Drones in NYC: CALL 911

[damoncooper]

Looks like the city is telling its citizens to call 911 if they see drones in the city. The Class B space only covers part of NYC though. What gives?

http://www1.nyc.gov/nyc-resources/service/5521/drones

 

[slim.slamma]

The Nypd wants to put anybody flying a drone in the city/MANHATTAN on the watch list. The outer boroughs you probably be alright.
I got my footage early

 

[slim.slamma]

I hate to admit it but this is why I fly bvlos and not my surrounding area. If someone see the drone and call because I'm just flying my drone cool now find me 3 miles away.
You try flying in 100 yard radius people calling 911 but can't articulate an actual crime. Just he's flying a drone.

 

[DesertWindAero]

I hate to admit it but this is why I fly bvlos and not my surrounding area. If someone see the drone and call because I'm just flying my drone cool now find me 3 miles away.
You try flying in 100 yard radius people calling 911 but can't articulate an actual crime. Just he's flying a drone.

3 miles?

What kind of battery are you using?

 

[slim.slamma]

3 miles?

What kind of battery are you using?

Our forum battery modification by @damoncooper, @FlyHighUSA . 20 to 25 minutes down to 30%
U.e.no

 

[DesertWindAero]

Our forum battery modification by @damoncooper, @FlyHighUSA . 20 to 25 minutes down to 30%
U.e.no

Excellent, thanks!

 

[slim.slamma]

You can't legally take off/land on the city's street, sidewalks, park's etc
My building or friends roof is up for debate
@Dave Armbrust any thoughts

 

[RaptorMan]

Part of the hysteria about drones. Here in Utah we have several wildfires going on and one of them has been effected by "drone sightings" numerous times (five times at least). When this happens the helicopters and other aircraft are grounded and much has been made of this in the news. While I don't know this for a fact it's my guess that if any of these numerous sightings were actually a drone then it's likely the a-hole put it away and has disappeared. The idea that this guy is doing this, day after day, and not getting caught is hard to imagine. It's my guess that many of the team have been told to keep an eye out for drones and are confusing Hawks or other things for drones.

The times we live in...


Brian

 

[Dave Armbrust]

You can't legally take off/land on the city's street, sidewalks, park's etc
My building or friends roof is up for debate
@Dave Armbrust any thoughts

Slim,

The charge they have been using is Reckless Endangerment which can either be a felony or misdemeanor. The more likely charge is the Reckless Endangerment in the Second Degree. Maximum penalty is up to 7 years. The simple act of voluntarily flying a drone, which weights at least a few pounds, near where people do or are gathered may be enough to prove Reckless Endangerment in the Second Degree. Reckless Endangerment statutes don't require a particular resulting outcome or injuries, rather what they criminalize is the risks created by the actor's conduct.

Of course the airspace of NYC is controlled by the FAA. During the summer of 2014, two men were charged with Reckless Endangerment in the First Degree when two drones flew near a NYC policy Department helicopter. The charges were ultimately dismissed because of the high bar of required proof for Reckless Endangerment in the First Degree. Charges from the FAA may still be pending.

Remember today we are still operating UAS under either 333 waiver or as recreational and hobby use under P.L. 112-95 Section 336. Under recreational and hobby use you must "...operate in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization."

Going forward to Part 107 you are required to not operate directly over people unless they are undercover such as in an stationary vehicle. I would suspect this would be very difficult, if not impossible, to do in NYC unless you are in a public park. The NYC park §1-04 prohibited uses include "Aviation" which states "No person shall voluntarily bring, land or cause to alight wishing or upon any parks, any airplane, ballon, parachute, hang glider, or other aerial device..." Note: There are public parks that do allow model aircraft in some of the boroughs.

And then you have the NYC invasion of privacy laws, obstruction of policy/emergency services duties and noise ordinance violations laws.

B&H Photo an large NYC based UAS provider has put up an excellent page for those that would like to legally operate in NYC and elsewhere:

Drones and the Law: The Sky's Not the Limit

BTW, B&H Photo sells UAS nationally, has a huge UAS product line, takes excellent care of their customers, do not sell stale products, have reasonable prices, and come highly recommended by this Florida operator.

 

[IrishHeights]

Slim,
The simple act of voluntarily flying a drone, which weights at least a few pounds, near where people do or are gathered may be enough to prove Reckless Endangerment in the Second Degree.

That is untrue, (but fun to talk about)

: the offense of recklessly engaging in conduct that creates a substantial risk of serious physical injury or death to another person NOTE: Reckless endangerment is a misdemeanor but sometimes rises to a felony, as when a deadly weapon is involved.

