USA Crowd Clearances

[Rwellvang]

I recently turned down a job shooting a block party at a local festival, couple thousand people, 3 different marching bands plus a beer tent and many other obstacles. Main reason I declined was I knew that in order to get what they were looking for I would need to be too close to people. My main question is where is it spelled out on what we need for clearances, I have my 333 and so far in my studies for the 107 I haven't seen anything other than do not fly over.

 

[Skydog]

My general drone flying rule is: If in doubt, don't. Especially when crowds are involved.

 

[Rwellvang]

That was my thought.

 

[licensed pilot]

I recently turned down a job shooting a block party at a local festival, couple thousand people, 3 different marching bands plus a beer tent and many other obstacles. Main reason I declined was I knew that in order to get what they were looking for I would need to be too close to people. My main question is where is it spelled out on what we need for clearances, I have my 333 and so far in my studies for the 107 I haven't seen anything other than do not fly over.

Skydog's advice is the best.

Unless you would like some totally made up bogus explanation of "crowd clearances." In that case, call your local FSDO UAV "experts".

 

[kcobello]

There seems to be many opinions on this subject. I have had 3. Local FSDO, sUAS attorney, and the opinion on here...

 

[licensed pilot]

I follow the FARs as written and when I want an opinion, I get it from FAA HQ. If you keep those emails, they may come in handy later. FSDOs are just trying to cover their butts.

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

 

[mattbeardsley]

Great question. I think you're right to decline, sounds like the client is looking for something unsafe – maybe better with cable or an old school jib. I had a similar situation with a client last week and used a Mavic with prop guards for the shots over people (at a private event with notice given that we'd be filming from a drone). We minimized our time over people, flew very conservatively, and flew at a high-enough altitude that it was quiet and unobtrusive (we'd also have a could seconds to warn folks in the very unlikely event some failure brought it down). For everything else, I used the Inspire 2 and avoided passing over people, per my usual protocol. Of course the two cameras are somewhat of a pain to color match in the edit, but close enough for the job, and much less risky and obnoxious, IMHO.

 

[kcobello]

Great question. I think you're right to decline, sounds like the client is looking for something unsafe – maybe better with cable or an old school jib. I had a similar situation with a client last week and used a Mavic with prop guards for the shots over people (at a private event with notice given that we'd be filming from a drone). We minimized our time over people, flew very conservatively, and flew at a high-enough altitude that it was quiet and unobtrusive (we'd also have a could seconds to warn folks in the very unlikely event some failure brought it down). For everything else, I used the Inspire 2 and avoided passing over people, per my usual protocol. Of course the two cameras are somewhat of a pain to color match in the edit, but close enough for the job, and much less risky and obnoxious, IMHO.

So the procedures you listed are adequate to fly over people? I have to ask because I am trying to get a gauge on what is accepted and what is not. My understanding is a waiver to fly near/over people, besides all that is required within the waiver. I am just asking because of the opinions I see here and get from others.... Truthfully prop guards do not protect a falling 1 pound object from bouncing off someone's head. The positive I see is you are trying...

 

[Casey53]

I've pondered attaching a 56" weather balloon with helium to counter-balance a flying Phantom and seeing if the FAA would waiver it for being over uncovered heads shots, just helium would cost a small fortune to fill it for the P4 lift. Something like those blimp and camera things that fly around inside sports arenas, although them being indoors gets them out of the FAA stuff. Being a blimp, less likely to cause injuries should it fall or pop.

Maybe a tethered lightweight drone like CNN's wavier for the FotoKite or whatever it's called.

 

[LAphotographer]

I was cleared by a Fire Inspector at a large event for minimal clearance, no overflights of crowd, but able to be within 10' laterally of the main assembly, and 25' AGL minimum. I don't recall what FAA says is adequate clearance, but on the ground you are primarily at the mercy of the local authorities - city, fire, police, etc. I think Part 107 only says that you cannot fly 'over' people, and doesn't mention lateral separation, leaving it up to interpretation.

 

[kcobello]

I was cleared by a Fire Inspector at a large event for minimal clearance, no overflights of crowd, but able to be within 10' laterally of the main assembly, and 25' AGL minimum. I don't recall what FAA says is adequate clearance, but on the ground you are primarily at the mercy of the local authorities - city, fire, police, etc. I think Part 107 only says that you cannot fly 'over' people, and doesn't mention lateral separation, leaving it up to interpretation.

I have to ask this. I like what you are saying but does a fire inspector have the right to overrule the FAA when you are in their airspace? Please I just want info on some of these ways of operating that I am reading here. You are right about flying OVER people but their has been input on direction of momentum at a crowd.

Thanks
Kevin

 

[licensed pilot]

So the procedures you listed are adequate to fly over people? I have to ask because I am trying to get a gauge on what is accepted and what is not. My understanding is a waiver to fly near/over people, besides all that is required within the waiver. I am just asking because of the opinions I see here and get from others.... Truthfully prop guards do not protect a falling 1 pound object from bouncing off someone's head. The positive I see is you are trying...

I don't believe that giving notice to the guests redefines then as "directly participating." Flying over crowds w/o a waiver is not legal. Part 107 does not define "lateral clearance." that's a judgment call by the PIC.

 

[mattbeardsley]

I don't believe that giving notice to the guests redefines then as "directly participating." Flying over crowds w/o a waiver is not legal. Part 107 does not define "lateral clearance." that's a judgment call by the PIC.

Good point. My thought is that private property, working for the owner to fly over their guests falls into a different category than some public or large event, or just folks on the street. Also, I think switching to Mavic with prop guards for that one shot at least minimizes risk. I haven't flown the I2 or my heavy lifters over people