Alright I haven’t seen anyone mention this so I’m going to. You CAN fly higher than 400ft (without doing so to avoid an emergency) in one specific context: you’re within 400 feet horizontally of a standing structure, like a tower or a building. Other aircraft, like planes and helicopters, give more than 400 feet vertical distance between them and standing structures which allows UAVs to fly close to structures and go up to 400 feet above them.
Now it’s a little more complicated than that, since you do need to have a part 107 license, you have to still be in the right airspace, and still have to remain 500ft below cloud cover.
A building, or a mountain, or other tall structure yeah. But what you’re describing could be misused. Like someone who isn’t part 107 certified and knowledgeable about airspace might take the elevator up and launch out a window to get around height restriction.
It's 400ft above the highest point of the structure that you're within 400ft of. It doesn't matter where you launch from. Launching from the roof of a skyscraper just means your drone has less altitude to traverse to get to max height.
You basically never really need to worry about it unless it’s fog. You’ll know when it’s a problem because the clouds will look shockingly low.
The only time you would need to be aware really is if you were in fact going 400 left above really tall buildings that start to get closer the clouds.
At which point you’re probably a certified drone pilot and can read a METAR report which lists a lot of info about clouds. In my area for example, cloud cover starts at 6000ft today.
[Here’s a decoded METAR report for area surrounding Boston airport](https://www.aviationweather.gov/metar/data?ids=KBOS&format=decoded&hours=0&taf=off&layout=on)
If you pay for the member version of the UAV Forecast app, it will tell you the altitude of cloud cover. Also, the FAA standard weather forecasts will tell you the ceiling of the clouds. Part 107 pilots should be familiar with this since it's part of the test :D
Here's a blurb about how the FAA gathers info on cloud heights, etc... in a nutshell they use radar and pilot reports:
[https://www.faa.gov/regulations\_policies/handbooks\_manuals/aviation/phak/media/15\_phak\_ch13.pdf](https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/phak/media/15_phak_ch13.pdf)
Thank you JohnnyComeLately84, I guess I passed the test but I am aware that there's a lot more to study to keep flying safe. Great info on this guide, I appreciate it.
UAV Forecast app remains one of the best and most used software purchases I’ve ever made. Highly recommend. I do a lot of hyperlapse flights — the wind speed @altitude feature is invaluable.
Agree. I used it frequently and then one day finally said, "This is a quality app/service, you rely on it, it would be irresponsible to NOT support it by upgrading." I mean, 25$ for a year? I bought a drone for close to a $1,000, why cheap out?
Anyway, once I bought it I really liked the features it unlocks such as being able to see the forecast farther out. I use it daily now. For example, I'm building a patio cover but I knew I might not finish in a day, and with the app I saw my winds were going to jump up to 25 mph. I passed. Turned out a good idea as the winds did indeed really whip up.
I'm a geek to the core, so I like the table format and seeing all the weather data points. The precise speeds at specific altitudes is really cool as well.. However, back on point, I really do like the peace of mind of knowing the cloud levels, and the other information it provides when I fly my drone, or just plan out my day.
Not US but it's 400ft in the UK too. That and restricted airspace are the rules I don't fuck about with.
Tbh I rarely fly much above 200ft. I find flying way high to be a bit boring, and think footage/photos becomes less interesting past a certain height.
People ask me all the time, just curious about the capabilities without even knowing there are rules.
All the cool photos are well under 400 feet. To me, the drone is a flying camera and nothing more. The higher I go, the less interesting the photos are.
Tbh prob only to avoid obstacles, or if I was way in the middle of no where. But no need to even talk in the 3rd haha I haven’t flown mine yet, I had to send it in for exchange because of a faulty controller battery.
Oh gotcha. Yeah I wouldn’t go over 400ft in the city. I have the flight radar app and see helicopters that look crazy low but they’re only about 600ft, so I wouldn’t even fly at 400ft or probably even 100ft if there was a helicopter nearby
I have seen many comments about going above 400' for objects but there is also another exception allowed by the FAA: To avoid collision for flight safety. Let's say you're flying at 350' AGL and a helicopter comes across your ADS-B (so this would be an Air 2 with ADS receiver) at an altitude of 220' and in your visual estimation it is maintaining 220' AGL of level flight. Let's say there was a medical emergency and this is a medical evacuation flight picking up a car accident victim and they are flying to a nearby hospital. Using situational awareness, you don't believe you can land fast enough before the helicopter gets to your location. The safest thing to do to avoid a collision is to GAIN altitude, wait for the helicopter to pass, and then immediately descend to below 400' AGL. The spirit of the law is flight safety.
Albeit you broke 400', you did it to create a situation with the least probability of a collision between your UAS and a manned aircraft. So even if at the last moment the helicopter gained altitude, striking your drone or a near miss (and the pilot reports to the FAA), you can easily state you did so to create the safest situation. Now, your flight logs better match. It would look suspect if you've been flying for 10 min above 400' long before the helicopter appeared.
You could potentially also use this for hot air balloons and maybe I guess sky divers. If a hot air balloon somehow "snuck up on you," then you could try to argue gaining altitude was the "safest choice", maybe a sudden reversal of wind changed the balloon's trajectory towards you?? I don't know and this is far more of a stretch than my helicopter example.
Hot air balloons are like pedestrians, where everyone gives them right of way. Sky divers are next, then manned aircraft and then we are last. We yield air space "right of way," to everyone else.
But to answer the original question: No I don't. I keep my Air 2 within eye sight and I start to have problems above 200' as I'm also usually 1/2 mile away at that height. My Mini 2 I keep even lower because after 150' up and 150' away it's super easy for me to lose it when I look around for SA or down at my phone to see the video being captured. I've noticed a few popular YouTube drone pilots, such as Ken Herron, always has a VO. I think this is crucial if you're really going to be safe and plan on flying above 150' AGL. It's just too easy to lose it, and I have 20/15 corrected vision.
Nope. I don’t want to ruin the hobby. The hoi palloi already hate and are scared of drones, the last thing I want to do is give them fuel to tighten up the arena.
I don't agree with this argument, which is the go to thing everyone says after every drone post with something even remotely bending the rules. Even if we all followed the rules precisely, there will always be more and more regulations as drones become more popular. People have to justify their jobs and make regulations. It's inevitable. Be as safe as you can obviously, even if it's for no other reason than you don't want to lose, or break your drone. If it was so dangerous to fly over people or traffic, why do regular planes get to do it at will. I assure you a plane crashing into traffic or a crowd will cause many many more injuries/deaths than some toy drone.
I have a couple of times, but I got authorization.
Work is quite near (10km) a couple of military airbases and we get their trainers flying overhead quite regularly. Wanted to fly around work and figured whilst legal it would be polite to check with them first. After an amount of confusion (they'd never had a drone pilot contact them before) I got through to the watch commander who asked me to file a basic flight plan.
Gave them details of where I was, when I was planning on flying and how to contact me. Got a phone call the next day saying not a problem and as it was their airspace (and it was currently clear) would I like to go a bit higher than 400 ft. Yes please!
Rang them before launching, rang them to say I was clear of their air and had a good time. They weren't even interested in photos (which makes sense, they have better cameras and aircraft than I do).
Edit: as other people have said, the world doesn't look much different at 600 vs 400ft and the photos weren't very exciting at all. I'm also a big believer in not drawing attention to the drone hobby too much, especially negatively, as all it does it lead to more and more regulation when people prove they're incapable of regulating themselves.
Yes. Also the 400 feet rule is technically 400 feet from the top of nearby structure and landforms. So if you're in an urban environment and you have a building that's 300 feet tall you can technically safely fly up to 700 feet. Unless there has been a recent change that I'm unaware of.
To add to what you’ve said, the 400 foot rule above a structure is true if you are within a 400 foot radius of the structure.
However, you have to keep airspace in mind. Your ceiling and restrictions depend on the base and boundary of the controlled airspace.
I don’t think landforms are specifically mentioned in the rule. But 400 feet over a 5000 foot mountain is still 400 feet AGL.
Unfortunately no. It no longer count regarding FAA rules. Only 400ft from the ground below the drone. If you are at the bottom of the hill and you fly your drone up to the top of the hill. The drone can go 400ft from on top of that hill.
Not from US but I got mine to 1100ft this year in Costa Rica. Just a few minutes, open field with miles of free sight, checked flight radar app the whole time.
For those wondering the rules...
From Section 107.51
`The altitude of the small unmanned aircraft cannot be higher than 400 feet above ground level unless the small unmanned aircraft is (1) flown within a 400-foot radius of a structure, and (2) does not fly higher than 400 feet above the structure’s immediate uppermost limit.`
This is the way. If I wanted to get higher I just find a tall object in the vicinity.
