Drones have been banned from flying within 32 miles of American Football's Super Bowl, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has said.
In a video to sports fans, the FAA warns the stadium is a "no-drone zone".
The restrictions cover anywhere within 32 miles of the Super Bowl stadium in Santa Clara, California, between 14.00 and 11.59 PST on 7 February.
FAA regulations also advise that "deadly force" may be used if a drone is perceived as a security threat.
The Super Bowl is the climax of the football season, and a crowd of 70,000 is expected for this year's game.
"Bring your lucky jersey, bring your facepaint, bring your team spirit," the video announces, "but leave your drone at home."
Related Stories
Homeland Security bulletin warns of weaponized drones and threat to aviation
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued an updated terror bulletin on Thursday highlighting the threat of weaponized drones, chemical attacks and the continued targeting of commercial aircraft.
"We continue to face one of the most challenging threat environments since 9/11, as foreign terrorist organizations exploit the internet to inspire, enable or direct individuals already here in the homeland to commit terrorist acts," reads the bulletin.
[...] "The current bulletin introduces unmanned aircraft systems as potential threats and highlights sustained concern regarding threats against commercial aviation and air cargo," said DHS acting press secretary Tyler Houlton in a statement.
There's been an "uptick in terrorist interest" in using unmanned aerial systems as weapons in the United States and other western countries, according to a senior DHS official. These tactics have been used by terrorists on the battlefield, and the department wants to "guard against those tactics being exported to the west," said the official. The official said that DHS wants to be "forward leaning" about seeing what terrorists are doing overseas and tactics they might adopt in the future.
Since the last bulletin, concerns about terrorist targeting aviation sector have grown, said the official. "[T]errorists continue to target commercial aviation and air cargo, including with concealed explosives," reads the updated bulletin.
Related: UK Criminals Use Drones To Case Burglary Targets
Drones Banned from Flying Within 32 Miles of Super Bowl
FAA Updates its Ban on Drones in Washington
Prison Blames Drone for Inmate's Escape
FAA Restricts Drone Operations Over 10 U.S. Landmarks
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @04:34AM
Muslim, jew, or christian, all are supposed to be united by disrespecting their own sabbath in order to pay proper praise to the ritual of 'grown men chasing a ball around a field.'
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @04:47AM
Could have sworn the Super Bowl was on a Sunday.
But you mention the Sabbath and that's Saturday for all the religions you mentioned with the exception of a few of the larger sects of Christianity but certainly not all of them.
(Score: 2) by AnonymousCowardNoMore on Sunday February 07 2016, @02:56PM
with the exception of a few of the larger sects of Christianity
Hmm? The Sabbath is on Saturday and the Lord's Day is on Sunday, for all major forms of Christianity to my knowledge. The former is usually not observed as much so there are quite a few casual adherents who confuse them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @04:57AM
I think how it happens is that little kids notice that the adults, or at least the adult males, are glued to the TV sets during certain sporting events, particularly big playoff games like the Super Bowl. (Of course in other countries it could be world football or cricket). So they grow up being fans themselves, and try to compete on the playground etc. At least that's what happened to me. BTW I generally got my butt handed to me on the playground, but I'm still a fan.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by gman003 on Sunday February 07 2016, @04:56AM
Okay, obviously there's good reason to keep drones from flying over a stadium packed with thousands of people. And sure, you might need to have a buffer zone, in order to enforce that properly.
But 32 miles? There's an airport - KSJC, an actual airport that jumbo jets can fly out of - just four miles away. The runways actually have traffic coming and going straight over the stadium - which should make the stadium a no-drone zone under normal circumstances, anyway, but maybe not. Seems a little weird to be worried about drones, but let people fly anything from a 172 up to a 747 right overhead. I think we've established how much damage can be done by a 747 under malicious control, have we not? I feel like that's something we wouldn't forget, least of all security professionals.
Are they going to shut down an international airport for the duration of the match? Because having a bunch of under-trained security forces, armed with anti-aircraft weaponry, right below a decent-sized active airway, seems like a bigger risk than just letting Joe Sixpack-during-tailgate-and-another-six-by-halftime fly his little quadrotor over the field.
(Score: 3, Informative) by legont on Sunday February 07 2016, @08:52AM
Just a regular TFR. I guess drone pilots should be proud - they are treated the same way as everybody else now. Here is a summary with all the necessary links http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2016/January/26/FAA-releases-Super-Bowl-50-flight-advisory [aopa.org]
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @12:40PM
Security theater. If somebody actually wanted to harm people they could easily and cheaply manufacture a bio weapon in their basement. Then just buy a ticket and enjoy the ride.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @06:52PM
This has nothing to do with security and everything with keeping a monopoly on broadcasting the game. If a bunch of people with drones were able to capture video, the NFL would not be able to make money on that video.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @08:19PM
Of course but you can't say that out loud. Much more palatable to talk about them terrists. Everybody's familiar with them and knows that unless people do anything and everything an ass-groping TSA agent says, the bad guys will win. "IT'S FOR YOUR OWN GOOD"...
