A sports pilot license ain't cheap!!!!

I agree. Just fly..... for so many reasons... just fly it. charge whatever you want if that is your gig... or do it for a penny, or free. But just fly... don't listen to the news or the doomsayers. You'll be fine.
"You'll be fine" And I promise I'll pay your legal fees!:rolleyes:
 
"You'll be fine" And I promise I'll pay your legal fees!:rolleyes:

Yes, you can drive 56 miles per hour... why would you think there would be any legal fees?

Do you stay up at night watching out for the FAA enforcement arm?

OP... fly, be happy.
 
Yes, you can drive 56 miles per hour... why would you think there would be any legal fees?

Do you stay up at night watching out for the FAA enforcement arm?

OP... fly, be happy.
You are dodging, come on, if you believe what you say then tell everyone you advise to ignore the FAA and that you'll pay their legal fees!:rolleyes: Bet you won't...
 
I own rental property and if my tenants find out what I spent to fix a problem (especially plumbing), they always say "I have a friend that could do it for half that",,,I assure them the city would throw me under the bus if I used a non-licensed person to do anything. When the brokers realize the liability, they will put a stop to it, because they are business people.
Don't confuse a pilot's license with a state-issued professional license. You are comparing Apples and Oranges.
 
Oddly I have a full ASEL rating and over 1000 hours in light planes. But I don't fly these days after I lost access to very sweet 182 and wasn't enjoying random rentals and escalating costs.

My Phantom fills a lot of that void for me.

Thanks,

Steve
Me, too. But my Cardinal was costing me almost $1,000 a month for hangar rent, insurance, annual inspections, taxes. And that was before flying it.
 
All that stuff you said. On the prices. Is that just a prediction or is that coming from official sources?
The proposed rule for the Part 107 UAS operator certificate breaks down like this.
You have to apply for the certificate with with an in-person visit to the nearest FSDO (Flight Standards District Office) office (no fees) or with any current CFI (Certified Flight Instructor) who may charge you a fee to verify that you are a US citizen. Then you have to go to an FAA-designated Airman Knowledge Testing Center to take the written test. The test centers are often located at General Aviation airports, but they can be in any office space as they are non-government businesses. The FAA does not charge a fee for the written exam, but the testing center may charge a fee for administering the test. some charge up to $200 for a Private Pilot written exam, but since the test for the UAS certificate will be shorter, they may charge less.

The proposed rule doesn't explain the process how the application that the FSDO or CFI validates your ID gets to the Testing Center. Do you hand carry it? Is it put into the system?

Then there is the TSA inspection of your application. Currently applicants for a Private Pilot's certificate gets vetted by the TSA with no fee collected unless you are a resident alien, then you pay a nonrefundable $130 processing. But the proposed Part 107 rule hints that the applicant will be paying this fee. [Though I am a CFI, I am not current, so the fee structure may have changed in the intervening years].

One thing that is most ridiculous about the proposed process is that in order to take the written test at an FAA-designated Airman Knowledge Testing Center, the testing personnel have to verify your ID.. This is after you went to the FSDO or paid a CFI to verify your ID. I pointed out the farce this implies in my comment to the NPRM. The testing personnel are too stupid to verify your ID for TSA purposes, but they still have to verify your ID to take the written exam? And these are the same testing centers who administer written tests for the TSA and Homeland Security. I also asked in my comments to the NPRM that an FAA-issued pilot certificate should be sufficient ID for the TSA and the testing center because these individuals have already been vetted by the TSA. I also asked that the testing center be able to issue a temporary certificate since here is no practical (flight) exam. But I found later that the exam is graded after you leave the testing center. You won't know if you passed or not for several days.

So, your test preparation, whether you buy a book or take a class, then pay a CFI to verify your ID, then pay the testing center to administer the test, you could easily spend $400- $500. Two years later you only have to pay for the written currency re-test.
 
You are dodging, come on, if you believe what you say then tell everyone you advise to ignore the FAA and that you'll pay their legal fees!:rolleyes: Bet you won't...

What reasonable person would say it is pretty **** safe to drive 61 in a 60 zone, but if you get caught, I'll pay your ticket an legal fees? Why are you making "paying legal fee" the only option? You or ignoring 99 other options out there. Why are you talking about legal fees? I'm really confused on that one. There is a certain fallacy family that this falls under. I bet you won't clean your ceiling tonight.

OP.. again, you are pretty safe doing it. I'm not sure why "Luis" is so happy on this legal feels thing... You have a better chance getting busted going 60 in the 61 zone than getting busted by the FAA for charging somebody a fee for taking a video of the gutter of their house for them.