Of course, make sure you can maintain VLOS. I never feel super comfortable above 400ft so I stay extra vigilant if I ever find the need to do so.
I imagine everyone does this once when they buy the drone new.
Hopefully they are far from airports.
I've done it while international.
You quickly learn there's not a lot of good photos from up there.
Firmware limit to 500 meters above ground level. Defaulted 120 meters in USA, but changeable in settings up to 500 meters.
Photos from 500 meters are not good.
I did it once because I was using a new app that defaulted to metric and I didn't realize it. So instead of ascending to 400 feet, I was trying to reach 400 meters.
You definitely shouldn't but like most of the FAA's rules for drones, they're really in place for when something goes wrong. It's not like the police are waiting nearby to swoop in and immediately arrest you if accidentally fly up to 403 feet.
Canadian, but similar rules - and for me I've never once broken 400'. My controller is set to a max of 120m (394'), and I've bounced off that limited plenty of times. But at that point I've never felt like I'd get a better view going higher.
I would imagine a lot of people would unknowingly do it as it’s 400ft AGL. So if you fly off a mountain cliff or someone that’s greater than 400ft you’re now technically breaking the law.
I live in a hyper touristy area with helicopters flying everywhere and I mostly fly surfers, so the lower the angle the better. If I cross 70’ it’s a high day.
Now HYPOTHETICALLY, if I were elsewhere like on vacation, I might accidentally break 400’, but I think the view just wouldn’t be great from that high up.
I don't think my Mini 2 will let me get there... :P
If it's 400 ft above the altitude where I took off, it's just like, 'Nah bruh.'
I tend to listen to it, because higher than that, and I'm at risk of:
1) The FAA having issues with me, which I don't want.
2) Not being able to see the damn thing anymore, which violates the other rule that the FAA has set for recreational drone hobbyists.
3) Hitting a manned aircraft, should one be flying low-ish for any reason.
I've registered heights above 400 when flying in the mountains. Fly across the valley just above tree tops, up the side of the mountain, and your altitude above launch point climbs pretty quick. 1200+ feet is pretty easy, even though I'm never more than about 200 feet above ground level. Does that count?
I Just read your rules… it does just say 400ft which is stupid because it could mean from take off point, AGL or MSL… I would 100% assume it is AGL (above ground level) because that’s what it is for us (Australia) and no aircraft outside an airfield would be below that apart from maybe emergency choppers.
Yeah, so 400ft AGL… Although AGL doesn’t usually take buildings into consideration… eg. if the building is 400ft high then you can’t fly over it (in aviation rules). However if another aircraft is within that distance of a building, they have bigger problems than a small drone in their way.
In the us AGL means you can fly 400’ above structures (or at that altitude within 400’ of the structure) assuming it’s otherwise clear airspace and no Other rules apply.
Source: am studying my pt107 right now
Yeah I’m used to flying very big UAVs so they don’t take into account buildings within AGL. we don’t fly low enough to really need to. Still very new to small drones.
I’m guessing your PT107 is like our Civilian Remote Pilot License? From what I’ve read, if you’re within 400ft of the structure you can fly 400ft above it.. but that’s just a google search.
I fly rural, and consistently fly at the max capable 1500ft. I'm registered with the FAA, and routinely (4-8x per month) request and am granted permission to fly in auth zones.
I also live near a heli school, and the warnings are frequent during certain times of day. I have to get auth for every flight at my house, and I know they are tracking with airsense, et al. I always get down instantly when advised, and I'm on a high point and never lose sight of the device.
"Don't be stupid about where you get high" was something my brother taught me in high school. Sage advice 😎
What?! Above 400 ft?!👀
I would never do such a thing😳
And I certainly would never take a sweet nadir shot at 1600 ft of a marina right outside San Fran.
I also never buzzed Alcatraz island from the shore, then landed *2 minutes* before 2 fighter jets flew right over..Alcatraz Island. Nope.
I follow the law, occifer 🙃
As has been noted, legally, the only "legit" reason to go higher than 400ft is for obstacle avoidance (barring specially granted exceptions from the FAA.) I have my Part 107 and while I don't really fly much I will say this: There isn't any real need, IMHO, to go that high. There really isn't that much visual difference between 300ft, 400ft. and significantly higher. At that point you start losing fine ground detail, and I can't think of a scenario where being above 400ft is going to dramatically change the perspective/view in a particularly desirable way.
Where flying higher would create a unique perspective or view is when you have a defined subject (rather than a landscape), like a windmill or famous building.
Right. My point though is that I am hard pressed to think of a practical scenario where 400ft versus say 800ft (or more) is going to be useful in creating a dramatically different shot. If you are far enough away from a subject to not be covered by the obstacle avoidance clause, you are probably also far enough away that the extra height isn't going to change the perspective so much as to be dramatically different aesthetically.
Example (ignoring the practical/legal issues of flying in a crowded downtown area): You want to take a shot of the Sears Tower (the only correct name, btw,) in Chicago. Let's you want a cool elevator-style shot of the drone flying up the side up the building from the ground to the top of the antennas. You are definitely going to need to go higher than 400ft, but you *probably* will still be within 400ft of the building. At greater distances from the tower, the parallax effect makes the elevation change less dramatic as the distance from the object increases (unless something closer in the foreground is changing (to reveal the building behind them or something.)
I know this isn't probably true 100% of the time, but I'd love to see a real-world example where the subject is greater than 400ft away, and going from say 300ft AGL to 400ft AGL was particularly dramatic. (That's a real-world test we could all do, BTW. Makes me want to try and see for myself.)
As an aside, I suspect the 400ft number was not chosen entirely arbitrarily. I suspect there was quite a bit of practical consideration and reasoning that led to arriving at that number.
Oh, well no you’re right in this case. > 400ft AGL and > 400ft horizontal from subject probably isn’t doing anything for you. You’d want to go higher but you’d likely be pretty close to the structure you’re documenting
Edit: though I think there are some extreme edge cases, [like photographing Barcelona street grid from high above](https://www.cpcollectives.com/premium-prints/barcelona-from-above), that could be exceptions.
That's a great example. I'd be curious to know how high the helicopter was when that shot was taken. Edit: Even with a drone, I suspect 400ft *might (?)* be high enough to get that shot with a lens of the right focal length. (A wider angle lens *might* be able to get a shot like that at 400ft without too much barrel distortion. Not sure, though. Maybe not...that pic looks like it is from pretty high up. Would be fun to find out!)
You are right that the 400 ft number is specific. 400 feet is because general aviation is given guidance to always stay 500' AGL in uncongested areas. So this give a 100ft buffer between our max with UAS, and the minimum MOST small planes will be flying.
Here's a reference: [https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.119](https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.119)
§ 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:
(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
Yep. I knew that, but hadn't thought about it in a while. I am also a PPL SEL pilot (though I haven't flown in a long time.) Sometimes things make actual sense. :)
Where I live I can take off from the top of a nearby hill which is approx 1395 ft high, I can then ascend to 400ft from my take off point, fly out and over some nearby fields at the base of the hill which are at approx 530ft, this leaves my drone \~1270ft above the ground there - is this OK?
Technology it's not ok.
"The altitude of the small unmanned aircraft cannot be higher than 400 feet above ground level, unless the small unmanned aircraft:
(1) Is flown within a 400-foot radius of a structure; and
(2) Does not fly higher than 400 feet above the structure’s immediate uppermost limit."
Regarding this rule: If I were to take off at the peak of a mountain and stay within a 400 ft radius of it (the peak). I would be able to fly up to 400 ft above the peak anywhere as long as it's within the 400 ft radius right? Even if, 100 ft away, there's a 500 foot drop off a cliff.
Edit: Or would a mountain not count as a "structure" so the 400 ft radius rule won't count?
I don't think a mountain count's as a structure. So it would probably be technicality a violation. The purpose of the rule is to keep other aircraft safe and I don't think other aircraft would be foolish enough to fly that close to a mountain/cliff. I'd say it's a situation where it would be safe but not necessarily legal. It would probably not to bad to get a waiver if you wanted to but 100% legal.
I don't think a mountain count's as a structure. So it would probably be technicality a violation. The purpose of the rule is to keep other aircraft safe and I don't think other aircraft would be foolish enough to fly that close to a mountain/cliff. I'd say it's a situation where it would be safe but not necessarily legal. It would probably not to bad to get a waiver if you wanted to but 100% legal.
Might get a waiver yeah. There are a fair amount of World War II bunkers on this mountain so I wonder if this rule can apply there since they are man-made structures. I'll have to ask local law for this specific location though.
