i guess i am that much of an idiot. thats why your snarky [EXPLETIVE REMOVED] comments are unapprieciated. i thought this was all you needed.
Last edited by a moderator:
Do I need Part 107 Cert for this?....
- Thread starter JamesJB
- Start date
Commercial or not really has no bearing either. The FAA has made it very clear. If you are not flying purely as a hobby, you are under Part 107. Whether you are Taking photos for a local charity, charging an insurance mucho buck or helping with search and rescue, all of that is considered non-hobby and requires a Part 107 cert.
What on earth is your problem? Are you saying that you were trolling just to get responses that you could whine about? If not then do, please, explain what, exactly, about my original reply you deemed "snarky". And stop posting misleading nonsense about Part 107 certification.
The certificate in the picture is the one that you get when you take the online course required for Part 61 pilots before they can apply for a Part 107 cert. They then get a separate card just like everyone else. Until/unless you have that actual certification, you Do Not have a Part 107 license.
See the post above. You took the test that is available to Part 61 pilots (Private Pilot license holders) which, if they pass, allows them to apply for a Part 107 certificate without taking the Part 107 exam. Everyone else has to take the exam.
Obviously you didn't read the entire thread to understand the scenario we were discussing. As was stated previously:
"Intent of the flight determines the "classification" of the flight. Images/video taken during a hobby flight can be later given (or even sold) to a 3rd party."
Welcome to the FAA. You are correct that "commercial" is not pertinent. You are correct that "intent" is pertinent. But, the FAA will determine what your "intent" was and it will be taken in the worst possible light. It is VERY easy to enter upon dangerous ground with the FAA and the maximum penalty is $250,000 and/or 8 years in Federal Prison. Very unlikely to get remotely close to anything like that but the FAA is notorious for taking a VERY harsh interpretation for a seemingly innocent act. And the appeal is to the NTSB, which almost always supports the FAA's decision. There is legislation pending to soften that approach and it may already be passed by now, but although you may state your "intent", it will be the FAA's interpretation of your intent that will rule. And for those who think that the chance of getting tagged is very low; I would not bet the family farm on that. Congress put a lot of pressure on the FAA to enforce these laws and the FAA really, really likes to get rid of that pressure by enforcement action. Don't make the mistake of thinking that you get to go to court. If you appeal, you get to go to an "administrative law judge" who works for, you guessed it, the FAA.
Interestingly; you can, with a private license, take photos incidental to your job from a plane, but you cannot do that with a drone. It's all in the paperwork that gets passed.
Interestingly; you can, with a private license, take photos incidental to your job from a plane, but you cannot do that with a drone. It's all in the paperwork that gets passed.
If you use an online posting as a means to deliver a photo or video to someone who asked you to capture something with your drone, you need a license even if no money or other value exchanged hands. Here is an example of an application where I took a video of a church to experiment with the Circle of Interest function in my Phantom. When done, I offered the video free of charge to the church. To be safe, a 107 license would be encouraged, and, credits for the music should be posted on any site that the video was posted on.
Exactly, especially in the realm of the incorrectly used term of 'profit'. If you are being paid for the service of filming with a drone, that is not 'profit'. For there to be 'profit', there must be 'gain'.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2017
- Messages
- 31
- Reaction score
- 13
- Age
- 72
Similar threads
