Plan with context
Choose a location with more than a score
A Flyable location is a place to start researching weather and operating context. Inclusion in this directory is not verification that the city, landmark or pictured viewpoint is approved for drone flight.
What qualifies as a location
The directory groups supported city weather pages so you can find a forecast and navigate to the relevant map and rules. City names provide a useful search entry point, but the forecast coordinate does not describe every neighbourhood, hill or shoreline. Confirm the intended position before relying on the result.
A city may include busy airports, restricted districts, private land and suitable research areas within the same boundary. Listing it is therefore a way to organise information, not a recommendation to launch in the centre. Use its local guide to identify the questions that deserve attention before selecting a site.
How to interpret a location score
Where a current weather score is available, it comes from a forecast assessment for an aircraft profile and time. It is not a permanent rating of the city. Missing scores should remain missing rather than being replaced with an invented value. Open the weather page to inspect the actual measurements, time and reasons.
Compare like with like: the same drone and relevant forecast period. A score can change when the aircraft profile changes even if the weather does not. The methodology page explains the dashboard’s factors and why its weather score differs from photography and mission-planning results.
Weather, airspace and scenic interest
Weather suitability asks whether forecast conditions fit the selected aircraft and plan. Airspace research asks what rules, permissions and restrictions apply to the route and time. Scenic interest concerns the subject and light. A location can be attractive for photography while failing either of the first two checks.
Images in this directory illustrate places. They do not certify a launch point, and they do not show that the photographer obtained drone footage lawfully. Treat landmarks as subjects for research and inspect the land manager’s conditions, public occupancy and recovery options before considering a flight.
Europe: national checks within a connected region
European city trips can be close together geographically while requiring different national zone tools and processes. Vilnius needs attention to its nearby airport and Lithuania’s UTM information; Paris adds a restrictive urban setting; Lisbon brings hills and Atlantic exposure. London must use UK rules rather than a generic EASA assumption.
Plan the destination’s legal pathway and access first, then compare weather for the actual site. A cross-border itinerary should have separate checks for each stop. A European map is useful orientation, but it cannot turn several jurisdictions into one permission system.
Canada: geography changes the weather question
Toronto’s lakefront, Vancouver’s coast and mountains, Montréal’s river setting and Ottawa’s winter daylight create different planning priorities. Choose the guide that matches the location and read the local considerations before comparing hourly scores. A clear city forecast may still be a poor description of a distant exposed site.
Use the Canada map and current Transport Canada categories to investigate the operation, and follow the appropriate official airspace process. The directory can help you research a backup city, but each alternative needs its own site assessment and a practical recovery plan.
USA: local context beyond an airport marker
The US directory covers cities with very different aviation and weather environments. New York combines city permit questions with airports and heliports; San Diego has military and civilian aviation context; Miami requires attention to convection; Austin adds equipment heat concerns. Those differences are why a copied generic city description is not enough.
Identify the relevant FAA operating framework and official restrictions, then check local ground rules. Compare weather across a feasible set of sites rather than choosing the highest score first and assuming the permissions can be solved later.
A practical way to shortlist
Select two or three possible locations with realistic travel time and known access. Investigate the official airspace and site manager’s conditions for each, then compare a complete weather window that includes preparation and recovery. Record which uncertainties remain instead of treating an attractive card as a finished plan.
On the day, recheck temporary restrictions and actual conditions. If the first option is no longer suitable, use only a backup whose location checks are also complete. A neighbouring city link helps discovery, but moving a few kilometres can introduce another airport, a different park manager or much greater wind exposure.