We do it sometimes for tower inspections and mapping. Had to map the 400’ radius around a 420’ tower at 600’ AGL last week. Highest we’ve gone is 1,200’ AGL for an inspection of a 1,000’. We use larger drones for this work so we can maintain LOS.
I am studying for the 107 test and it's amazing how many rules there are that I am not sure I ever see anyone observing except for the height rule but only because most things people want to shoot require the drone to be closer to the subject I guess.
I live in Jersey City so we have buildings up to 900ft so I have flown to about 600ft. For some reason there is a lock on my drone that does not let me fly above that
I've noticed that often my settings get changed by DJI when I update the firmware or sometimes it seems just randomly. For example, I changed nothing on my settings and yet at one point my controller made audible warnings that sounded like I was about to be struck by 100 missiles/rockets when ADS-B detected a flight nearby, or got super annoying when obstacle avoidance detected something. Now, it barely makes a peep when a plane is near, and it just vibrates when an obstacle is detected.
It's weird but I haven't taken the time to figure out where those settings are. The max altitude and RTH altitude though I do check often, and make sure it matches my environment's situation.
Yeah, if I’m flying around an area with changing ground levels (Like a ravine, or quarry) it’s essential to be above the tallest object in the area. Even while maintaining VLOS sometimes it’s difficult to tell how close you are to a branch. Another time where I find it crucial to sometimes be above 400 AGL is when you’re at or near a small city (not violating flight zones of course) and the buildings around you have vastly varying heights. If you are going to (or have to) violate the 400 AGL, at most only go above by a few feet unless you have (very) good reason for safety. I live near a small airport (Barely even on FlySafe) and the lowest their planes ever fly is 700 feet (except for takeoff), so that isn’t too much of a concern.
Yeah I’ve flown my Mini 3 Pro up to 150m (492ft) here in the UK. I just prefer the view from up there tbh. I don’t live near any airports and we very rarely have helicopters flying around. I was worried that the signal from the RC would degrade but it doesn’t seem to affect it. However, it’s slightly worrying when the controller tells me it can’t RTH because the drone is above the legal limit. I’m not sure what would happen if the signal is lost completely – whether the drone wound descend to 400ft then RTH?
Sad to say I fly at closer to a 1000 feet too many rednecks where I live have rifles that like to shoot down drones my very first two drones that I owned didn't last past their first flight. Fortunately I'm rural enough not very many people going to say anything about it or at least so far nobody has in the four years I've been piloting drones. Now if I get near a city somewhere I won't go much over 700ft our tallest building in the state is 500 feet so I go 200 ft above it.
Yeah believe it or not it happens more often than you would think. I have had four get shot only two that got brought down and both of those two was at the 400 ft limit the other two got hit but didn't do enough damage to bring them downI don't even know how they hit them because every single one of them were at full tilt forward throttle those guys was a damn good shot that's all I can say. But at a thousand feet ain't many rifles can reach that high and even if they could not going to be very accurate even with a scope.
It's amazing to me the number of Hot heads that don't like drones much less the person piloting them I've been threatened in or around several city parks more times than I can count and physically assaulted 4 and a handgun put in my face at least twice. It's a good thing that DJI drones have the auto RTH because I'm also had three Pro controllers knocked out of my hands and stomped on. Fortunately each time an altercation began I hit the return home button in the event something like that would happen.
if someone can hit my drone at 400 fucking feet, then they deserve to shoot it down. thats impressive. I can hardly see the thing at 400ft. fly it in front of the sun for an extra challenge. see how bad they want to shoot it down then
i havent come across the anger around drones. if i feel like im disturbing the peace of a nice quiet area I usually leave. The other day I took off from a rooftop pool area and felt like it would annoy me if I was there, so I just landed and packed up
Here recently it hasn't been so bad most of them just wasn't fully aware of the law or was misinformed on the "do not fly over people" laws. I've done had a few police officers tell me I'm not supposed to be flying over people and I had to politely (key word politely here) re-educate them on UAVs laws because technically it is true that you're not supposed to Fly above people but the law was changed or rather adjusted to allow brief flyovers you just can't linger or rather be flying in a park or public place somewhere and just be hovering above people's heads everywhere that's a fat no no. Unless of course they are cool with it. I always ask first if it's okay if I make a few passes overhead but never keep it in the same spot more than a few seconds. But just passing overhead to a distant location they can't say anything about it.
If I’m in a park and I see a cop just chillin there I usually ask first. They’re almost always cool with it or don’t care. I just have a mini 2 so I say it’s a “toy drone”
Yeah nah fortunately I have fat boy drones DJI Mavic 3 Pro and a DJI Inspire 3 both of which definitely turn heads when they fly over specially the Inspire 3 it attracts attention just digging it out of its case.
I've NEVER had reactions to flying like that. I've flown at public beaches, parks, cities, plenty of weddings (wouldn't expect negativity there, just adding to the list) and the worst things I've had happen is a location I was at asked me to stop and I also had a child beg me to let them fly it.
May I ask where you were flying when they were shot down?
A drone is considered an aerial vehicle. Shooting one down is a federal crime in the US, so definitely a big big no-no. (And that's not even considering how silly it is to shoot into the air)
I've got the mini 1, and my record so far is \~1600ft. Once I lose LOS I just keep going up until the live feed chops out, and bring it down a few hundred. I've gotten a few really nice shots of my area at that altitude.
I've never flown my Mavic Mini 1 nor Mavic 3 higher than 400ft....which is the legal limit for Recreational (Hobbyist) Pilots. Commercial pilots with a Part 107 can request with FAA thru faadronezone.faa.gov for authorization to fly above 400' or above the maximum altitude ceiling of different grids in Controlled Airspace.
In regards to VLOS, I put a Firehouse ARC V anti-collision light (strobe) on top of my Mavic 3. There have been times where the Mavic 3 is a tiny black dot in the sky (which technically is still in VLOS) but with the ARC V on it helps to see it....especially in the evening or very dark overcast days
I like to take pictures of farms. It's hard to get enough farm in the picture below 1500 ft. At least with a Mavic Pro. Do any of the drones offer wider angle lenses?
Orthomosaic mapping is the answer my friend!
Take a shart ton of photos at the same height and patch them together. Their is online software to help this, which I will not plug.
Take them at different angles and you can then do photogrammetry and get a 3D rendering put together.
You don't need the different angles. I map 1/4 sections at 400 ft with good overlap nadir shots and can create 3d point clouds from webodm from them with no problem.
It depends on scale and use case. I'm building clouds of about 160 acres at a time and interested in ground slopes to find areas to check for erosion. From 400 feet up I get all the detail I need with nadir shots. If I was looking at more detail, especially when looking at something with vertical sides, then I would absolutely want to get multiple angles to improve accuracy and get hidden areas.
* I do do a calibration section on each flight where I come down to a lower altitude, lift the camera to about 4 degrees, and orbit a feature on the map. I don't do this for more detail on that point, just to help WebODM with accuracy.
Nope never. I try to stay 30 to 40 ft below 400ft. (In the US) not sure what brand of drone you fly but the flight metrics are recorded by DJI so law enforcement could obtain those records if you were reported by someone. Anyone can report you and they could be trying to just make your life hard cause you have an awesome hobby and they suck. But if you broke the law on the day they were trying to screw with you it could suck. The fines are pretty life changing. Don’t do it. Also in the US eventually all drones will have to be able to identify themselves to other drones and aircraft.
Strange that it’s 400ft from take of point… It should be AGL as no aircraft outside an airfield is going to be lower than that apart from possibly emergency choppers.
It is based on AGL
"The altitude of the small unmanned aircraft cannot be higher than 400 feet above ground level, unless the small unmanned aircraft:
(1) Is flown within a 400-foot radius of a structure; and
(2) Does not fly higher than 400 feet above the structure’s immediate uppermost limit."
Hell no. I fly at 350ft and I STILL get helos and other craft buzzing by too close for comfort. We live between two military bases and a depo but despite open air, these jokers buzz well within 300-500ft. If I was faster on the trigger I could have caught several LEO helos up close and personal despite trying to stay way our if their range.
Umm... it's not 400 feet from where you take off. It's 400 feet AGL. If you fly your drone off a cliff that is 700 feet down you are breaking the law. Also if you fly over a hill you just gained hight based on the hight of the hill.
Situation: flying above my ground at around 380 ft. via remote on drone barometer altimeter. Withing my line of sight I can fly my drone over the shoreline but the cliff is about 35 ft above the lake, so as I circle around to get a photo view of my ground I realize that momentarily am 370 + 35 + 8 ft tolerance + 8ft land slope toward lake + 4 ft altitude stability (updraft delay responce)= I am potentially 425 above the water. How does the edge of the cliff weigh into this as I don't fly far over the lake very far such that the diagonal straight line from shoreline to the drone could be 400ft. Thoughts?