Do I "recommend" it? Well, to appease Luis and not get his/her undies out of a very tight knot, I'll say "no, I don't recommend it" .. but I don't 'not' recommend it either.

How about the Mariners?
 
What reasonable person would say it is pretty **** safe to drive 61 in a 60 zone, but if you get caught, I'll pay your ticket an legal fees? Why are you making "paying legal fee" the only option? You or ignoring 99 other options out there. Why are you talking about legal fees? I'm really confused on that one. There is a certain fallacy family that this falls under. I bet you won't clean your ceiling tonight.

OP.. again, you are pretty safe doing it. I'm not sure why "Luis" is so happy on this legal feels thing... You have a better chance getting busted going 60 in the 61 zone than getting busted by the FAA for charging somebody a fee for taking a video of the gutter of their house for them.

Do I "recommend" it? Well, to appease Luis and not get his/her undies out of a very tight knot, I'll say "no, I don't recommend it" .. but I don't 'not' recommend it either.

How about the Mariners?
You are deflecting nicely. All I said was that if you are going to give advice that may clearly get this youngster (I'm assuming by his pic:D) in trouble, you should back up your advice since you feel so strongly about giving it. And BTW I always wear my panties a size larger to prevent knotting:oops:
 
Me, too. But my Cardinal was costing me almost $1,000 a month for hangar rent, insurance, annual inspections, taxes. And that was before flying it.

Didn't realize you were a Cardinal person Steve,,I had a straight leg cardinal, loved the plane, but finally wanted a little more speed and bought a V35B,,
 
Don't confuse a pilot's license with a state-issued professional license. You are comparing Apples and Oranges.

Hiring a person that is not licensed to do a job, when there are licensed people available to do the job, will always add liability,,if nothing goes wrong, chances are 99.99% nothing happens,, however if it does, yes, you are still hiring an unlicensed person to do a job which means you haven't done your job correctly, the broker has liability (I considered buying a real estate brokerage at one point, the liability issues are very real
 
Hiring a person that is not licensed to do a job, when there are licensed people available to do the job, will always add liability,,if nothing goes wrong, chances are 99.99% nothing happens,, however if it does, yes, you are still hiring an unlicensed person to do a job which means you haven't done your job correctly, the broker has liability (I considered buying a real estate brokerage at one point, the liability issues are very real
As I said, the professional licensing is a state issue for tort, omissions or liability. All state level. Your FAA-issued certificate (what the Muggles call a license) is an entirely different issue. Once the final Part 107 rules are effective, you can expect to see the FAA rain bricks on unlicensed (it's easier to say than non-certified) commercial drone operators.
Some states may decide to add aerial photographers to their professional licensing boards, but that would be a hurdle both financially and legally. State-level professional boards hold professional businesses to a standard. Anyone may say they are an electrician handyman, but to protect the public who may be harmed by crappy work, the state requires the handyman to be licensed and in many cases, bonded. What possible protection can state licensing provide that the FAA rules don't? (Assuming the Part 107 rules are finalized). Note, the state can already require liability insurance without the burden of a licensing authority. The FAA cannot require insurance because liability is a state-governed function.

Bottom line - state professional services licensing is in a different ocean from federal certification. Just not the same.
 
As I said, the professional licensing is a state issue for tort, omissions or liability. All state level. Your FAA-issued certificate (what the Muggles call a license) is an entirely different issue. Once the final Part 107 rules are effective, you can expect to see the FAA rain bricks on unlicensed (it's easier to say than non-certified) commercial drone operators.
Some states may decide to add aerial photographers to their professional licensing boards, but that would be a hurdle both financially and legally. State-level professional boards hold professional businesses to a standard. Anyone may say they are an electrician handyman, but to protect the public who may be harmed by crappy work, the state requires the handyman to be licensed and in many cases, bonded. What possible protection can state licensing provide that the FAA rules don't? (Assuming the Part 107 rules are finalized). Note, the state can already require liability insurance without the burden of a licensing authority. The FAA cannot require insurance because liability is a state-governed function.

Bottom line - state professional services licensing is in a different ocean from federal certification. Just not the same.

