Police Departments

[Recoveryone]

What many of you are missing that every P.D. is also a jail, even if only temporary custody. So, they have the right to jam/prevent certain signals, also most P.D. have the dispatch center within the same facility and that can be another reason for the signal block. The worst thing to happen is the flight take place and Mr. Perry loses control due to signal interference.

 

[Fred Garvin]

So, they have the right to jam/prevent certain signals,

They do? Do you have any links to documentation that backs this statement up? I'm asking because I don't know. As far as I'm aware, the FCC takes a very dim view on jamming radio signals, unless you're military engaged in operations against a hostile enemy. If there is a legal precedent or allowance in the law for local agencies to jam radio frequencies, it'd be handy to have this information.

 

[Recoveryone]

They do? Do you have any links to documentation that backs this statement up? I'm asking because I don't know. As far as I'm aware, the FCC takes a very dim view on jamming radio signals, unless you're military engaged in operations against a hostile enemy. If there is a legal precedent or allowance in the law for local agencies to jam radio frequencies, it'd be handy to have this information.

My comment is that P.D. stations can be classified as NO Fly Zones, due to it can be classified as a jail facility, as far as radio signal, I did state that very often P.D. dispatch centers are located within the same building and could cause interference with drone signals. My comment about blocking signals was if in fact that is happening it would be within reason due to the it being a jail or dispatch center.

 

[Fred Garvin]

I get that, but you said:

...So, they have the right to jam/prevent certain signals...

That's very specific, and we need verification of this right that legalizes the action of jamming radio frequencies. Personally, I don't think they do have this right, and if they are jamming radio frequencies the FCC would be very interested in this. (As @Vic Moss said) But, if you do have a link to something (not just an implication) that grants these public entities the "right" to jam radio frequencies, please post it to back up this claim.

I'm not trying to jam you up here, but you've made a significant statement, that if true, is important for us to know. Yes, we already know about NFZ's and incarceration facilities, plenty of them clearly marked on my local maps. Active jamming of radio signals in the vicinity (even at all) is a whole other issue.

 

[Vic Moss]

What many of you are missing that every P.D. is also a jail, even if only temporary custody. So, they have the right to jam/prevent certain signals,

Nope. They can't do any such thing without FCC approval, and it if it's specifically targeted to UAS, they need the FAA's (& likely the DOJ's) approval as well. And I can pretty much promise you they won't get it.

also most P.D. have the dispatch center within the same facility and that can be another reason for the signal block.

Again, not allowed.

The worst thing to happen is the flight take place and Mr. Perry loses control due to signal interference.

 

[Recoveryone]

Nope. They can't do any such thing without FCC approval, and it if it's specifically targeted to UAS, they need the FAA's (& likely the DOJ's) approval as well. And I can pretty much promise you they won't get it.

Again, not allowed.

I'm more than happy to retrack my statement to Mr. Moss's knowledge

 

[2edgesword]

Interesting discussion. I would think the FAA has jurisdiction over that airspace and anything that interferes with a flight operation would be a no go without their approval. In my mind that would include anything interfering with radio signals required to conduct a flight operation.

 

[BigAl07]

Interesting discussion. I would think the FAA has jurisdiction over that airspace and anything that interferes with a flight operation would be a no go without their approval. In my mind that would include anything interfering with radio signals required to conduct a flight operation.

In some instances (North Carolina for instance) there are local restrictions on Jails etc. Keep in mind that the FAA does allow for "Sensitive Infrastructure" etc in the regulations. A Jail/Prison is one such "Sensitive Infrastructure".