I'm sure most of you know the difference between slight risk, minimal risk, moderate risk, substantial risk.

for those that need it ........................ "Substantial Risk"
Substantial risk means a strong possibility, (as contrasted with a remote or even a significant possibility), that a certain result may occur or that a certain circumstance may exist.
A substantial risk of serious harm means that the risk was so great that it was almost certain to materialize if nothing was done. [Miller v. Fisher, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 12932 (7th Cir. Ill. June 23, 2010)]

Without a crash resulting in serious injury or substantial property damage, there is little to No chance of proving Reckless Endangerment

 

[slim.slamma]

Without a crash resulting in serious injury or substantial property damage, there is little to No chance of proving Reckless Endangerment

Ha ha you know your stuff also
That was my thought it's all good, until a crash. Then the reckless charge
Appreciate you guys input

 

[slim.slamma]

There are public parks that do allow model aircraft in some of the boroughs.

It's nothing fun about those quarantined park's
Swamps

Most importantly I understand this
Therefore, one shouldn't assume that just because UAS represent something of a new legal frontier that one will be immune from any form of legal action.
It's areas of the city

The Class B space only covers part of NYC though. What gives

Parts of The City/Manhattan like Harlem and the Wall Street area out of class B and that's where I fly. It should be no interferences from the law or the FAA's standpoint.

 

[DamesNY]

You can legally fly in coney island (not over people) but over the water....
You can verify it on the FAA app B4Ufly. I like going there in winter...the beach is yours (no sunbathers) and at about 350ft up on a non hazy day the manhattan skyline is just behind the amusement park. even though its totally legal, it feels weird when i see planes on approach for JFK haha...they're still over 1500 above me, but still odd.

Just use the B4Ufly app. People always call the cops even when we are on a closed set under a 333. Just because cops come doesn't mean you're in trouble.
Most of it comes down to having your papers in order and having RESPECT for the officers that show up.
Ive been on legal shoots (which can last up to 8 hrs) where neighbors eventually call in the cops with "they're spying on me!" (ha, not in the slightest) and when you present the papers and explain, they going back to the much more important crimes of NYC.
Many times cops come up with the same questions many of you have already fielded
1) how far?
2) how high?
3) how long does the battery last?
4) how much?

you can fly in nyc...just not in ALL of nyc.

 

[Dave Armbrust]

That is untrue, (but fun to talk about)

: the offense of recklessly engaging in conduct that creates a substantial risk of serious physical injury or death to another person NOTE: Reckless endangerment is a misdemeanor but sometimes rises to a felony, as when a deadly weapon is involved.

I'm sure most of you know the difference between slight risk, minimal risk, moderate risk, substantial risk.

for those that need it ........................ "Substantial Risk"
Substantial risk means a strong possibility, (as contrasted with a remote or even a significant possibility), that a certain result may occur or that a certain circumstance may exist.
A substantial risk of serious harm means that the risk was so great that it was almost certain to materialize if nothing was done. [Miller v. Fisher, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 12932 (7th Cir. Ill. June 23, 2010)]

Without a crash resulting in serious injury or substantial property damage, there is little to No chance of proving Reckless Endangerment

Irish,

The definition you state is for reckless endangerment in the first degree, and yes it is very hard to prove.

What I was referring to is reckless endangerment in the second degree, which is much easier to prove.

The best defense in both of these cases is following established safety procedures, if you can show the LEO that you are doing this they are far more likely to look the other way. Of course these procedures must address distance from people, property and prohibit overflight, etc. This is exactly what Part 107 addresses. Until Part 107 goes into effect the best defense would be to follow these new regulations and use common sense which is more correctly called Aeronautical Decision Making and Risk Management.

If you do this then you are not a kid flying a toy in the park.

Dames,

The B4UFly app only looks at airspace. All airspace is regulated and controlled by the FAA. It does not take into consideration local laws.

What cities and other locales have done is to prohibit landings and takeoffs. The FAA does not control a UAS while it is sitting on the ground.

The "Reckless Endangerment" laws of NYC go beyond FAA and landings and takeoff.

The FAA prohibits Careless or Reckless Operation in 14 CFR 91.13, which we must follow. It is similar but it is not exactly the same as NYC "Reckless Endangerment" Laws.

 

[IrishHeights]

Irish,
The definition you state is for reckless endangerment in the first degree, and yes it is very hard to prove.
What I was referring to is reckless endangerment in the second degree, which is much easier to prove.

No it's not Dave, that definition I posted is for misdemeanor charge, Reckless Endangerment (and says under the definition that it "could" be upped to "felony" if a deadly weapon is involved).

What you said is incorrect,
(even though you went back and edited it by adding in the Second Degree)

The simple act of voluntarily flying a drone, which weights at least a few pounds, near where people do or are gathered may be enough to prove Reckless Endangerment.

What I posted was fact, what you posted was "your interpretation" of the law. No one is correct EVERY time Dave, and you are no exception Let's just agree to disagree, and be friends