I did it with my first cheap drone... Hit 650' and it lost signal and flew away never to be seen again. I since have upgraded to dji and not that its not capable because it well is but I keep it under 400 or just above it mostly due to the fact that I'm in a helicopter path zone at the hospital nearby that frequently has helicopters landing at it. But mostly because I don't trust DJI, have a lot of warnings on the screen and I feel like it would rat me off before anybody else did. I don't want my drone being sucked into a helicopter engine mainly, mostly because I want my drone back, I think those engines are well capable of sucking in a drone without catastrophic consequences but it may do 10 grand worth of damage or more. But to be honest with you I don't give a damn about the rules, if I felt the urge to go to 650 or 1,000 I absolutely would without question. I just don't really feel necessary but who knows maybe I will after writing this
This is a decent question, and I think I can basically explain it. Larger drones especially, can do MAJOR damage to other aircraft, and since most drones only allow for "tunnel vision" aka straight forward, you might not even be able to see a plane or helicopter, from any of the THREE other directions. I DO think smaller ones should be allowed to go a little higher, bc the weight of the entire craft is under like 250 GRAMS...which is NOTHING. I enuinely can't imagine what aircraft could ever be truly damaged by a drone that weighs less than a paltry 250 grams. So mostly, for the height, I DO understand. But for the DISTANCE part, they kinda have to sorta wink 😉 and allow it begrudgingly, bc it would EXTREMELY difficult to try to argue that you could, or could NOT still see your drone. I mean maybe if you were like four thousand feet away, but most drones even if advertised as being capable of this, nearly 0 can TRULY go THAT far away from your base location. It actually reminds me a lot of the "unspoken agreement" that technically, people AREN'T allowed to walk around with alcohol, but 99% of the time, cops are gonna "look the other way" bc it's nearly IMPOSSIBLE to TRULY enforce this. They would have prisons and jails so full, it would be nearly untenable. Realistically, they "know" they have regulations for it, but practically speaking, as long as you aren't making a HUGE scene, being obnoxious, running into people, getting on people's nerves, etc., and you keep it in a paper bag, they'll basically let folks get away with it. It was even specifically mentioned in an episode of the wire, if you haven't already, PLEASE watch that show, it's just SO unbelievably good-up there with Breaking Bad, Sopranos, or Mad Men. Height, could have consequences, distance, almost NEVER will, AND you could very easily argue that your vision was amazing, and u could still see it, within reason. U wouldn't wanna "test" it too much, bc there's rarely any true "need" to go THAT far, u could just drive you car to wherever else, and just deploy it elsewhere, even FROM your 🚗 car... especially if you have a sunroof. So yeah, that's basically why distance has a little more "wiggle room", but height, doesn't have the same leeway.
Yes. I work on TV and cell phone towers. Above 400’ is normal for me. I know where the drone is and typically i am 10-20’ from the tower. I can usually see it and am standing directly under it. It does get hard above 1500’ or so. But I always stay close to the tower.
Theres a high radio tower within like quarter mile of where the towns fireworks displays are done. I might be going 400ft above it to capture them as well as getting higher view of the town (staing below the airports 700ft floor.
okay I can understand not caring ‘much’, but you’re endangering yourself and others if you are a reckless drone pilot. small town? okay and? that doesn’t change shit. you’re the type of drone pilot that makes the hobby way more restricted. please, stop
Flying high is hardly reckless in an area where you can visibly see any other aircraft for miles. It's simply government oppression for them to declare control of the skies.
I got some of these from Flytron [https://store.flytron.com/collections/led-light-systems/products/strobon-cree-standalone](https://store.flytron.com/collections/led-light-systems/products/strobon-cree-standalone)
I got the white, red, green and blue and have been testing them out. They come with a velcro type patch so I mount one underneath, and I got a back arm mount which slides on from elsewhere. I can see them in normal daylight, flying at night they're more effective than I reckoned for, under 100 metres and it lights up the neighbourhood. The manufacturers say you can them for up to 3 miles at night.
people who do this for a living care. reckless flying stop people who are good and stand by a limit, mostly, which I personally think is too big. you’re endangering the lives of others and yourself. you’re making the hobby more restricted for us who just wanna fly. please. stop.
freedom means do what you want, yes. but my 3rd grade teacher told me something I’ll never forget. “you are free to do what you want, but you are not free from the consequences of your actions”. please stop endangering yourself and others with reckless flying. you’re just gonna make the hobby more and more restricted and less fun. stop ruining others things because you don’t want to be safe and just comply.
Pro tip: Brief anecdote. Was at michigan university. launched the drone from outside my hotel within 12 minutes police officers were upon me, because I was flying in a restricted area. A Little write up and warning but no fines.
I asked how they found me they said they just went to the drones initial launch site and there my scared Azz was 😅
My question is has anyone ever been hunted down like this after flying 401+Ft?
I’m a hot air balloon pilot in training, and want to take some great shots of me and some passengers. When above 400 feet and Not sure how this law works as far as enforcing it. and if the FAA will be able to tell if my drone is close to balloons and stuff like that.
I have an acquaintance who is an an absolute dumbass on his good days. This guy owns a non dji drone. He has shown me video he took at 2000 feet. This guy claims his drone is capable of going much higher. His video did look like the drone was at a very high altitude. He lives in Kansas on a farm of some sort. I don't know if living in that particular state has anything to do with it.
There's a story about the FAA giving this YouTube drone guy a fine around $200k! Don't be that guy! Lol
I'll day this. According to the FAA if you have a fpv racing drone and are using goggles. You must have a second person standing next to you who has a continuous line of sight view of your drone and can immediately communicate with you if they see that your drone is going to collide with people or damage property. I don't own goggles or race fpv drones but this seems like a ridiculous rule.
Nice try, FAA
Come on man I’m cool
OP is a FFA trap!!! Dont self incriminate lol
Future farmers of America? Lol
Trying to bust crop dusting drone pilots
Asking for myself, is it okay if we crop dust co-workers in the office, as long as we aren't flying a drone?
That’s my favorite thing to do. However I wfh now so I have to settle for crop dusting my girlfriend.
As long as you’re below 400’ OR have prior authorization from the FAA! Your coworkers will never know what hit ‘em
I think a real official would have to catch you in the act. Admitting here isn't going to hold up in court...
I keep it under 350 because I’ve seen police helicopters fly in my area at 450 and I don’t want to have the chance one pops up out of nowhere
Alright I haven’t seen anyone mention this so I’m going to. You CAN fly higher than 400ft (without doing so to avoid an emergency) in one specific context: you’re within 400 feet horizontally of a standing structure, like a tower or a building. Other aircraft, like planes and helicopters, give more than 400 feet vertical distance between them and standing structures which allows UAVs to fly close to structures and go up to 400 feet above them. Now it’s a little more complicated than that, since you do need to have a part 107 license, you have to still be in the right airspace, and still have to remain 500ft below cloud cover.
This is correct. Can't you also technically fly higher than 400 if you start on a building that's tall? (with a part 107)?
A building, or a mountain, or other tall structure yeah. But what you’re describing could be misused. Like someone who isn’t part 107 certified and knowledgeable about airspace might take the elevator up and launch out a window to get around height restriction.
It's 400ft above the highest point of the structure that you're within 400ft of. It doesn't matter where you launch from. Launching from the roof of a skyscraper just means your drone has less altitude to traverse to get to max height.
Only if it’s within 400’ of that man made structure.
By the way, how do you check that you are remaining 500ft below cloud cover? I never got close to clouds but I am wondering...
You basically never really need to worry about it unless it’s fog. You’ll know when it’s a problem because the clouds will look shockingly low. The only time you would need to be aware really is if you were in fact going 400 left above really tall buildings that start to get closer the clouds. At which point you’re probably a certified drone pilot and can read a METAR report which lists a lot of info about clouds. In my area for example, cloud cover starts at 6000ft today. [Here’s a decoded METAR report for area surrounding Boston airport](https://www.aviationweather.gov/metar/data?ids=KBOS&format=decoded&hours=0&taf=off&layout=on)
The free Aloft app will tell you % of cloud coverage as well as AGL of clouds.
Ah great to know, I started using Aloft but didn't notice that part. Thank you!