In North Carolina:
USE OF AN UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM NEAR A CONFINEMENT OR CORRECTIONAL FACILITY PROHIBITED ((§ 15A-300.3)
It is illegal to operate a UAS in North Carolina near a prison. This includes local confinement facilities, and state and federal correctional facilities. The restricted distance is 500 feet horizontally or 250 feet vertically from the prison. The horizontal distance extends outward from the furthest exterior building walls, perimeter fences, and permanent fixed perimeter, or from another boundary clearly marked with posted notices.
There are exceptions to the UAS flight restrictions around prisons if you:
• Are a law enforcement officer operating in accordance to G.S. 15A-300.1(c).
• Are a emergency management agency responding to an emergency.
• Have obtained written permission from the official in charge of the facility.

 

[Dave Pitman]

or 250 feet vertically

Really? That should be no problem. I'm surprised they didn't go for at least a 400' ceiling. I thought one of their concerns was dropping of objects which is definitely possible above 250.

 

[BigAl07]

Really? That should be no problem. I'm surprised they didn't go for at least a 400' ceiling. I thought one of their concerns was dropping of objects which is definitely possible above 250.

It's definitely a concern and I have no idea why they chose that altitude.

 

[R.Perry]

I had an opportunity to speak with the Chief of Modesto PD. He claims they have no jamming equipment but stated that their drones won't enter the departments or jails airspace. So that leaves our communist folks blocking it. I had just updated the Inspire 2 so the update reinitialized the geo fence.

 

[BigAl07]

I had an opportunity to speak with the Chief of Modesto PD. He claims they have no jamming equipment but stated that their drones won't enter the departments or jails airspace. So that leaves our communist folks blocking it. I had just updated the Inspire 2 so the update reinitialized the geo fence.

I fly for our local Sheriff's Dept and it's easy to get an unlock if you send them a letter from the AHJ on official letterhead.

Side Note: I haven't needed to do this in over 6 months due to "unlocking" my Mavic on a PERM basis but I did earlier.

 

[Vic Moss]

In some instances (North Carolina for instance) there are local restrictions on Jails etc. Keep in mind that the FAA does allow for "Sensitive Infrastructure" etc in the regulations. A Jail/Prison is one such "Sensitive Infrastructure".

In North Carolina:
USE OF AN UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM NEAR A CONFINEMENT OR CORRECTIONAL FACILITY PROHIBITED ((§ 15A-300.3)
It is illegal to operate a UAS in North Carolina near a prison. This includes local confinement facilities, and state and federal correctional facilities. The restricted distance is 500 feet horizontally or 250 feet vertically from the prison. The horizontal distance extends outward from the furthest exterior building walls, perimeter fences, and permanent fixed perimeter, or from another boundary clearly marked with posted notices.
There are exceptions to the UAS flight restrictions around prisons if you:
• Are a law enforcement officer operating in accordance to G.S. 15A-300.1(c).
• Are a emergency management agency responding to an emergency.
• Have obtained written permission from the official in charge of the facility.

The second anyone challenges that, it will lose in Federal Court. Unfortunately, no one has yet.

 

[Dave Pitman]

The second anyone challenges that, it will lose in Federal Court. Unfortunately, no one has yet.

The FAA has made it clear that state and local municipalities are free to enact ordinances to restrict the take-off, landing, and operation of RC aircraft. They are not free to include any control over the airspace.

Here in Washington, even the US Navy was required to apply to the FAA in order to get air space restrictions installed over various installations. They could not legally implement them on their own.

 

[Vic Moss]

The FAA has made it clear that state and local municipalities are free to enact ordinances to restrict the take-off, landing, and operation of RC aircraft. They are not free to include any control over the airspace.

Here in washington, even the US Navy was required to apply to the FAA in order to get air space restrictions installed over various installations. The could not legally implement them on their own.

The FAA is also quite clear that no one but them can require additional training or registration. NC's does both of those.

 

[Dave Pitman]

The second anyone challenges that, it will lose in Federal Court. Unfortunately, no one has yet.

Might be a good source of airtime publicity for @BigAl07 's company to prevail over NC. Does the loosing party have to pay all legal fees ?

 

[R.Perry]

Got rid of geo fence again, problem solved.