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Snotnose on Sunday February 07 2016, @04:58AM
My drone can carry 5 lbs plus a go pro, remote has a 2 mile range. I get 2 lbs of explosive, 3 lbs of ball bearings, find a spot 2 miles away from the stadium that is somewhat remote. Launch my drone, fly it over the players and, during the snap count, make it go boom.
Less than a grand, 30 minutes of training, hardest part is making the stuff that goes boom. Just think of all the free publicity I'll get out of it.
32 miles is both stupid and uneforcable, appealing only to those asshats who don't have a decent imagination.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Sunday February 07 2016, @06:06AM
There are multiple-tenant office buildings about 1/2 mile away from the stadium and getting onto the roof of these buildings would not be difficult. Because they are multiple-tenant, there is no meaningful security on the building, just the office suites within.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 08 2016, @07:06PM
AC posting is here for a reason.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday February 08 2016, @07:23PM
Yeah man! All those scratched helmets are going to be crazy expensive to resurface!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by cykros on Sunday February 07 2016, @05:36AM
The FAA may find themselves on the losing side of a lawsuit if they wind up shooting down someone's drone if it's being flown over their own property at a moderate altitude (below 500 feet), particularly given that the FAA doesn't have jurisdiction at this altitude (source [wikipedia.org]). If I were living in the Bay Area, I'd be going out to buy a drone just for the chance to fuck 'em in court.
And let's be real here; this isn't about safety. There've been no incidents of drones crashing into stadiums, disrupting games, landing on people, etc. This is about broadcast rights, and making the area big enough that no amount of picking just the right angle is going to get anyone a livestream up and running of the super bowl to provide any competition with the official networks.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Sunday February 07 2016, @06:09AM
They might be concerned about the Black Hawks that will be flying near the stadium. If the rotors of one of those helicopters hit a drone, the result might not be pretty.
(Score: 2) by deadstick on Sunday February 07 2016, @06:27AM
There've been no incidents of drones crashing into stadiums, disrupting games, landing on people, etc.
Including the drones that supply close-up video of the plays...they sometimes show up in long shots from fixed cameras.
(Score: 1) by Osamabobama on Monday February 08 2016, @07:13PM
There are cameras suspended from cables crossing the field of play. Perhaps the cable was too small to be visible in the longer shot...
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @07:05AM
You didn't follow the news, did you? [cnn.com]
(Score: 4, Informative) by legont on Sunday February 07 2016, @09:08AM
The wikipedia is wrong in this case Here is FAA source https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=76240 [faa.gov]
Fact—The FAA is responsible for the safety of U.S. airspace from the ground up. This misperception may originate with the idea that manned aircraft generally must stay at least 500 feet above the ground
And by the way, note they say "generally". In fact regular aircraft can fly below 500 feet in sparsely populated areas and over water. They just have to stay 500 feet away from people and property. I do it all the time over Hudson, for example. That's why drones should be no more that 500 feet from their pilots or I could hit one and die.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by Fnord666 on Sunday February 07 2016, @10:04PM
There've been no incidents of drones crashing into stadiums, disrupting games, landing on people, etc.
Close enough [nydailynews.com] for government work!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @05:51AM
Not only do governments squander taxpayer dollars to build giant sports stadiums, but they also use the events as excuses to decrease our liberties. All the security for the games, as well as the surveillance equipment they install everywhere and almost never get rid of afterwards, is paid for by us taxpayers. Recently, they are going even further by forbidding drones from being used within a huge area around, a power that the constitution never even gave the federal government. Will no amount of this nonsense be enough to wake people up, or is watching people throw balls around a sufficient distraction and justification?
What a farce.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Justin Case on Sunday February 07 2016, @01:11PM
Any law or right can be easily dismissed "Because Super Bowl!"
I saw plenty of illegal activity (by the "good" guys) when the Stupid Bowl came to my city.
How do I get the same power for my company? No drones within 32 miles of my roadside tomato stand?
Look, if drones are teh dangerous terrrrrrist evil then we should ban them everywhere. If not, ban them nowhere. Certain elected gods / big dollar companies should not have their own separate layer of laws as if they were better or more important than the rest of us.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @05:30PM
If your company event brings in 70,000 people and over 1,000,000,000 people watching it, you would get special consideration too.
Are you really THAT stupid?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @08:00PM
1 billion people? HAH, don't delude yourself, the rest of the world doesn't give one hoot about your 'super bowl'
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Monday February 08 2016, @12:40AM
Pretty sure most of the country doesn't give a crap either.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 08 2016, @04:50AM
So if your company is big and powerful enough, the government will do your bidding. This is not a good thing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 08 2016, @05:54AM
Which is not good and is antithetical to democracy.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by snufu on Sunday February 07 2016, @06:06AM
turn into an enforcement organization for NFL owners and their private, for-profit events?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @07:19AM
I don't know about the FAA, but the government has been doing the bidding of NFL owners for decades.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @09:08AM
Great, so now the only people with exploding drones will be bad guys with exploding drones. What next, no explosive vests? It's the slippery slope to communo-fascistic socialism.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 07 2016, @09:42AM
I wasn't aware that they only banned exploding drones, so thanks for sharing.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by isostatic on Sunday February 07 2016, @11:15AM
The reaso for this is to stop people filing the game and endangerining our corporate overlords. But sure, socialism bad.