
The Flying Robots project brings the automation ethos of Factorio to life. Swarms of tiny drones ferry materials and handle jobs across sprawling factories in the game; our real-world version uses low-cost quadcopters, solar boats, and the Cyberpony Express mesh network so communities can dispatch autonomous craft to tackle everyday tasks. While the focus began in the air, the project is expanding to include water-based electric robots that glide across ponds and canals.
This initiative now lives under the Pathfinders’ Guild, reflecting their mission to maintain resilient pathways and communications between outposts.

We have raised more than ten thousand dollars and distributed hundreds of Cyberpony Express nodes across the Sacramento – San Francisco Bay Area. This growing Meshtastic network lets devices talk even when the public internet or cell service is unavailable. With the network in place, inexpensive drones can coordinate just like Factorio’s flying robots.

Built for long distances where agility is less critical.
Example tasks:

Workers excel at nimble, close-quarters tasks.
Example tasks:

Rovers trade speed for endurance and payload capacity.
Example tasks:

Skimmers rely on solar-charged batteries to move quietly across ponds, canals, or reservoirs.
Example tasks:
The images below illustrate the system architecture, prototype capabilities, and long-term vision for the flying robot fleet.

The system diagram highlights how sensors feed alerts into the Cyberpony Express mesh. Tasks are broadcast, claimed by an available robot, and reported back through ATAK.

A surveyor drone captures detailed aerial photography, turning routine flights into up-to-date maps and progress logs.

Modular payloads let each airframe specialize. Swap a camera for a speaker, light, or small cargo pod depending on the mission.

Concept art shows how a humble fleet might look zipping between gardens, rooftops, and neighborhood outposts.

An automated charging rack keeps robots topped off and ready without human intervention.

The same system that handles daily chores can pivot to disaster response, delivering supplies or relaying messages when roads are impassable.

These scenes hint at a future where swarms of flying robots and solar boats quietly stitch together the digital and physical realms.
By combining open-hardware drones and solar electric watercraft with the Cyberpony Express, communities gain a modular automation layer that works off-grid. Each robot handles a narrow task it is suited for, while the mesh network and ATAK provide the coordination glue. When a sensor or buoy trips, a mission is created, a robot claims it, and the job gets done—no internet backbone required.
This is not legal advice. This is just research conducted to understand where relevant regulations are at in different states and how they might affect the feasibility of this project. Many of these laws are for delivery services or industrial agriculture; none of which is what we propose to do. This is by no means a complete or exhaustive list of the relevant or applicable laws, regulations, or rules. Please consult a qualified attorney for legal advice specific to your situation.
Scope: small unmanned aircraft (drones) under 55 lb operating under 14 CFR Part 107; spray/ag drones under 14 CFR Part 137; and ground-based Personal Delivery Devices (PDDs) a.k.a. sidewalk delivery robots. This is an informational overview, not legal advice.
| State | Statewide PDD authorization? | Typical statewide caps | Local control? | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CA | No single statewide PDD statute. Cities regulate (e.g., San Francisco, Los Angeles). | City-by-city (speed/weight, chaperone, insurance). | Strong. SF/LA permit programs limit pilots to specific zones and device counts. | If you target CA, plan city permits and human chaperone rules in SF. |
| AZ | Yes (preemption for UAS; PDDs governed with statewide framework). | Usually ~6–10 mph; weight caps; operator monitoring. | Limited local control for safety/parks. | Generally straightforward if you meet equipment/marking and remote monitoring. |
| VA | Yes (Code of Virginia authorizes PDDs statewide). | Speed/weight caps; plate/marker; remote monitoring. | Localities may regulate time/place/manner. | Clear statewide authorization; good permitting climate. |
| OH | Yes (ORC 4511.513). | ≤10 mph; ≤~250–550 lb device weight depending on locality. | Localities can add conditions. | State recognizes PDDs as pedestrians for certain rules. |
| UT | Yes (Utah Code 41-6a-1119). | Similar caps; operator monitoring required. | Locals can set sidewalk rules. | Includes separate mobile carrier category. |
| ID | Yes (Idaho Code 40-2305). | Must yield to pedestrians; no hazmat; sidewalk/crosswalk only. | Locals may regulate for safety. | Explicit no hazmat, no highway use (except crosswalks). |
| TX | Yes (Transp. Code Ch. 552A). | Speed/weight limits; equipment; remote support. | Cities may regulate if not inconsistent with Chapter 552A. | Good fit for at-scale pilots; watch critical infrastructure air rules for drones. |
| FL | Yes (state UAS act; PDDs allowed under local ordinances). | Similar caps; insurance & identification common. | Localities may add conditions. | Pair with strong privacy program; park rules can be strict. |
Tip: Across states, plan for: device ID plate, braking, lights, audible signals, remote monitoring/override, insurance, data retention/privacy policy, and incident reporting.
| State | Audio recording consent | Extra state privacy/surveillance limits | Parks & wildlife | Local preemption | Critical infrastructure rules |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CA | All-party consent | Anti-paparazzi intrusion tort; filming/audio in private spaces; drone near prisons banned | State & city parks often restrict takeoff/landing; NPS lands closed; wildlife harassment prohibited | Many cities regulate takeoff/landing on their property | General nuisance/trespass; some local facility restrictions |
| AZ | One-party | “Critical facility” proximity/loitering crimes; strong state preemption of UAS | State parks often require permits; NPS closed; avoid wildlife harassment | Yes (state preemption limits city UAS regs; parks may regulate takeoff/landing) | Yes (criminal penalties near critical facilities) |
| VA | One-party | Peeping/trespass by drone | State parks ban recreational drones without special permit; NPS closed | General preemption for airspace; locals can regulate property use | Facility-specific rules may apply |
| OH | One-party | General privacy/trespass/harassment | State parks vary; NPS closed | Moderate; locals may regulate property use | Some facility rules via general criminal law |
| UT | One-party | General privacy/trespass; wildfire TFR enforcement | Wilderness areas off-limits; state parks vary; NPS closed | Limited | Facility rules mostly via general criminal law |
| ID | One-party | General privacy; stalking/harassment | Wilderness off-limits; state parks vary; NPS closed | Limited | General criminal law |
| TX | One-party | Gov’t Code Ch. 423: surveillance image-capture/use offenses; venue & critical-infra no-fly | State parks permit-based; NPS closed | State preemption on airspace; cities can regulate takeoff/landing on their land | Strong: offenses for flying ≤400 ft over critical infrastructure & stadiums |
| FL | All-party consent | Unmanned Aircraft Systems Act + “Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act”; facial recognition restrictions for government | State parks often restrict; NPS closed | State preemption of local airspace rules; locals regulate property | Strong: can’t fly over or near critical infrastructure (interference/disturbance standard) |
FAA (air):
Federal lands:
Radios (FCC):
(Sections for California, Arizona, Virginia, Ohio, Utah, Idaho, Texas, Florida, etc., remain identical to the previous research and have been retained here for continuity. Refer to the detailed breakdowns for localized constraints and permitting tips.)
For drones (Part 107):
For ground robots (PDDs):
For private properties:
We focus on small drones (under 55 lbs) and robots operating primarily on private property, with strict adherence to FAA regulations and local laws. The regulatory landscape continues to evolve, but by coordinating with the Pathfinders’ Guild, Cyberpony Express operators, and local partners, we can keep communities connected, safe, and resilient.