You’ve probably read about the Cajon Pass fire already, which has burned up a bunch of cars on the freeway. (Hard to believe the people in those cars could escape a fast-moving fire by running)
Anyway, all the news sources ( example ) are talking about th aerial firefighting being disrupted by people (of the sort sometimes known as jackasses) flying their little drones in the area, the better to get a good look-see.
How is this even possibly legal? Do we need new laws to forbid this? Don’t we have existing laws against interfering with police or fire fighters or other emergency responders? And if so, aren’t the existing laws sufficient to cover these kinds of cases? Or, in the specific circumstances of aerial interference, is this something that only Federal law or the FAA can regulate? If that’s so, do we need new Federal laws here?
Also: The linked article says the fire crews were delayed about a half-hour until they were able to locate the drone operators and tell them to knock it off. They can actually locate the operators? The article doesn’t mention if they cited the operators, or arrested them, or confiscated their equipment.
It isn’t legal. They just choose not to drag the operators off in handcuffs as it’s a mistake a reasonable person could make.
I actually wonder if a lightweight drone is that big of a threat to a large aircraft. I doubt they have any more mass than a large bird, and aircraft don’t crash from single bird strikes generally.
it isn’t legal, since airspace can fall under temporary flight restrictions. but that won’t stop man-children from playing with their new toys in places they shouldn’t be.
you do not want the rotor blades of a helicopter striking a hard object. and you definitely don’t want metal and plastic pieces going down the throat of a turbine.
Why does the aircraft have to crash before it becomes a bad thing? I mean, if a bird can do this to a helicopter, I’d say causing thousands of dollars of equipment damage and/or injuring the occupants are good enough reasons to say “keep your damn toys out of areas they don’t belong.”
hell, I run and race R/C vehicles, and I can’t stand these things. they’re purchased by idiot bros who have no idea (if they even care) how to operate them safely and appropriately. those of us who actually belong to an R/C organization/sanctioning body and take the time to secure approved places to run would be glad to see every single one of these inappropriately operated drones blasted out of the air. I giggled at a video I watched where some drone bro was flying around his (burning) neighbor’s house while the firefighters were working on putting it out. eventually one of the firefighters just turned a fire hose on the drone, and the idiot owner had the balls to insist the county should “compensate” him for the damage.
148.2. Every person who willfully commits any of the following acts at the burning of a building or at any other time and place where any fireman or firemen or emergency rescue personnel are discharging or attempting to discharge an official duty, is guilty of a misdemeanor:
[ol] [li] Resists or interferes with the lawful efforts of any fireman or firemen or emergency rescue personnel in the discharge or attempt to discharge an official duty.[/li] [li] Disobeys the lawful orders of any fireman or public officer.[/li] [li] Engages in any disorderly conduct which delays or prevents a fire from being timely extinguished.[/li] [li] Forbids or prevents others from assisting in extinguishing a fire or exhorts another person, as to whom he has no legal right or obligation to protect or control, from assisting in extinguishing a fire.[/ol][/li][/quote]
I’d say #3 covers it. And #2 once they have been told to get their little drone the f— out of there!
In the specific circumstance of aerial firefighting, does Federal aviation law [del]trump[/del] supersede any state law? Is that an area that only Congress or FAA can regulate?
And if so, is there in fact Federal law or FAA regulation to cover this kind of activity?
Sounds like a good shotgun with a skeet scope and #6 magnum loads should be standard equipment on fire trucks. Not sure about air-to-air on the choppers, though.
“No pilots may operate an aircraft in the areas covered by this NOTAM (except as described).”
typically the media will operate above the restriction, e.g. in this case the airspace is restricted from ground to 8,000 feet. They can fly above that, or outside of the restricted area.
Whoa! Something you typed in your post didn’t show up, but I see it here in this edit box! I think you’re missing a QUOTE tag. Here’s the part of your post that isn’t showing up: (ETA: Ninja’d. I see jz78817 has fixed this already.)
Anyway, good to see that FAA is almost on top if this by issuing a NOTAM, although it was a bit late (today instead of yesterday). But from now on, with this experience, they should know to issue a NOTAM like that immediately whenever there’s a fire to be fought.
And, fires being rather common, one might think there would be a blanket general rule like this, instead of having to issue a specific NOTAM for each fire. (Which I doubt that drone operators would see anyway.)
Now, now, we don’t want to go completely Judge Dredd here. But securing the emergency zone could lead to some wonderfully expensive and satisfying aluminum rain.
Can the operator of a drone be charged as a pilot ( even though they have no license nor are actually in/on the flying machine ) when their drone flying machine breaks a FAA or Certain pertinent law/rule?
I think it should be legal and without consequence to fire anything that isn’t considered a firearm at drones. Or any other method of knocking them out of the air.
If a drone is over your property or observing your private space, I don’t believe there are any consequences to… disabling it. IANAL etc. but I’d like to see the court case where some fan-boy tries to sue you for whacking his toy with a pool scoop, or whatever.