While it is refreshing to see something unique and out of the ordinary, I am curious if the photographer had the proper permits to operate this drone directly above an active airfield? If not it is probably unwise to reward such behavior by allowing the photo to be published. The EXIF data was published with the shot, and the camera model is FC6310, which is this drone: https://www.amazon.com/DJI-CP-PT-000314-Phantom-4-Quadcopter/dp/B01CFXQZD0.

It's a very nice photo!

Quoting the video linked below: "This is a drone video that I made with the footage I got of the United 747s in Tupelo Mississippi. They were retired here and are in the process of being recycled. I was the photographer hired to take photos at the "Dinner Under the 747 Event". I had to go through an extensive process to receive qualifications and permission to take this video of the planes over an active airport. Do not worry, it was all legal! More photos on my instagram account"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DvIIcrINLg

You could ask how many photos on this site were taken legally. In a lot of countries it is illegal to take photos in and around airports, Middle Eastern countries spring to mind, India, Greece, people trespassing while taking photos.

Is it just the unique angle that brings into question this photo and that the photographer ID's it as from a drone ? We take every other photo on this site for granted that it was taken legally, but guaranteed, many weren't.

Operating a drone on airport property is illegal without the appropriate permits. I'm assuming such permits were obtained...

KICT wrote:

Operating a drone on airport property is illegal without the appropriate permits. I'm assuming such permits were obtained...

If you assume that such a permit was obtained, what's the point of this thread?

BartSimpson wrote:

If you assume that such a permit was obtained, what's the point of this thread?

Obviously I started the thread to trigger you into replying...
Actually, I started it because we should take this seriously.
Drones near airports are becoming a major issue in the UK, given recent incidents, and it is only a matter of time before bad actors / irresponsible people unaware or unconcerned with the rules ruin this hobby for those of us who do obey them or are otherwise cognizant of them.

With tower permit you can do many things on active airports. Even drive cars on the runway like some supercars do to demonstrate their top speed. Drone flights with FAA permission are okay. Nice photo btw.

KICT wrote:

BartSimpson wrote:

If you assume that such a permit was obtained, what's the point of this thread?

Obviously I started the thread to trigger you into replying...
Actually, I started it because we should take this seriously.
Drones near airports are becoming a major issue in the UK, given recent incidents, and it is only a matter of time before bad actors / irresponsible people unaware or unconcerned with the rules ruin this hobby for those of us who do obey them or are otherwise cognizant of them.

Great, although raising awareness on a website where many have an interest (and know their local regs) by using an example obtained legally, under different regulations, in another country, in a scenario completely different to that of one of flying a drone near an active major international airport, isn't really going to sway bad actors or irresponsible idiots (in the UK or otherwise) is it? By definition they won't give a toss.

All you can do is stay legal yourself, advise others in your local circles of the law where appropriate and report any infractions to the correct authority if you feel so strongly.

Thread was pointless after the first reply. As was this response after you'd been informed (with supporting links) it was all above board & legal.

Operating a drone on airport property is illegal without the appropriate permits. I'm assuming such permits were obtained...

KICT wrote:

BartSimpson wrote:

If you assume that such a permit was obtained, what's the point of this thread?

Obviously I started the thread to trigger you into replying...
Actually, I started it because we should take this seriously.
Drones near airports are becoming a major issue in the UK, given recent incidents, and it is only a matter of time before bad actors / irresponsible people unaware or unconcerned with the rules ruin this hobby for those of us who do obey them or are otherwise cognizant of them.

So...flame bait.

None of the planes in the image have engines, so hard to say if this is an active airfield, or a scrap yard. Given that they're United 747's, it's likely to be a scrapyard and is perhaps outside of controlled airspace.

Broadly speaking though, there are virtually zero circumstances that a drone operator (especially someone flying a hobby-style drone) are going to be granted permission to fly over an active airfield in the US.

aden23 wrote:

None of the planes in the image have engines, so hard to say if this is an active airfield, or a scrap yard. Given that they're United 747's, it's likely to be a scrapyard and is perhaps outside of controlled airspace.

Broadly speaking though, there are virtually zero circumstances that a drone operator (especially someone flying a hobby-style drone) are going to be granted permission to fly over an active airfield in the US.

KTUP is most certainly an active airfield, with commercial service regularly scheduled.

aden23 wrote:

None of the planes in the image have engines, so hard to say if this is an active airfield, or a scrap yard. Given that they're United 747's, it's likely to be a scrapyard and is perhaps outside of controlled airspace.

Broadly speaking though, there are virtually zero circumstances that a drone operator (especially someone flying a hobby-style drone) are going to be granted permission to fly over an active airfield in the US.

The second post in the thread links to the video. It was an event for United allowing high status passengers to dine under the 747.The drone operator explains in the YouTube comments the approvals he had to get from the FAA.