Apparently the FAA found out about our flying behind one of the local schools and informed the county it was a no-no. School security came out this morning and nicely ran us off.

The next closest legal place is in Maryland. Hell of a place to go for anything, but you gotta take a little bad with the good. The new field has a 50 yard asphalt runway and lots of room.

I'm going to learn to fly this damn airplane yet.

On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 18:14:04 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

Apparently the FAA found out about our flying behind one of the local schools and informed the county it was a no-no. School security came out this morning and nicely ran us off.

The next closest legal place is in Maryland. Hell of a place to go for anything, but you gotta take a little bad with the good. The new field has a 50 yard asphalt runway and lots of room.

I'm going to learn to fly this damn airplane yet.

===

That's too bad. Why would the FAA care?

On Saturday, September 20, 2014 9:27:09 PM UTC-4, Wayne. B wrote:
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 18:14:04 -0700 (PDT), John H

wrote:



Apparently the FAA found out about our flying behind one of the local schools and informed the county it was a no-no. School security came out this morning and nicely ran us off.



The next closest legal place is in Maryland. Hell of a place to go for anything, but you gotta take a little bad with the good. The new field has a 50 yard asphalt runway and lots of room.



I'm going to learn to fly this damn airplane yet.



===



That's too bad. Why would the FAA care?

The school was within the Restricted Flight Zone for National Airport. Of course, if an airplane is flying that low behind the school, it is already in a heap of trouble!

On 9/20/14 9:14 PM, John H wrote:
Apparently the FAA found out about our flying behind one of the local schools and informed the county it was a no-no. School security came out this morning and nicely ran us off.

The next closest legal place is in Maryland. Hell of a place to go for anything, but you gotta take a little bad with the good. The new field has a 50 yard asphalt runway and lots of room.

I'm going to learn to fly this damn airplane yet.



Unlikely.

On 9/20/2014 9:35 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/20/14 9:14 PM, John H wrote:
Apparently the FAA found out about our flying behind one of the local
schools and informed the county it was a no-no. School security came
out this morning and nicely ran us off.

The next closest legal place is in Maryland. Hell of a place to go for
anything, but you gotta take a little bad with the good. The new field
has a 50 yard asphalt runway and lots of room.

I'm going to learn to fly this damn airplane yet.



Unlikely.
If you could learn to field strip a pistol, he could learn to fly a plane.

On 9/20/14 11:09 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 18:14:04 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

Apparently the FAA found out about our flying behind one of the local schools and informed the county it was a no-no. School security came out this morning and nicely ran us off.

The next closest legal place is in Maryland. Hell of a place to go for anything, but you gotta take a little bad with the good. The new field has a 50 yard asphalt runway and lots of room.

I'm going to learn to fly this damn airplane yet.

That is where the quad rotor starts to show it;s advantages. You can
fly them in more places.

The kid who works for my wife has developed a pretty good business
building these things. Most of the skill (and profit) is actually in
programming the on board electronics tho.
He is also getting a lot of interest in commercial operations but the
legality is still in limbo. People want him to shoot aerials of golf
courses, housing developments and other real estate, them edit them
into a well produced video. To get around the legal problems he is
trying to figure out a way that they are actually doing the raw
photography with a rented copter. He is only selling the post
production and renting the copter. That is probably illegal too but he
has more plausible deniability.
FAA really needs to fix this BS. Knowing how our government works,
they will want a license that requires years and thousands of hours of
training to get.



Seems perfectly ok to fly these little devices around open fields
designated for such use, but flying over the backyards of people not
participating in the taking of these vids seems like an invasion of
privacy and shouldn't be allowed. On the other hand, might be an
opportunity to develop and sell jamming devices that cause the model
planes to crash and burn.

On 9/21/2014 7:22 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 9/20/14 11:09 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 18:14:04 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

Apparently the FAA found out about our flying behind one of the local
schools and informed the county it was a no-no. School security came
out this morning and nicely ran us off.

The next closest legal place is in Maryland. Hell of a place to go
for anything, but you gotta take a little bad with the good. The new
field has a 50 yard asphalt runway and lots of room.

I'm going to learn to fly this damn airplane yet.

That is where the quad rotor starts to show it;s advantages. You can
fly them in more places.

The kid who works for my wife has developed a pretty good business
building these things. Most of the skill (and profit) is actually in
programming the on board electronics tho.
He is also getting a lot of interest in commercial operations but the
legality is still in limbo. People want him to shoot aerials of golf
courses, housing developments and other real estate, them edit them
into a well produced video. To get around the legal problems he is
trying to figure out a way that they are actually doing the raw
photography with a rented copter. He is only selling the post
production and renting the copter. That is probably illegal too but he
has more plausible deniability.
FAA really needs to fix this BS. Knowing how our government works,
they will want a license that requires years and thousands of hours of
training to get.



Seems perfectly ok to fly these little devices around open fields
designated for such use, but flying over the backyards of people not
participating in the taking of these vids seems like an invasion of
privacy and shouldn't be allowed. On the other hand, might be an
opportunity to develop and sell jamming devices that cause the model
planes to crash and burn.

Let's make a case of Google showing pictures all around your house. You
have a pretty good invasion of privacy case if you want to pursue it.
BTW have you filed a case against the guy who tapped on your window and
scared the bejeesus out of you?

On Sunday, September 21, 2014 3:31:21 PM UTC-4, Harrold wrote:
On 9/21/2014 7:22 AM, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/20/14 11:09 PM, wrote:

On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 18:14:04 -0700 (PDT), John H

wrote:



Apparently the FAA found out about our flying behind one of the local

schools and informed the county it was a no-no. School security came

out this morning and nicely ran us off.



