FAA directly interfered with my hobby - Need Help

Joined
Mar 21, 2014
Messages
908
Reaction score
11
Location
Brooklyn, NY
So here is the summary:

The area I live in is having a fair and I volunteered to do aerial photography (for free). It's a city run event, so they passed it by the local precinct. The cops are fine with it.

Except that they were told by the FAA that regardless of the 400ft restriction, that I need a license. (for laws that dont exist)
The cops have no choice but to listen to them.

The contact I have in the senate asked me to provide any information possible that would prove the FAA is wrong.
Can you guys help me with gathering info?

I want to flood this guys email with links so the FAA cant say boo.
It's sad too. Everyone setting up the event was psyched about having a phantom take aerial photos
 
Start here: www.dronelawjournal.com

However, I'd ask the FAA to clarify exactly which license you need to apply for to fly an RC aircraft for non-commercial use under 400 ft. Contact them separately and ask them that specifically, I'm guessing their answer will contradict what the city was told.
 
Monte55 said:
Sounds like a bunch of uninformed jerks

its city run, they cant risk any lawsuits.
The cops an the guy with the senate are actually on my side.
But neither have the need to stick their necks out for a "toy", if you know what I mean.
 
I doubt the FAA 'told' anyone anything.

Most likely, someone tried to Google their way to intelligence and ended up being roadkill on the Information Superhighway.
 
480sparky said:
I doubt the FAA 'told' anyone anything.

Most likely, someone tried to Google their way to intelligence and ended up being roadkill on the Information Superhighway.

Well, the whole "license" thing was definitely an FAA comment at one time.
Either way, the more links for me to use, the better :)
 
dragonash said:
480sparky said:
I doubt the FAA 'told' anyone anything.

Most likely, someone tried to Google their way to intelligence and ended up being roadkill on the Information Superhighway.

Well, the whole "license" thing was definitely an FAA comment at one time.
Either way, the more links for me to use, the better :)

I'm pretty good at photoshop, I can make you an FAA certificate.
 
http://www.modelaircraft.org/

These people will set the record straight for the city and the senator.
If I were you, I'd just go do it.
Congress has already told the FAA, by law, that the FAA has no jurisdiction over honny aircraft of any type.
If you get cited, by the FAA, challenge it.
The more cases the courts hear will help tell the FAA to keep their dang faces out of the show!

There is no license needed! Period!
 
just for the record, regardless of what the FAA says, if the police say no, then I listen to the police.
I'm going through the proper channels to do this.

And believe it or not, because the event coordinators are big wigs in the neighborhood, I am dealing with someone from the state senate! Kind of crazy.
 
ianwood said:
You want to use the FAA Modernization and Reform Act. Pretty much says if you abide by the safety rules, you can fly for personal use all day long. http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/HR658_020112.pdf

thanks ian.

This just came out as well
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-fa ... ourt-rules

you know, on a related subject, when I was speaking to the local FAA employee, he mentioned how hot a topic this was and referenced "those 2 drone operators who flew near the bridge"

It's like my heart skipped a beat when he said it cause I already had all my bullets loaded lol Not that HE in general would be able to change anything, but more so to the fact that he tried to use that example as a reason why they dont allow drones.

I was like, yes, i know about it.... and I also read the entire transcript and listned to the recording. Did you know that it wasnt the operators who flew too close to the police, but it was the police t hat pursued the drone? Did you also know that they wee operating a basic phantom 2 with no FPV gear, so there was no possible way to be anywhere close to the bridge let alone go out of LOS? Not to mention flying around the chopper and ascending and descending at such speeds were impossible.

It felt so good because he just went silent. So I smoothed it over a bit at the end by saying "but hey, thats just the media overhyping things as well as lack of knowledge about this hobby"

I'm not going to be a "complete" **** to a bottom tier employee who has no say in how the FAA works. But dont try to use bogus examples either! :)
 
I have a hot air balloon festival here in NJ next weekend so I phoned the organizers asking for permission to fly there - within safety protocols of course and for free. They had no problem with it but told me to contact the FAA and get permission first as it is adjacent to a Class C airfield. This proves easier said than done. The FAA website does not have a Contact Us etc. As soon as they said to contact FAA first, I new this was not going to get resolved to my advantage - so I gave up ... :evil:

http://www.balloonfestival.com
 
Submariner said:
I have a hot air balloon festival here in NJ next weekend so I phoned the organizers asking for permission to fly there - within safety protocols of course and for free. They had no problem with it but told me to contact the FAA and get permission first as it is adjacent to a Class C airfield. This proves easier said than done. The FAA website does not have a Contact Us etc. As soon as they said to contact FAA first, I new this was not going to get resolved to my advantage - so I gave up ... :evil:

http://www.balloonfestival.com

to my surprise, there are actually local (or semi local) FAA contacts

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/hea ... us_eastern
 
Submariner said:
Thanks dragon. I never saw that page. I guess there is no harm in giving them a call ..

not a problem.
but dont expect much.

Seems their default answer if "you need a certificate of authentication" or whatever its called. You know, those things they arent giving out at all but to 2 huge companies in the world lol

Catch 22 anyone?
 
I'm not sure where to find the article, but yesterday, I read, the court of appeals in DC ruled that the E-mail letter that the FAA sent out as drone guide lines was invalid, as there was, to this date, no laws to back it up.
Fly Happy. :D
 
I think the FAA was rebuked AGAIN as of yesterday (July 18, 2014) for issuing cease and desist notices without effect of law (for lack of them) for commercial/humanitarian uses. Sounds like they're simply intent on plugging their ears, insisting they've had jurisdiction all along, while pushing for defective notice-and-comment processes until they finally have a passable claim.
 
ElGuano said:
I think the FAA was rebuked AGAIN as of yesterday (July 18, 2014) for issuing cease and desist notices without effect of law (for lack of them) for commercial/humanitarian uses. Sounds like they're simply intent on plugging their ears, insisting they've had jurisdiction all along, while pushing for defective notice-and-comment processes until they finally have a passable claim.

see the top post of this page :)
 
Just fly under 400'. Won't that solve the issue? With the 94 degree lens, you'll get over 800' of coverage (width at 9:16 ratio). Since you're doing it for free, you don't need an exemption or license. Call the FAA. Get it from the horse's mouth. They're pretty easy to talk to.
But, you might as well file for a 333 exemption if you're going to be doing this stuff. It's free, not too difficult, but it does take several months for approval.
 
Yep but with a 333 exemption they require a pilots license. Not a toy one but a aircraft pilots license or a sport pilot as they have stated.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,358
Members
104,936
Latest member
hirehackers