Would a search warrant be required?

[Broomstick]

@muldoonthief

So reading the Section 107 regulations, a “small unmanned aircraft” is “an unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds on takeoff, including everything that is on board or otherwise attached to the aircraft.”

But is there any exclusion for minimum size? I can’t believe a toy like the tiny $20 radio controlled flying Superman is somehow covered by FAA rules, including requiring a “remote pilot certificate with a small UAS rating”.

@Kron

Part 107 certification is only required for commercial operation. Personal use of small drones is covered under hobbyist use, which does not require a cert.

“Drones” under 0.55 pounds do not require certification, a license number, or any sort of license for the operator. So, most likely, based on size, the flying Superman wouldn’t require one.

0.55 pounds is pretty lightweight. About 80% of my and my spouses RC model collection required official numbers after the new rule went through.

[Hari_Seldon]

It seems to me to be similar to using an infrared detector to search out grow-ops and then using the information gathered to get a search warrant. It also seems to me that a grower could defeat this by funneling the generated heat 1000’ into the ground using a heat pump. Kind of geothermal in reverse.

[LTU2]

@rbroome

I thought the law was quite the opposite. A person does not own the airspace above his property. I have never read otherwise.

And since you grant exceptions to aircraft, no warrant would be needed.

A person owns the air space above them as noted this is known as “Air Rights”

The SW issue would fall under the “Open Fields”, doctrine, no warrant would be required.