U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

Post by asynchronous13 » Thu, Jan 17, 2019, 12:35 AM UTC

avar wrote: post #197

asynchronous13 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would it need to be tested in court? Because the law is not clear as it is currently written. On one hand, the minimum safe altitude to operate an aircraft is 500ft. So it's pretty clear that anything above 500ft is considered a public thoroughfare. The FAA claims to own and regulate all US airspace down to ground level. The FAA also says that drones must be operated below 400ft (clearly an effort to keep drone…

That's really interesting. As the Wikipedia article notes[1] quoting the decision while the court didn't hold property rights at as specific altitude, in their language they referred to the height of buildings, trees etc.: > "if the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the land, he must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere. Otherwise, buildings could not be erected, trees cou…

You're right that there are aspects of the case that would not apply to a current-day situation. The takings clause can only apply to the US Government, for example. But the main takeaway that I believe would apply is that a property owner effectively owns the airspace up to some altitude X ft.

The way I see it is that the property owner should be entitled to exclusive use from 0ft to Xft. (Of course, the land owner can always give permission for lower flights if they so choose.) And drones should be able to legally traverse from Xft to 400ft.

It would be great if a law would establish what X is. Unfortunately, I think it's more likely that someone will fly a drone over private land at 150ft, the land owner will shoot it down, and the ensuing lawsuit will set a precedent.

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people

Re: U.S. proposes to allow drone operation at night, over people