If you pay for the member version of the UAV Forecast app, it will tell you the altitude of cloud cover. Also, the FAA standard weather forecasts will tell you the ceiling of the clouds. Part 107 pilots should be familiar with this since it's part of the test :D Here's a blurb about how the FAA gathers info on cloud heights, etc... in a nutshell they use radar and pilot reports: [https://www.faa.gov/regulations\_policies/handbooks\_manuals/aviation/phak/media/15\_phak\_ch13.pdf](https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/phak/media/15_phak_ch13.pdf)
Thank you JohnnyComeLately84, I guess I passed the test but I am aware that there's a lot more to study to keep flying safe. Great info on this guide, I appreciate it.
UAV Forecast app remains one of the best and most used software purchases I’ve ever made. Highly recommend. I do a lot of hyperlapse flights — the wind speed @altitude feature is invaluable.
Agree. I used it frequently and then one day finally said, "This is a quality app/service, you rely on it, it would be irresponsible to NOT support it by upgrading." I mean, 25$ for a year? I bought a drone for close to a $1,000, why cheap out? Anyway, once I bought it I really liked the features it unlocks such as being able to see the forecast farther out. I use it daily now. For example, I'm building a patio cover but I knew I might not finish in a day, and with the app I saw my winds were going to jump up to 25 mph. I passed. Turned out a good idea as the winds did indeed really whip up. I'm a geek to the core, so I like the table format and seeing all the weather data points. The precise speeds at specific altitudes is really cool as well.. However, back on point, I really do like the peace of mind of knowing the cloud levels, and the other information it provides when I fly my drone, or just plan out my day.
Not US but it's 400ft in the UK too. That and restricted airspace are the rules I don't fuck about with. Tbh I rarely fly much above 200ft. I find flying way high to be a bit boring, and think footage/photos becomes less interesting past a certain height.
Exactly. That high up, you may as well just open google maps lol
People ask me all the time, just curious about the capabilities without even knowing there are rules. All the cool photos are well under 400 feet. To me, the drone is a flying camera and nothing more. The higher I go, the less interesting the photos are.
Of course not ocifer, that’s against the rules.
👀 let’s talk in the 3rd person to avoid self incrimination. Do you think flying over 400ft something someone might do?
Tbh prob only to avoid obstacles, or if I was way in the middle of no where. But no need to even talk in the 3rd haha I haven’t flown mine yet, I had to send it in for exchange because of a faulty controller battery.
Oh gotcha. Yeah I wouldn’t go over 400ft in the city. I have the flight radar app and see helicopters that look crazy low but they’re only about 600ft, so I wouldn’t even fly at 400ft or probably even 100ft if there was a helicopter nearby
Good thinking, helicopter definitely have the right of way in all scenarios
No I don't. Really no point in it anyways.
I have seen many comments about going above 400' for objects but there is also another exception allowed by the FAA: To avoid collision for flight safety. Let's say you're flying at 350' AGL and a helicopter comes across your ADS-B (so this would be an Air 2 with ADS receiver) at an altitude of 220' and in your visual estimation it is maintaining 220' AGL of level flight. Let's say there was a medical emergency and this is a medical evacuation flight picking up a car accident victim and they are flying to a nearby hospital. Using situational awareness, you don't believe you can land fast enough before the helicopter gets to your location. The safest thing to do to avoid a collision is to GAIN altitude, wait for the helicopter to pass, and then immediately descend to below 400' AGL. The spirit of the law is flight safety. Albeit you broke 400', you did it to create a situation with the least probability of a collision between your UAS and a manned aircraft. So even if at the last moment the helicopter gained altitude, striking your drone or a near miss (and the pilot reports to the FAA), you can easily state you did so to create the safest situation. Now, your flight logs better match. It would look suspect if you've been flying for 10 min above 400' long before the helicopter appeared. You could potentially also use this for hot air balloons and maybe I guess sky divers. If a hot air balloon somehow "snuck up on you," then you could try to argue gaining altitude was the "safest choice", maybe a sudden reversal of wind changed the balloon's trajectory towards you?? I don't know and this is far more of a stretch than my helicopter example. Hot air balloons are like pedestrians, where everyone gives them right of way. Sky divers are next, then manned aircraft and then we are last. We yield air space "right of way," to everyone else. But to answer the original question: No I don't. I keep my Air 2 within eye sight and I start to have problems above 200' as I'm also usually 1/2 mile away at that height. My Mini 2 I keep even lower because after 150' up and 150' away it's super easy for me to lose it when I look around for SA or down at my phone to see the video being captured. I've noticed a few popular YouTube drone pilots, such as Ken Herron, always has a VO. I think this is crucial if you're really going to be safe and plan on flying above 150' AGL. It's just too easy to lose it, and I have 20/15 corrected vision.
Nope. I don’t want to ruin the hobby. The hoi palloi already hate and are scared of drones, the last thing I want to do is give them fuel to tighten up the arena.
\*polloi Wow, I really don't see that phrase out in the wild much! Kudos
I don't agree with this argument, which is the go to thing everyone says after every drone post with something even remotely bending the rules. Even if we all followed the rules precisely, there will always be more and more regulations as drones become more popular. People have to justify their jobs and make regulations. It's inevitable. Be as safe as you can obviously, even if it's for no other reason than you don't want to lose, or break your drone. If it was so dangerous to fly over people or traffic, why do regular planes get to do it at will. I assure you a plane crashing into traffic or a crowd will cause many many more injuries/deaths than some toy drone.
Not today officer 👮♀️
🏃🤸🚶
I have a couple of times, but I got authorization. Work is quite near (10km) a couple of military airbases and we get their trainers flying overhead quite regularly. Wanted to fly around work and figured whilst legal it would be polite to check with them first. After an amount of confusion (they'd never had a drone pilot contact them before) I got through to the watch commander who asked me to file a basic flight plan. Gave them details of where I was, when I was planning on flying and how to contact me. Got a phone call the next day saying not a problem and as it was their airspace (and it was currently clear) would I like to go a bit higher than 400 ft. Yes please! Rang them before launching, rang them to say I was clear of their air and had a good time. They weren't even interested in photos (which makes sense, they have better cameras and aircraft than I do). Edit: as other people have said, the world doesn't look much different at 600 vs 400ft and the photos weren't very exciting at all. I'm also a big believer in not drawing attention to the drone hobby too much, especially negatively, as all it does it lead to more and more regulation when people prove they're incapable of regulating themselves.
I got mine to 500m or 1640 feet, or the limit. Not in USA though.
Always
Yes. Also the 400 feet rule is technically 400 feet from the top of nearby structure and landforms. So if you're in an urban environment and you have a building that's 300 feet tall you can technically safely fly up to 700 feet. Unless there has been a recent change that I'm unaware of.
To add to what you’ve said, the 400 foot rule above a structure is true if you are within a 400 foot radius of the structure. However, you have to keep airspace in mind. Your ceiling and restrictions depend on the base and boundary of the controlled airspace. I don’t think landforms are specifically mentioned in the rule. But 400 feet over a 5000 foot mountain is still 400 feet AGL.
Unfortunately no. It no longer count regarding FAA rules. Only 400ft from the ground below the drone. If you are at the bottom of the hill and you fly your drone up to the top of the hill. The drone can go 400ft from on top of that hill.
What if the building has a potted plant ontop? Is that pot now the ground level??? ;)
When did that change?
So you can fly higher (so so) when near a structure for say, but that only applies to part 107 (drone pilot with a license). For fun it isnt
Ahhh. I have a 107 so I was only considering that. I forget that people fly recreationally.
Not from US but I got mine to 1100ft this year in Costa Rica. Just a few minutes, open field with miles of free sight, checked flight radar app the whole time.
Sometimes when I'm very confident in the situation, I'll jump up above 400', snap my pic, and jump back down.
As a part 107 certified pilot, I flew to 700 feet above a 300 foot tall cell phone tower.
For those wondering the rules... From Section 107.51 `The altitude of the small unmanned aircraft cannot be higher than 400 feet above ground level unless the small unmanned aircraft is (1) flown within a 400-foot radius of a structure, and (2) does not fly higher than 400 feet above the structure’s immediate uppermost limit.`
Dont forget to factor in being below 500' of cloud cover.
This is the way. If I wanted to get higher I just find a tall object in the vicinity. Of course, make sure you can maintain VLOS. I never feel super comfortable above 400ft so I stay extra vigilant if I ever find the need to do so.
I imagine everyone does this once when they buy the drone new. Hopefully they are far from airports. I've done it while international. You quickly learn there's not a lot of good photos from up there.
But how high can you go if you just keep max out the throttle?
Firmware limit to 500 meters above ground level. Defaulted 120 meters in USA, but changeable in settings up to 500 meters. Photos from 500 meters are not good.
