FAA institutes nationwide drone no-fly zones around ICE operations
121 points
1 hour ago
| 10 comments
| aerotime.aero
| HN
dayofthedaleks
1 hour ago
[-]
Bubble of protection is 3000 feet laterally and 1000 feet vertically. From the article:

“Unlike traditional Temporary Flight Restrictions, the NOTAM does not provide geographic coordinates, activation times, or public notification when the restriction is in effect near a specific location. Instead, the restricted airspace moves with DHS assets, meaning the no-fly zone can appear wherever ICE or other DHS units operate.”

“In practical terms, a drone operator flying legally in a public area could unknowingly enter restricted airspace if an ICE convoy passes within the protected radius.”

reply
hn_throwaway_99
1 hour ago
[-]
One of the hallmarks of authoritarianism is to have laws that are virtually impossible to not break.

I hope this gets tested in court and declared unconstitutional for being overly vague and arbitrary. For example, Montana used to have some maximum speed limits that were just "reasonable and prudent", but they were eventually rejected by courts as being too vague (what's prudent to you may not be prudent to someone else). This is similar, in that the FAA has a no fly zone but they don't actually publish what it is.

Catch-22 and 1984 weren't supposed to be instruction manuals.

reply
gtowey
1 hour ago
[-]
> I hope this gets tested in court and declared unconstitutional

The rule of law has left the building. The SC is willing to rubber-stamp nearly anything right now.

Waiting and hoping for common sense to prevail is what allows authoritarian regimes to bulldoze through existing laws and norms. Even if the courts were an avenue for redress, they are being overwhelmed by the daily barrage of new illegal and unconstitutional actions. Once the courts get around to addressing these cases, the damage has been done and the precedent has been set.

reply
mothballed
1 hour ago
[-]
The gun free school zone act has been upheld even though you could be within 1000 ft of one with no real indication there is one there. Supposedly you can only be convicted for doing it knowingly, but IIRC knowingly has been interpreted to mean as little as you live near the area so reasonably should have known.

Also note, i.e. stuff like statutory rape has been upheld even in cases where the perpetrator in all good faith thought the victim was 18+, the victim initiated selling the services, and the victim provided fake ID showing they were 18+.

So there is not necessarily any need for mens rea in the US legal system.

reply
dragonwriter
1 hour ago
[-]
So the unannounced movements of the secret police in their unmarked vehicles also create a bubble around them where usually-legal activity is illegal?
reply
speed_spread
1 hour ago
[-]
And reciprocally, where usually illegal activity (beating up people and kidnapping them) is legal.
reply
oawiejrlij
1 hour ago
[-]
You mean, shooting them ten times in the back?
reply
jacquesm
1 hour ago
[-]
That's the goal, it just isn't spelled out.
reply
unangst
1 hour ago
[-]
See no crimes. Hear no truth. Speak no facts.
reply
throw0101c
12 minutes ago
[-]
> “In practical terms, a drone operator flying legally in a public area could unknowingly enter restricted airspace if an ICE convoy passes within the protected radius.”

“For my friends everything, for my enemies the law.” ― Oscar R. Benavides (Peru)

reply
oawiejrlij
1 hour ago
[-]
I'm guessing that's entirely the idea. There will be even more cameras on them after yesterday, and they're trying to be proactive in having the authority to arrest all of them. They want the authority to arrest someone who was just out flying a drone and happened to film them as they moved.
reply
Espressosaurus
1 hour ago
[-]
This is a useful measure to point the law as a weapon against drone operators who may be recording what’s going on by accident or on purpose. Any drone made in the last few years is going to be emitting its ID, which likely has been registered with the pilot’s name and contact information.

They can then after the fact come down on that person without having to get facial recognition, grab cellphone beacons, or other similar steps.

reply
jacquesm
1 hour ago
[-]
It's trivial to build your own drone without a DroneID.
reply
gtowey
1 hour ago
[-]
And you will be labeled a terrorist for doing so, regardless of intent.
reply
jacquesm
1 hour ago
[-]
I don't mind being labeled a terrorist. Fortunately I'm not in the USA. But you couldn't pay me to go there. One man's terrorist...
reply
sheikhnbake
10 minutes ago
[-]
Every protester and registered democrat has been labelled a domestic terrorist already in both rhetoric and policy.
reply
Cornbilly
1 hour ago
[-]
Yeah, that’s been the GOP playbook for 20+ years. It’s only recently been used for US citizens.
reply
mothballed
59 minutes ago
[-]
DHS flagged my passport on a list for literally fighting against terrorist in a US sanctioned anti-terrorist militia. When I returned they interrogated me as if I was a terrorist.

