style, but in two cases, the stadium and the airport, he looks  ...

You cannot trust the DJI software. As you can see when using that measuring tool in Google Earth the distance is far less than 3 miles, it's 1.47 miles.  That is why in my previous post I mention to use the Google Ruler.  See the picture below.  As for flying over the stadiums your correct, although I still think that its one of those things that you just dont do it so not to keep getting negitave press about the hobby.  what if this idiot were to crash his UAV into the crowd like the dingbat at the US Open the other day?

I still think that flying near the airport is far more worst.  KSAC is a tower controlled air space see the images from google earth below.  this just goes to show you that you need to do your homework when it comes to trusting DJI's no fly info.

-Dog

Dog,  I don't trust the DJI posted No-fly-zones. I call the FAA number 1-800-WX-BRIEF to verify where I can fly..

The 3 mile restricted area is three miles across not 3 miles each direction from the runway intersecting point.

If I were to pull up the IFR maps, they give greater detail almost down to the foot on where the restrictions start.

The airport next to where I worked had both ANG and private traffic. They have an active control tower, but aren't on the restricted list from either DJI or the FAA. There is an active tower, but they close at night, not sure of the times they are open.

gregg1r Posted at 2015-9-5 20:37
Dog,  I don't trust the DJI posted No-fly-zones. I call the FAA number 1-800-WX-BRIEF to verify wher ...

If you look at the highlighted section KSAC tower operations is from 0600 to 2100 hours.  I have called them to request promission to fly a quad at Sac City College and was denied due to the proximity.

-Dog

Dive-N-Dog Posted at 2015-9-5 08:43
If you look at the highlighted section KSAC tower operations is from 0600 to 2100 hours.  I have ca ...

That seems surprising. Just curious - other than the time you requested, did they ask you for any details, especially the height you wanted to fly? Or did they just say to forget about it in general.

I have not had any denials from tower operators at small 1-runway to medium 2-runway airports within a couple of miles of them, so far. They have been consistent in asking for the exact time window (and requiring that I call just before takeoff and just after landing) and that I do not exceed 100 feet AGL. Three airports and one AFBase so far - in SC and FL, not CA - maybe I have simply been lucky.

This does not apply to recreational drones from the way I read...

I thought all the people with any common sense already left California.

BobbyB Posted at 2015-9-6 12:07
I thought all the people with any common sense already left California.

I am in Nevada.  

Tahoe_Ed Posted at 2015-9-7 03:15
I am in Nevada.

See, I told you so.

That and no State taxes.  

FYI, The General Assembly in Rhode Island is working on Legislation also.
It only takes a couple of idiotic people to ruin things for the rest of us.
You mention the word Drone and people look down upon us because of a very limited number of people that commit a senseless act.

rodger Posted at 2015-9-7 20:54
FYI, The General Assembly in Rhode Island is working on Legislation also.
It only takes a couple of ...

You should read what Florida just passed in July.  

BobbyB Posted at 2015-9-7 12:32
You should read what Florida just passed in July.

I can see Licensing coming and a ton of Regulations for individual States. What prompted it here this time was someone kept flying over a house on the water where two Males are partnered. The last time was a couple of years ago when someone was flying over the Backyard of a Representative's home and she had the press all over it and tried to pass some very strict Laws and Regulations. Both of these incidents were all over the News Media.

If you live anywhere in the US, have a friend in CA send in an email.  I'm no stranger to legislation, and as Ben Franklin said; "there are two things men should never see, one is the making of sausage and the other the making of law".   If a news story about the horrors of drones ever appears in your state the quickest fix is to adopt "what they did in CA".   NOW is the time to protect your rights.  Send the email or call someone in CA that can.  Only YOU can make a difference.

So 350 ft or below is a no no but you can still legally fly 351 to 400ft?  I hate the government, it had done nothing but screw me so far in my lifetime so far..  Another 100 yrs we won't be able to shit without permit!  Just look at all the freedom we have lost in the past 100 yrs!  Keep laying down everyone..  

We really have the wrong people in government..  I believe their needs to be positions of power where the normal everyday joe needs to populate and has some say so.  All these politicians have no real lives, they entire world consists of their job, so it's no issue to make stupid laws to them, it won't affect them anyway..  Which is crap.  You have a whole hobby that has been happening since things could fly and it shouldn't be in the spot light like this..  I can see tests or getting a drone license to teach people about safety and such and only ticket people that do stupid shit, like buzzing people ect...  I don't live in California but I'm hoping this crap don't happen there..  Ca is the strictest place to live and that's why I don't even go visit there cuz I'm afraid of breaking some stupid law or getting a ticket from driving a car there with Wisconsin license plates on it since emission standards are so different..  We can't zoom in with our dji premade drones..  You would need a $15,000+ copter to have had zooming abilities..  A s1000 with a $5,000 fumble and $6,000 professional camera is what it would take and anyone with that kind of money would be making movies..  

Not to mention a law like this would really screw over the big movie industry that thrives in California...  They need to be able to fly their copters in allot of places at different heights and what not..  If this bill gets passed it would be the dumbest thing ever to be past into law..  I hope the lawmakers of California are smarter than this..  And I hope someone in California organizes something to fight it..  

As one of those people who have taken the time to apply for licenses the heart of the matter is the people who cannot follow directions and who cannot understand that you cannot fly anywhere you care to.
Because fools will fly near an airport, the US OPEN a football game, well you get the picture we all will suffer.  

Guys, I want to thank you all for your support.  With it we have been able to defeat SB142 in California.  It is a small victory and hopefully one of many to come.

Tahoe_Ed Posted at 2015-9-9 21:47
Guys, I want to thank you all for your support.  With it we have been able to defeat SB142 in Califo ...

As a Californian...


I AM SO GIDDY.

Thanks DJI for fighting the good fight.

Phantom 3 ( UAV ) = 1

Drone Haters = 0

Priceless

Engadget story about the governor shooting down the bill. I guess all of us clicking that link worked.
http://www.engadget.com/2015/09/ ... one-bill-shot-down/

Every UAS pilot in California needs to band together and fight this Call you elected officials and write them. Make your voice be heard! Drone Lives Matter!

Just trying to had a little humor otherwise I would cry!

The said thing is that the people in California voted all the liberal idiots into office because at the time it did not affect them. Now the liberal Democrats have turned their nanny state views on UAVs. We have to ban together with a strong voice and counter this B.S.

Fortunately here in Venezuela there is no food, no basic necessities so nobody is going to get to invent laws against drones.

Something good in our misery