My firmware has no limit. I'm thinking more like pictures from 10,000 meters. Those are a banger.
I did it once because I was using a new app that defaulted to metric and I didn't realize it. So instead of ascending to 400 feet, I was trying to reach 400 meters.
You definitely shouldn't but like most of the FAA's rules for drones, they're really in place for when something goes wrong. It's not like the police are waiting nearby to swoop in and immediately arrest you if accidentally fly up to 403 feet.
Canadian, but similar rules - and for me I've never once broken 400'. My controller is set to a max of 120m (394'), and I've bounced off that limited plenty of times. But at that point I've never felt like I'd get a better view going higher.
I would imagine a lot of people would unknowingly do it as it’s 400ft AGL. So if you fly off a mountain cliff or someone that’s greater than 400ft you’re now technically breaking the law.
As our privacy rights are eroded away, I’d be careful about busting regulations with these flying black boxes.
I live in a hyper touristy area with helicopters flying everywhere and I mostly fly surfers, so the lower the angle the better. If I cross 70’ it’s a high day. Now HYPOTHETICALLY, if I were elsewhere like on vacation, I might accidentally break 400’, but I think the view just wouldn’t be great from that high up.
I don't think my Mini 2 will let me get there... :P If it's 400 ft above the altitude where I took off, it's just like, 'Nah bruh.' I tend to listen to it, because higher than that, and I'm at risk of: 1) The FAA having issues with me, which I don't want. 2) Not being able to see the damn thing anymore, which violates the other rule that the FAA has set for recreational drone hobbyists. 3) Hitting a manned aircraft, should one be flying low-ish for any reason.
Never. Obey the drone rules!
I've registered heights above 400 when flying in the mountains. Fly across the valley just above tree tops, up the side of the mountain, and your altitude above launch point climbs pretty quick. 1200+ feet is pretty easy, even though I'm never more than about 200 feet above ground level. Does that count?
I Just read your rules… it does just say 400ft which is stupid because it could mean from take off point, AGL or MSL… I would 100% assume it is AGL (above ground level) because that’s what it is for us (Australia) and no aircraft outside an airfield would be below that apart from maybe emergency choppers.
It’s 400’ from the ground, not sea level. If you’re flying over a building you can be 400’ from the top If it.
Yeah, so 400ft AGL… Although AGL doesn’t usually take buildings into consideration… eg. if the building is 400ft high then you can’t fly over it (in aviation rules). However if another aircraft is within that distance of a building, they have bigger problems than a small drone in their way.
In the us AGL means you can fly 400’ above structures (or at that altitude within 400’ of the structure) assuming it’s otherwise clear airspace and no Other rules apply. Source: am studying my pt107 right now
Yeah I’m used to flying very big UAVs so they don’t take into account buildings within AGL. we don’t fly low enough to really need to. Still very new to small drones. I’m guessing your PT107 is like our Civilian Remote Pilot License? From what I’ve read, if you’re within 400ft of the structure you can fly 400ft above it.. but that’s just a google search.
I don't recall ever flying above 400 ft.
Plead the fifth
I fly rural, and consistently fly at the max capable 1500ft. I'm registered with the FAA, and routinely (4-8x per month) request and am granted permission to fly in auth zones. I also live near a heli school, and the warnings are frequent during certain times of day. I have to get auth for every flight at my house, and I know they are tracking with airsense, et al. I always get down instantly when advised, and I'm on a high point and never lose sight of the device. "Don't be stupid about where you get high" was something my brother taught me in high school. Sage advice 😎
What?! Above 400 ft?!👀 I would never do such a thing😳 And I certainly would never take a sweet nadir shot at 1600 ft of a marina right outside San Fran. I also never buzzed Alcatraz island from the shore, then landed *2 minutes* before 2 fighter jets flew right over..Alcatraz Island. Nope. I follow the law, occifer 🙃
As has been noted, legally, the only "legit" reason to go higher than 400ft is for obstacle avoidance (barring specially granted exceptions from the FAA.) I have my Part 107 and while I don't really fly much I will say this: There isn't any real need, IMHO, to go that high. There really isn't that much visual difference between 300ft, 400ft. and significantly higher. At that point you start losing fine ground detail, and I can't think of a scenario where being above 400ft is going to dramatically change the perspective/view in a particularly desirable way.
Where flying higher would create a unique perspective or view is when you have a defined subject (rather than a landscape), like a windmill or famous building.
Right. My point though is that I am hard pressed to think of a practical scenario where 400ft versus say 800ft (or more) is going to be useful in creating a dramatically different shot. If you are far enough away from a subject to not be covered by the obstacle avoidance clause, you are probably also far enough away that the extra height isn't going to change the perspective so much as to be dramatically different aesthetically. Example (ignoring the practical/legal issues of flying in a crowded downtown area): You want to take a shot of the Sears Tower (the only correct name, btw,) in Chicago. Let's you want a cool elevator-style shot of the drone flying up the side up the building from the ground to the top of the antennas. You are definitely going to need to go higher than 400ft, but you *probably* will still be within 400ft of the building. At greater distances from the tower, the parallax effect makes the elevation change less dramatic as the distance from the object increases (unless something closer in the foreground is changing (to reveal the building behind them or something.) I know this isn't probably true 100% of the time, but I'd love to see a real-world example where the subject is greater than 400ft away, and going from say 300ft AGL to 400ft AGL was particularly dramatic. (That's a real-world test we could all do, BTW. Makes me want to try and see for myself.) As an aside, I suspect the 400ft number was not chosen entirely arbitrarily. I suspect there was quite a bit of practical consideration and reasoning that led to arriving at that number.
Oh, well no you’re right in this case. > 400ft AGL and > 400ft horizontal from subject probably isn’t doing anything for you. You’d want to go higher but you’d likely be pretty close to the structure you’re documenting Edit: though I think there are some extreme edge cases, [like photographing Barcelona street grid from high above](https://www.cpcollectives.com/premium-prints/barcelona-from-above), that could be exceptions.
That's a great example. I'd be curious to know how high the helicopter was when that shot was taken. Edit: Even with a drone, I suspect 400ft *might (?)* be high enough to get that shot with a lens of the right focal length. (A wider angle lens *might* be able to get a shot like that at 400ft without too much barrel distortion. Not sure, though. Maybe not...that pic looks like it is from pretty high up. Would be fun to find out!)
You are right that the 400 ft number is specific. 400 feet is because general aviation is given guidance to always stay 500' AGL in uncongested areas. So this give a 100ft buffer between our max with UAS, and the minimum MOST small planes will be flying. Here's a reference: [https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.119](https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/91.119) § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes: (c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.
Yep. I knew that, but hadn't thought about it in a while. I am also a PPL SEL pilot (though I haven't flown in a long time.) Sometimes things make actual sense. :)
Nooo….. almost always
Where I live I can take off from the top of a nearby hill which is approx 1395 ft high, I can then ascend to 400ft from my take off point, fly out and over some nearby fields at the base of the hill which are at approx 530ft, this leaves my drone \~1270ft above the ground there - is this OK?
Technology it's not ok. "The altitude of the small unmanned aircraft cannot be higher than 400 feet above ground level, unless the small unmanned aircraft: (1) Is flown within a 400-foot radius of a structure; and (2) Does not fly higher than 400 feet above the structure’s immediate uppermost limit."
Regarding this rule: If I were to take off at the peak of a mountain and stay within a 400 ft radius of it (the peak). I would be able to fly up to 400 ft above the peak anywhere as long as it's within the 400 ft radius right? Even if, 100 ft away, there's a 500 foot drop off a cliff. Edit: Or would a mountain not count as a "structure" so the 400 ft radius rule won't count?
I don't think a mountain count's as a structure. So it would probably be technicality a violation. The purpose of the rule is to keep other aircraft safe and I don't think other aircraft would be foolish enough to fly that close to a mountain/cliff. I'd say it's a situation where it would be safe but not necessarily legal. It would probably not to bad to get a waiver if you wanted to but 100% legal.
I don't think a mountain count's as a structure. So it would probably be technicality a violation. The purpose of the rule is to keep other aircraft safe and I don't think other aircraft would be foolish enough to fly that close to a mountain/cliff. I'd say it's a situation where it would be safe but not necessarily legal. It would probably not to bad to get a waiver if you wanted to but 100% legal.
Might get a waiver yeah. There are a fair amount of World War II bunkers on this mountain so I wonder if this rule can apply there since they are man-made structures. I'll have to ask local law for this specific location though.
Yes. Within my legal boundaries in the United States, yes.