The next closest legal place is in Maryland. Hell of a place to go

for anything, but you gotta take a little bad with the good. The new

field has a 50 yard asphalt runway and lots of room.



I'm going to learn to fly this damn airplane yet.



That is where the quad rotor starts to show it;s advantages. You can

fly them in more places.



The kid who works for my wife has developed a pretty good business

building these things. Most of the skill (and profit) is actually in

programming the on board electronics tho.

He is also getting a lot of interest in commercial operations but the

legality is still in limbo. People want him to shoot aerials of golf

courses, housing developments and other real estate, them edit them

into a well produced video. To get around the legal problems he is

trying to figure out a way that they are actually doing the raw

photography with a rented copter. He is only selling the post

production and renting the copter. That is probably illegal too but he

has more plausible deniability.

FAA really needs to fix this BS. Knowing how our government works,

they will want a license that requires years and thousands of hours of

training to get.







Seems perfectly ok to fly these little devices around open fields

designated for such use, but flying over the backyards of people not

participating in the taking of these vids seems like an invasion of

privacy and shouldn't be allowed. On the other hand, might be an

opportunity to develop and sell jamming devices that cause the model

planes to crash and burn.



Let's make a case of Google showing pictures all around your house. You

have a pretty good invasion of privacy case if you want to pursue it.

BTW have you filed a case against the guy who tapped on your window and

scared the bejeesus out of you?

Perhaps that guy just had excellent vision and spotted an asshole from 50 yards!

On 9/21/14 12:12 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 07:22:11 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/20/14 11:09 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 18:14:04 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

Apparently the FAA found out about our flying behind one of the local schools and informed the county it was a no-no. School security came out this morning and nicely ran us off.

The next closest legal place is in Maryland. Hell of a place to go for anything, but you gotta take a little bad with the good. The new field has a 50 yard asphalt runway and lots of room.

I'm going to learn to fly this damn airplane yet.

That is where the quad rotor starts to show it;s advantages. You can
fly them in more places.

The kid who works for my wife has developed a pretty good business
building these things. Most of the skill (and profit) is actually in
programming the on board electronics tho.
He is also getting a lot of interest in commercial operations but the
legality is still in limbo. People want him to shoot aerials of golf
courses, housing developments and other real estate, them edit them
into a well produced video. To get around the legal problems he is
trying to figure out a way that they are actually doing the raw
photography with a rented copter. He is only selling the post
production and renting the copter. That is probably illegal too but he
has more plausible deniability.
FAA really needs to fix this BS. Knowing how our government works,
they will want a license that requires years and thousands of hours of
training to get.



Seems perfectly ok to fly these little devices around open fields
designated for such use, but flying over the backyards of people not
participating in the taking of these vids seems like an invasion of
privacy and shouldn't be allowed. On the other hand, might be an
opportunity to develop and sell jamming devices that cause the model
planes to crash and burn.

Yeah, only the government and Google are allowed unrestricted access
to spy on you from the air (and ground)..



Because of the trees around here, we don't have many low-flying
neighborhood owned drones circling the neighborhood. If we did, there
are enough tech-savvy folks up and down the street who could and would
figure out a way to bring them down. One of them works as a top-level EE
at the Puzzle Palace.

On 9/21/14 2:31 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 13:48:38 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/21/14 12:12 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 07:22:11 -0400, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 9/20/14 11:09 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 20 Sep 2014 18:14:04 -0700 (PDT), John H
wrote:

Apparently the FAA found out about our flying behind one of the local schools and informed the county it was a no-no. School security came out this morning and nicely ran us off.

The next closest legal place is in Maryland. Hell of a place to go for anything, but you gotta take a little bad with the good. The new field has a 50 yard asphalt runway and lots of room.

I'm going to learn to fly this damn airplane yet.

That is where the quad rotor starts to show it;s advantages. You can
fly them in more places.

The kid who works for my wife has developed a pretty good business
building these things. Most of the skill (and profit) is actually in
programming the on board electronics tho.
He is also getting a lot of interest in commercial operations but the
legality is still in limbo. People want him to shoot aerials of golf
courses, housing developments and other real estate, them edit them
into a well produced video. To get around the legal problems he is
trying to figure out a way that they are actually doing the raw
photography with a rented copter. He is only selling the post
production and renting the copter. That is probably illegal too but he
has more plausible deniability.
FAA really needs to fix this BS. Knowing how our government works,
they will want a license that requires years and thousands of hours of
training to get.



Seems perfectly ok to fly these little devices around open fields
designated for such use, but flying over the backyards of people not
participating in the taking of these vids seems like an invasion of
privacy and shouldn't be allowed. On the other hand, might be an
opportunity to develop and sell jamming devices that cause the model
planes to crash and burn.

Yeah, only the government and Google are allowed unrestricted access
to spy on you from the air (and ground)..



Because of the trees around here, we don't have many low-flying
neighborhood owned drones circling the neighborhood. If we did, there
are enough tech-savvy folks up and down the street who could and would
figure out a way to bring them down. One of them works as a top-level EE
at the Puzzle Palace.

Unfortunately the same law that makes it illegal to shoot down an
airliner, applies to a drone as does the law that keeps you from
jamming the ILS at the airport.



I'm sure it would take the owner of the annoying drone a while to figure
out what happened, especially if he had the flying and tech skill set of
say, John Herring.