Until Part 107 rules are approve, someone without a 333 and pilots license is non-licensed,,,very clear, yes there is liability for a real estate broker if an agent hires a non-licensed person to do ANY work that a license is required by any government body. As I stated, if nothing goes wrong, then it is very probable nothing will happen, but if there is an issue, there is damage or someone is hurt, yes, the person with the non professional doing the work is asking for action. They will go after the broker because that is where the money
 
Until Part 107 rules are approve, someone without a 333 and pilots license is non-licensed,,,very clear, yes there is liability for a real estate broker if an agent hires a non-licensed person to do ANY work that a license is required by any government body. As I stated, if nothing goes wrong, then it is very probable nothing will happen, but if there is an issue, there is damage or someone is hurt, yes, the person with the non professional doing the work is asking for action. They will go after the broker because that is where the money
Technically, pilots are certificated, not licensed.
 
your arrogance amazes me,,,you have to be right even if you know you aren't
It shouldn't. I am arrogant because I am usually correct. And if proven wrong, I will acknowledge it.

Look at any FAA-issued airman's certificate. Nowhere on it does it say "License", it says: "Certificate". Nowhere in 14 CFR Part 61 is the term "License" used for FAA-certified pilots. It's always "Certificate"

On the FAA website the reference to license is almost always in parenthesis, probably for Search Engines since most people incorrectly search for License. Such as a link "Replace an Airman Certificate (License)", but on the linked page, all FAA-issued documents are "certificates".
 
  • Like
Reactions: highcastle
It shouldn't. I am arrogant because I am usually correct. And if proven wrong, I will acknowledge it.

Look at any FAA-issued airman's certificate. Nowhere on it does it say "License", it says: "Certificate". Nowhere in 14 CFR Part 61 is the term "License" used for FAA-certified pilots. It's always "Certificate"

On the FAA website the reference to license is almost always in parenthesis, probably for Search Engines since most people incorrectly search for License. Such as a link "Replace an Airman Certificate (License)", but on the linked page, all FAA-issued documents are "certificates".

Glad we cleared that up. Anyone else have something worthwhile?
 
It shouldn't. I am arrogant because I am usually correct. And if proven wrong, I will acknowledge it.

Look at any FAA-issued airman's certificate. Nowhere on it does it say "License", it says: "Certificate". Nowhere in 14 CFR Part 61 is the term "License" used for FAA-certified pilots. It's always "Certificate"

On the FAA website the reference to license is almost always in parenthesis, probably for Search Engines since most people incorrectly search for License. Such as a link "Replace an Airman Certificate (License)", but on the linked page, all FAA-issued documents are "certificates".

LOL,,no Steve, I don't doubt your reference to 'license",,you know your wrong about the liability, so you changed the argument.

I don't have time to 'argue' with someone that obviously has very little going on with their life,,,you seem to fit that perfectly,,
 
LOL,,no Steve, I don't doubt your reference to 'license",,you know your wrong about the liability, so you changed the argument.

I don't have time to 'argue' with someone that obviously has very little going on with their life,,,you seem to fit that perfectly,,
I never said anything about liability. Only that a state-issued professional license is not in the same category as an FAA-issued airman's certificate. A real estate professional can only hire an unlicensed pilot because pilot's aren't licensed. They are certified.

You said: " yes there is liability for a real estate broker if an agent hires a non-licensed person to do ANY work that a license is required by any government body." to which I agree totally. (Someday I'll tell the story of a window contractor who dropped their tools and disappeared when I presented a permit for a new window installation. Really, I got a few slightly used hand tools out of the deal). The licensed professional liability is regulated by the state. which is why the state has licensing boards for those professionals. If a broker hires an unlicensed Septic Engineer who certified that the septic system in a new home is OK, and six months later the field fails and the new homeowner is looking at a $25,000 repair, it is state law that protects the new homeowner and provides a path for responsibility for litigation to follow that would include the broker. All at the state level. The state does not license photographers (at least I've never heard of a state licensing photographers), or pilots. So if a real estate professional hires an uncertified drone operator to take photos and the drone crashes into a window, the drone operator is liable for the damages under ordinary tort. But not for violating any licensing laws, and neither is the real estate professional, because the drone operator/photographer is not a licensed profession.
 
You are probably confusing it with the crappy AMA sports pilot membership or something along those lines.

Furthermore, if you want to be in business, you should be looking at this as a positive, not a negative. Once you have your license, you're golden. And you don't have to worry about every kid with a Phantom cutting into your business working for peanuts. Regulation + restrictions = higher pay for you and much less competition.

I think licensing is a positive to restrict the people who are safe a serious about what they do. Understanding airspace should be essential. But a pilots license? I want to fly a UAV. I don't want to fly a plane.
 

Recent Posts

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,352
Members
104,933
Latest member
mactechnic