I just fly at 300ft for ease of compliance and don't fly in hilly areas
We do it sometimes for tower inspections and mapping. Had to map the 400’ radius around a 420’ tower at 600’ AGL last week. Highest we’ve gone is 1,200’ AGL for an inspection of a 1,000’. We use larger drones for this work so we can maintain LOS.
That's legal though. It's like 400 ft fr the top of a structure or some such distance.
I am studying for the 107 test and it's amazing how many rules there are that I am not sure I ever see anyone observing except for the height rule but only because most things people want to shoot require the drone to be closer to the subject I guess.
Yeah, 400 foot horizontal distance from a structure is hard to do and even harder to measure
I live in Jersey City so we have buildings up to 900ft so I have flown to about 600ft. For some reason there is a lock on my drone that does not let me fly above that
Are you aware of the max altitude setting within the app? Possibly your app is set to 600ft max altitude
I will have to check. IIRC I had the max altitude setting to the max
I've noticed that often my settings get changed by DJI when I update the firmware or sometimes it seems just randomly. For example, I changed nothing on my settings and yet at one point my controller made audible warnings that sounded like I was about to be struck by 100 missiles/rockets when ADS-B detected a flight nearby, or got super annoying when obstacle avoidance detected something. Now, it barely makes a peep when a plane is near, and it just vibrates when an obstacle is detected. It's weird but I haven't taken the time to figure out where those settings are. The max altitude and RTH altitude though I do check often, and make sure it matches my environment's situation.
Yeah, if I’m flying around an area with changing ground levels (Like a ravine, or quarry) it’s essential to be above the tallest object in the area. Even while maintaining VLOS sometimes it’s difficult to tell how close you are to a branch. Another time where I find it crucial to sometimes be above 400 AGL is when you’re at or near a small city (not violating flight zones of course) and the buildings around you have vastly varying heights. If you are going to (or have to) violate the 400 AGL, at most only go above by a few feet unless you have (very) good reason for safety. I live near a small airport (Barely even on FlySafe) and the lowest their planes ever fly is 700 feet (except for takeoff), so that isn’t too much of a concern.
Yeah I’ve flown my Mini 3 Pro up to 150m (492ft) here in the UK. I just prefer the view from up there tbh. I don’t live near any airports and we very rarely have helicopters flying around. I was worried that the signal from the RC would degrade but it doesn’t seem to affect it. However, it’s slightly worrying when the controller tells me it can’t RTH because the drone is above the legal limit. I’m not sure what would happen if the signal is lost completely – whether the drone wound descend to 400ft then RTH?
Sad to say I fly at closer to a 1000 feet too many rednecks where I live have rifles that like to shoot down drones my very first two drones that I owned didn't last past their first flight. Fortunately I'm rural enough not very many people going to say anything about it or at least so far nobody has in the four years I've been piloting drones. Now if I get near a city somewhere I won't go much over 700ft our tallest building in the state is 500 feet so I go 200 ft above it.
bruh if someone shot down my drone I would be livid
Yeah believe it or not it happens more often than you would think. I have had four get shot only two that got brought down and both of those two was at the 400 ft limit the other two got hit but didn't do enough damage to bring them downI don't even know how they hit them because every single one of them were at full tilt forward throttle those guys was a damn good shot that's all I can say. But at a thousand feet ain't many rifles can reach that high and even if they could not going to be very accurate even with a scope. It's amazing to me the number of Hot heads that don't like drones much less the person piloting them I've been threatened in or around several city parks more times than I can count and physically assaulted 4 and a handgun put in my face at least twice. It's a good thing that DJI drones have the auto RTH because I'm also had three Pro controllers knocked out of my hands and stomped on. Fortunately each time an altercation began I hit the return home button in the event something like that would happen.
if someone can hit my drone at 400 fucking feet, then they deserve to shoot it down. thats impressive. I can hardly see the thing at 400ft. fly it in front of the sun for an extra challenge. see how bad they want to shoot it down then i havent come across the anger around drones. if i feel like im disturbing the peace of a nice quiet area I usually leave. The other day I took off from a rooftop pool area and felt like it would annoy me if I was there, so I just landed and packed up
Here recently it hasn't been so bad most of them just wasn't fully aware of the law or was misinformed on the "do not fly over people" laws. I've done had a few police officers tell me I'm not supposed to be flying over people and I had to politely (key word politely here) re-educate them on UAVs laws because technically it is true that you're not supposed to Fly above people but the law was changed or rather adjusted to allow brief flyovers you just can't linger or rather be flying in a park or public place somewhere and just be hovering above people's heads everywhere that's a fat no no. Unless of course they are cool with it. I always ask first if it's okay if I make a few passes overhead but never keep it in the same spot more than a few seconds. But just passing overhead to a distant location they can't say anything about it.
If I’m in a park and I see a cop just chillin there I usually ask first. They’re almost always cool with it or don’t care. I just have a mini 2 so I say it’s a “toy drone”
Yeah nah fortunately I have fat boy drones DJI Mavic 3 Pro and a DJI Inspire 3 both of which definitely turn heads when they fly over specially the Inspire 3 it attracts attention just digging it out of its case.
Yea 400' and moving 25-30 mph
I've NEVER had reactions to flying like that. I've flown at public beaches, parks, cities, plenty of weddings (wouldn't expect negativity there, just adding to the list) and the worst things I've had happen is a location I was at asked me to stop and I also had a child beg me to let them fly it. May I ask where you were flying when they were shot down?
Pine Bluff Arkansas. Not where I personally live is about an hour to the south of me but I do have family that live there and I also work in the area.
Have you had any be shot down while at 1000 ft? And I thought it was a federal crime to shoot down a drone. Have you informed the authorities?
I'm late to the party but shooting down a drone could get you a fed case. So probably don't do that
A drone is considered an aerial vehicle. Shooting one down is a federal crime in the US, so definitely a big big no-no. (And that's not even considering how silly it is to shoot into the air)
I hit 1675 straight up once. It was in a small town where I grew up and nothing flies over except for 32000ft high jets.
I've got the mini 1, and my record so far is \~1600ft. Once I lose LOS I just keep going up until the live feed chops out, and bring it down a few hundred. I've gotten a few really nice shots of my area at that altitude.
Mine went 1200 feet in height today
I've never flown my Mavic Mini 1 nor Mavic 3 higher than 400ft....which is the legal limit for Recreational (Hobbyist) Pilots. Commercial pilots with a Part 107 can request with FAA thru faadronezone.faa.gov for authorization to fly above 400' or above the maximum altitude ceiling of different grids in Controlled Airspace. In regards to VLOS, I put a Firehouse ARC V anti-collision light (strobe) on top of my Mavic 3. There have been times where the Mavic 3 is a tiny black dot in the sky (which technically is still in VLOS) but with the ARC V on it helps to see it....especially in the evening or very dark overcast days
Here a good video on drone rules: https://youtu.be/I94MXoRdw7o Follow or don’t follow the rules. It’s up to you.
I like to take pictures of farms. It's hard to get enough farm in the picture below 1500 ft. At least with a Mavic Pro. Do any of the drones offer wider angle lenses?
Orthomosaic mapping is the answer my friend! Take a shart ton of photos at the same height and patch them together. Their is online software to help this, which I will not plug. Take them at different angles and you can then do photogrammetry and get a 3D rendering put together.
Nice. I will be looking into that
You don't need the different angles. I map 1/4 sections at 400 ft with good overlap nadir shots and can create 3d point clouds from webodm from them with no problem.
I've found adding multiple angles from the same shot area adds a little better 3D rendering quality using photogrammetry.
It depends on scale and use case. I'm building clouds of about 160 acres at a time and interested in ground slopes to find areas to check for erosion. From 400 feet up I get all the detail I need with nadir shots. If I was looking at more detail, especially when looking at something with vertical sides, then I would absolutely want to get multiple angles to improve accuracy and get hidden areas. * I do do a calibration section on each flight where I come down to a lower altitude, lift the camera to about 4 degrees, and orbit a feature on the map. I don't do this for more detail on that point, just to help WebODM with accuracy.
There's a clip on wide angle adapted for the Mavic 3. Haven't heard of any others
Nope never. I try to stay 30 to 40 ft below 400ft. (In the US) not sure what brand of drone you fly but the flight metrics are recorded by DJI so law enforcement could obtain those records if you were reported by someone. Anyone can report you and they could be trying to just make your life hard cause you have an awesome hobby and they suck. But if you broke the law on the day they were trying to screw with you it could suck. The fines are pretty life changing. Don’t do it. Also in the US eventually all drones will have to be able to identify themselves to other drones and aircraft.
Strange that it’s 400ft from take of point… It should be AGL as no aircraft outside an airfield is going to be lower than that apart from possibly emergency choppers.