So if you are against the terrorists, you are also a terrorist.

reply
roughly
39 minutes ago
[-]
The Americans who fought against the Francoists in the Spanish civil war faced enormous scrutiny back home for what was later described as “being prematurely anti-fascist.” The state worries about people willing to take up arms to protect their ideals without being told to do so (or what those ideals are).
reply
oawiejrlij
1 hour ago
[-]
For some people
reply
xvxvx
1 hour ago
[-]
Not shady at all. Can’t have the public see what’s going on.
reply
actionfromafar
1 hour ago
[-]
You don't understand. You must always respect authority. Trump is the highest authority in the land, put there by God.
reply
yoyohello13
47 minutes ago
[-]
This is the real danger of religion. When you train people from birth to turn off their brains and submit to authority without question, this is what happens.
reply
bicx
39 minutes ago
[-]
I’m sure they said the same about Obama…. Right?
reply
koiueo
1 hour ago
[-]
I no longer know if it's sarcasm
reply
garciasn
1 hour ago
[-]
It depends on what team you’re rooting for in the sports game that has become politics in the US.
reply
yoyohello13
1 hour ago
[-]
People believing the president of the United States has been ordained by God, and can therefore do no wrong, should be extremely concerning to EVERYONE, no matter what team your rooting for.
reply
actionfromafar
1 hour ago
[-]
This has been the case for a long time. What's new and weird with this "sports" game is that the side with the umpire in their pocket has suddenly decided the game is bloodsport.
reply
vineyardmike
41 minutes ago
[-]
If you’re a minority in America then it’s been a blood sport for a while. It’s only recently that the majority demographics are now at risk.
reply
jacquesm
1 hour ago
[-]
Oh from their point of view it always was. You can't explain the last decades in any other way. It's been brewing over time and as long as the blood spilled was mostly foreign blood on foreign soil it was all fine. Now the masks are dropping and suddenly it is plain to everybody what was plain to outsiders looking in for a long time.
reply
actionfromafar
1 hour ago
[-]
That's because this is a pretty mainstream opinion now. I'd say... a quarter to a third of the population holds such beliefs.

If you ever shook your head at theocratic regimes such as Iran, well maybe look a little closer to home. "But... the people in charge of Iran are hypocrites, they do nasty stuff at home behind closed doors."

Again, may I point to Mom: "we have mullas at home".

reply
amluto
1 hour ago
[-]
How is an operator supposed to recognize these “MOBILE ASSETS”? For the case of ICE, ICE is reputed to try fairly hard to make it challenging to recognize their mobile assets. But the NOTAM says nothing about ICE per se, and there are lots of things that seem like they would qualify. On multiple occasions, I suspect that I have personally transported “DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY … MOBILE ASSETS”, and any drone flying nearby would have seen this as … a rental car with a couple people in it. All the DOE assets would have been in the trunk or maybe the back seat. Definitely assets and definitely mobile, but I suppose a court would need to determine whether they were MOBILE ASSETS or whether they were sufficiently associated with the DOE.

(Also, had this been in effect and if a drone had been a part of the project, which would not have been unreasonable [0], it would have been really annoying if I was carrying a portable do-not-fly zone and needed to get permission from the agency to take some photos of the equipment I was carrying.)

[0] To be fair, part of this project was in a location where operating a drone would have been inappropriate for reasons that have nothing to do with the FAA or national security.

reply
djoldman
1 hour ago
[-]
> ALL UNMANNED ACFT ARE PROHIBITED FROM FLYING WITHIN A STAND-OFF DISTANCE OF 3000FT ... LATERALLY AND 1000FT ABOVE ...

> TO: DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD), DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (DOE), AND DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS) FACILITIES AND MOBILE ASSETS, INCLUDING VESSELS AND GROUND VEHICLE CONVOYS AND THEIR ASSOCIATED ESCORTS, SUCH AS UNITED STATES COAST GUARD (USCG) OPERATED VESSELS

Much more restrictive than just ICE operations.

See also: https://udds-faa.opendata.arcgis.com/search

reply
theoreticalmal
1 hour ago
[-]
I don’t fully understand why drone operators follow these laws. Or any “no-fly” rules in general. Around an airport, it seems like common sense to not fly. Can’t someone just…buy/build a drone and fly is surreptitiously?
reply
arter45
1 hour ago
[-]
Traditional, permanent no-fly areas tend to be enforced by the drone firmware (via GPS checks), so sometimes there is also a technological obstacle.

This is probably not the case here, but IIRC there are criminal charges attached to violating NOTAMs, so there’s still some kind of deterrence.

reply
gear54rus
1 hour ago
[-]
What is the best hackable drone brand these days? Where you can remove all this bs remote ID and GPS disobedience?
reply
jacquesm
1 hour ago
[-]
$150 will build you a 7" with a reasonably long flying time, a bit more and you can do some pretty impressive things. You still need a controller but those can be had for cheap as well. The main issue would be hiding it for pickup until after the event.
reply
05
29 minutes ago
[-]
You’re talking about bargain bin analog FPV drones? Most people can’t operate them and even for an experienced operator it’s far from the best tool for the job of filming armed thugs..I mean ICE..

You’d need a digital system with a gimbal, and the DJI O4 Pro alone will run you $200+. For dual lenses with different zoom levels and feed switching it’s getting pretty expensive very fast.

reply
jacquesm
4 minutes ago
[-]
Most people can't operate drones, period.