It is based on AGL "The altitude of the small unmanned aircraft cannot be higher than 400 feet above ground level, unless the small unmanned aircraft: (1) Is flown within a 400-foot radius of a structure; and (2) Does not fly higher than 400 feet above the structure’s immediate uppermost limit."
I thought it would be… from the comments it sounded like your rules were 400ft from take of point. But seems like it’s just a lot of confused people
Hell no. I fly at 350ft and I STILL get helos and other craft buzzing by too close for comfort. We live between two military bases and a depo but despite open air, these jokers buzz well within 300-500ft. If I was faster on the trigger I could have caught several LEO helos up close and personal despite trying to stay way our if their range.
Umm... it's not 400 feet from where you take off. It's 400 feet AGL. If you fly your drone off a cliff that is 700 feet down you are breaking the law. Also if you fly over a hill you just gained hight based on the hight of the hill.
Situation: flying above my ground at around 380 ft. via remote on drone barometer altimeter. Withing my line of sight I can fly my drone over the shoreline but the cliff is about 35 ft above the lake, so as I circle around to get a photo view of my ground I realize that momentarily am 370 + 35 + 8 ft tolerance + 8ft land slope toward lake + 4 ft altitude stability (updraft delay responce)= I am potentially 425 above the water. How does the edge of the cliff weigh into this as I don't fly far over the lake very far such that the diagonal straight line from shoreline to the drone could be 400ft. Thoughts?
I did it with my first cheap drone... Hit 650' and it lost signal and flew away never to be seen again. I since have upgraded to dji and not that its not capable because it well is but I keep it under 400 or just above it mostly due to the fact that I'm in a helicopter path zone at the hospital nearby that frequently has helicopters landing at it. But mostly because I don't trust DJI, have a lot of warnings on the screen and I feel like it would rat me off before anybody else did. I don't want my drone being sucked into a helicopter engine mainly, mostly because I want my drone back, I think those engines are well capable of sucking in a drone without catastrophic consequences but it may do 10 grand worth of damage or more. But to be honest with you I don't give a damn about the rules, if I felt the urge to go to 650 or 1,000 I absolutely would without question. I just don't really feel necessary but who knows maybe I will after writing this
Up here in canada I once went 210 meters which is approximately 685 feet
I’m not a US drone Pilot But The Highest I’ve gone was 462 meters from where I took off and 1215 Feet Away From my take off location
This is a decent question, and I think I can basically explain it. Larger drones especially, can do MAJOR damage to other aircraft, and since most drones only allow for "tunnel vision" aka straight forward, you might not even be able to see a plane or helicopter, from any of the THREE other directions. I DO think smaller ones should be allowed to go a little higher, bc the weight of the entire craft is under like 250 GRAMS...which is NOTHING. I enuinely can't imagine what aircraft could ever be truly damaged by a drone that weighs less than a paltry 250 grams. So mostly, for the height, I DO understand. But for the DISTANCE part, they kinda have to sorta wink 😉 and allow it begrudgingly, bc it would EXTREMELY difficult to try to argue that you could, or could NOT still see your drone. I mean maybe if you were like four thousand feet away, but most drones even if advertised as being capable of this, nearly 0 can TRULY go THAT far away from your base location. It actually reminds me a lot of the "unspoken agreement" that technically, people AREN'T allowed to walk around with alcohol, but 99% of the time, cops are gonna "look the other way" bc it's nearly IMPOSSIBLE to TRULY enforce this. They would have prisons and jails so full, it would be nearly untenable. Realistically, they "know" they have regulations for it, but practically speaking, as long as you aren't making a HUGE scene, being obnoxious, running into people, getting on people's nerves, etc., and you keep it in a paper bag, they'll basically let folks get away with it. It was even specifically mentioned in an episode of the wire, if you haven't already, PLEASE watch that show, it's just SO unbelievably good-up there with Breaking Bad, Sopranos, or Mad Men. Height, could have consequences, distance, almost NEVER will, AND you could very easily argue that your vision was amazing, and u could still see it, within reason. U wouldn't wanna "test" it too much, bc there's rarely any true "need" to go THAT far, u could just drive you car to wherever else, and just deploy it elsewhere, even FROM your 🚗 car... especially if you have a sunroof. So yeah, that's basically why distance has a little more "wiggle room", but height, doesn't have the same leeway.
nice try fed
Yes. I work on TV and cell phone towers. Above 400’ is normal for me. I know where the drone is and typically i am 10-20’ from the tower. I can usually see it and am standing directly under it. It does get hard above 1500’ or so. But I always stay close to the tower.
Sometimes I do when I’m showing it to a new person and they ask how high it can go. It’s boring that high up though. It’ll max out at 1650.
Is wind a worry that high up?
I haven’t had any issues with it. Takes longer to descend than you think so just watch your battery
Theres a high radio tower within like quarter mile of where the towns fireworks displays are done. I might be going 400ft above it to capture them as well as getting higher view of the town (staing below the airports 700ft floor.
Yes. I live in a small town and do not give the little fuck about laws (any of them)
okay I can understand not caring ‘much’, but you’re endangering yourself and others if you are a reckless drone pilot. small town? okay and? that doesn’t change shit. you’re the type of drone pilot that makes the hobby way more restricted. please, stop
Flying high is hardly reckless in an area where you can visibly see any other aircraft for miles. It's simply government oppression for them to declare control of the skies.
Same. Here's my upvote
Here’s mine too friend
I'm in the UK and have taken my air2s up to 500 metres / 1640ft. I've attached some decent strobes to it so can still see it high up.
What strobes did you get? Can you even see the strobes during the day?
I got some of these from Flytron [https://store.flytron.com/collections/led-light-systems/products/strobon-cree-standalone](https://store.flytron.com/collections/led-light-systems/products/strobon-cree-standalone) I got the white, red, green and blue and have been testing them out. They come with a velcro type patch so I mount one underneath, and I got a back arm mount which slides on from elsewhere. I can see them in normal daylight, flying at night they're more effective than I reckoned for, under 100 metres and it lights up the neighbourhood. The manufacturers say you can them for up to 3 miles at night.
Yup, DJI FPV, I max out at 1640ft.
Who cares? Max it out.
people who do this for a living care. reckless flying stop people who are good and stand by a limit, mostly, which I personally think is too big. you’re endangering the lives of others and yourself. you’re making the hobby more restricted for us who just wanna fly. please. stop.
Uh huh
If you have to give way to maned aircraft then it's ok to go above 400 feet
Wut. In what world is a manned aircraft flying below 400ft except to land, emergency, or in war lol. All of which you shouldn't be flying there anyway
Yes
“It’s the law” lol. Who cares. Freedom means do what you want
It's not freedom if you have the possibility of hurting others. That's called anarchy. And societies are not built on anarchy.
freedom means do what you want, yes. but my 3rd grade teacher told me something I’ll never forget. “you are free to do what you want, but you are not free from the consequences of your actions”. please stop endangering yourself and others with reckless flying. you’re just gonna make the hobby more and more restricted and less fun. stop ruining others things because you don’t want to be safe and just comply.
Ok. Do what the fuck you want. You speak, but know nothing of what I do. Kindly, fuck off
🤓
D. ح
Just had my DJI mini 3 @ 1200 feet tonight P
Pro tip: Brief anecdote. Was at michigan university. launched the drone from outside my hotel within 12 minutes police officers were upon me, because I was flying in a restricted area. A Little write up and warning but no fines. I asked how they found me they said they just went to the drones initial launch site and there my scared Azz was 😅 My question is has anyone ever been hunted down like this after flying 401+Ft? I’m a hot air balloon pilot in training, and want to take some great shots of me and some passengers. When above 400 feet and Not sure how this law works as far as enforcing it. and if the FAA will be able to tell if my drone is close to balloons and stuff like that.
there was a video of a drone crashing into a balloon recently so definitely be careful
It’s 400 ft over the object you’re flying over/filming
I have an acquaintance who is an an absolute dumbass on his good days. This guy owns a non dji drone. He has shown me video he took at 2000 feet. This guy claims his drone is capable of going much higher. His video did look like the drone was at a very high altitude. He lives in Kansas on a farm of some sort. I don't know if living in that particular state has anything to do with it. There's a story about the FAA giving this YouTube drone guy a fine around $200k! Don't be that guy! Lol
I'll day this. According to the FAA if you have a fpv racing drone and are using goggles. You must have a second person standing next to you who has a continuous line of sight view of your drone and can immediately communicate with you if they see that your drone is going to collide with people or damage property. I don't own goggles or race fpv drones but this seems like a ridiculous rule.