FPV is a skill you can learn though and for filming armed thugs I actually can't think of a better tool because it allows you to fly the drone out of LOS so you can do it from a relatively safe position while still getting footage that matters.

For extra protection you could even abandon the drone and record the video directly on your headset.

reply
acc_297
1 hour ago
[-]
It may be simpler to build from scratch using parts from a hobby store if you want a drone which cannot be tracked back to you or your credit card
reply
killingtime74
1 hour ago
[-]
What if you're already flying when they enter your vicinity. It's pretty easy to do in a city. Also they may not announce themselves until you're already violating or even after when they charge you
reply
Sevii
1 hour ago
[-]
Potential criminal charges are enough to deter most people.
reply
buildbot
1 hour ago
[-]
Doesn’t anything under 250g basically slip under the radar (not literally radar). Seems like most drones they care about might end up not being trackable anyway.
reply
TheRealPomax
1 hour ago
[-]
Are you saying the FAA has a permanent and up to date list of ICE operations? Because if so, that's a public list and something that some might be very interested in for knowing when and where ICE is operating.

And if they don't, there is no basis for enforcement, so we're done.

reply
actionfromafar
1 hour ago
[-]
It's just an extra chilling effect. Or yet another reason to shoot you and your terrist drone.
reply
CamperBob2
1 hour ago
[-]
My understanding is that DJI drones no longer enforce no-fly zones. Supposedly they still warn you when entering a restricted zone, but hard geofencing functionality is no longer in effect. Anyone know if that's true?
reply
thedougd
45 minutes ago
[-]
There’s a checkbox in the app that implies that. I haven’t had a reason or way to test it yet.

I can confirm altitude restrictions can be turned off.

reply
arthurcolle
1 hour ago
[-]
I highly doubt this

Edit: owner of matrice m100 and a few other DJI drones

reply
jacquesm
1 hour ago
[-]
Matrice is a nice bit of kit. Building that kind of functionality from scratch with the same weight and range is very difficult.
reply
arthurcolle
16 minutes ago
[-]
I was unable to ever get it to fly reliably without GPS. It was probably stupid to drop $7K on drone GPUs and all kind of gadgetry (6 battery bay for rapid charging, etc), but it was just really really hard to pilot around in Maryland (Montgomery County). I would constantly have it throw up warnings and alerts, even only hovering a few feet above the ground for small scale testing. I would have to disable the GPS to do small scale testing, and then with GPS enabled, it would straight up not allow me to pilot it. When I moved to Miami, brought it down there, but I managed to find an apartment right smack-dab in the MIA no-fly zone as well. The smaller drone was allowed to fly though, so I eventually got a small Mini 2 IIRC, which was a lot easier to pilot, but I was just so disappointed in not being able to use the larger scaled up version. I wanted to do realtime facial recognition (not at scale, just to show that commercial drones can be turned into research demonstrators) on the onboard GPU (apparently just a NVDA Jetson from 2017 era)

The irony is the M100 is genuinely great hardware - the payload capacity, the SDK access, the flight time with extra batteries. But DJI's geofencing treats the entire DC metro like a no-go zone, which makes sense from their liability perspective but means the thing is basically a $7K shelf ornament unless you want to deal with LAANC authorizations for every single flight.

reply
jacquesm
6 minutes ago
[-]
Gah that sucks. I've looked at the hardware specs and basically ended up drooling over it and realizing that my homebrew stuff will never be able to compete. But the optics alone on that DJI stuff is nothing short of science fiction compared to what you can put together on a hobbyists budget. But for $7K you can build an octocopter with twice the range and twice the payload, which may not be as impressive on paper but can be pretty useful as well.

The larger agricultural drones are also amazingly impressive, those I've seen up close doing real work and they are so reliable it is almost boring.

I wonder what the reason is that yours behaves the way it does, that sounds like a real challenge to find out though with the closed system like that.

Drones that rely on GPS are very iffy as soon as the GPS fails, I've seen more than one inexplicable 'fly-away' happen. I've found a really neat trick to test drones that are not 'known good': just find yourself a long stretch of really light chain and tie it to the drone. As long as it behaves: no problem. But if it tries to take off by itself at some point the length of chain weighs more than the drone can handle and it will stop ascending. That way at least you have some kind of safety measure that does not immediately impact the drone in a material way as long as it is near to you.

reply
foxglacier
1 hour ago
[-]
I wonder if these vessels, convoys, etc. are going to jam drones or use some other anti-drone weapon and this NOTAM allows that by saying "we can intercept or destroy it if it comes too close". That way they don't have to identify how much of a threat each individual drone is.
reply
ultrarunner
50 minutes ago
[-]
That's when the fiber optic lines will become necessary
reply
roughly
35 minutes ago
[-]
Loudly broadcasting electronic signals out of something you’re trying to keep hidden seems like a tactical error, but these cats aren’t the best trained, are they?
reply