In an effort not to hijack other posts, I'm just going to air my
opinion on all of this talk of FAA 'rules' in place now and the AMA's rules.
I want to first clarify that I agree there needs to be some guidelines for phantom pilots to go by for safe operation of their craft. They are no different in some ways than full sized aircraft in the skies above us. The FAA heavily regulates aircraft from ultralights to 787's, the pilots that fly them, the mechanics that work on them, and the manufacturers who produce them. With that regulation, the safety record of our aviation industry is very good.
Now, with that out of the way I want to step back for a moment and look at this through the eyes of a person who saved up, tucked away some money and purchased one of these awesome little machines. Lets keep the mechanical issues at bay for the sake of the topic.
I am retiring after 20+ years in law enforcement. I'm also a commercial pilot and flight instructor. I thoroughly enjoy flying but it costs an arm, a leg, and your second born anymore to do so. I wanted to enjoy flight at a less expensive rate. I often get requests from people to fly over their property and take pictures from aloft. I was thinking, like most I'm sure, what a great way to take aerials, and NOT have to spend all the money on the plane (gas, oil, hangar rent, insurance, annual inspections, etc.) but yet still provide quality images/videos and do so with much better quality.
Well, I get my P2V+ (was a v2, now a v3) and get acquainted.
Now comes the discussion of the FAA's oversight on these craft and the opposing opinions of airline pilots, the AOPA, and every other tom-****-and-harry who are uneducated on these craft.
1) I can't use my phantom to take pictures/video for commercial use. I can't even sell the picture I take from my phantom. That in and of itself I think is BS. Again, I understand all of the safety regs and what not. I operate the phantom like I do the airplane with all safety concerns in mind.
2) I'm not supposed to fly over 400' AGL in any airspace (as
suggested by the FAA and AMA.) Again, I understand why this
suggestion is in place. As I've stated in other posts, manned aircraft is supposed to stay 500' over rural and 1,000' over urban areas unless with a few exceptions.
3) The suggestions say I can't fly at night. even though my craft is well lit with red and green lights, just like a full sized aircraft, I can't fly between the hours the sun is either horizon or darkness.
4) There is talk of making UAS pilots obtain a PPL (Private pilot license) in order to even operate the craft. WHAT?!? I spent, and am still paying off over $40,000 for my commercial license and CFII certs. Granted the PPL won't cost that much, but you can easly get into $5,000 for a PPL.
Ok.... now my rants, again these are just MY opinions, so flame me if you will but these are mop opinions.
First point - selling the images/videos produced by my Phantom. This one just blows my mind. Lets flip this around a little and see how these rules apply in a different manner. Supposed for a second that I take a friend up in my little Cessna 172. That friend takes pictures from the right seat. We land, he/she goes to a business and sells those images. Has my friend violated any rules? Not as far as I know. I'm not a scholar in FAA regs, but I have been through them a few times. I keep reiterating that I understand there are rules and regs for safety and I understand those. I fly my Phantom in a very responsible manner making sure I check my GPS app, TFR's in the area, pending weather, and proximity to airports and approach paths. Argh! I'll stop.. this one could go on forever.
Second point - Again, I understand why to a certain extent, these suggestions are in place. I explained above about full sized aircraft and the rules they are supposed to operate by. I've also stated in other posts the cloud clearance rules aircraft must adhere to when operating in the skies. (Generally speaking, 500' below, 1,000' above, and 2,000 feet horizontally) Another point of contention in these and other forums. Have I gone above the 400' ceiling, sure I have to maybe 450'. The craft is never out of my sight and I keep a full scan of the surrounding sky in view at all times. If I hear a medivac chopper in the area or see an aircraft in the area I descend quickly to tree top level and continue after it passes. The 'see-and-avoid'
rules the FAA has in place already. This is the one that they'll hang someone on should a craft strike a full size aircraft.
Third point - Don't fly at night. Have I flown at night, sure I have. I use the same rules I do above. I watch for aircraft, and avoid should any be in the area. For example, New Years Eve my family gathered, lit Chinese Lanterns, and let them go. I flew the Phantom and captured video of the launch and tracked them for a short time. The highest I got was maybe 150'. The craft was lit with the mandatory red and green lights and was clearly visible to me on the ground.
This fourth one, although I might be able to actually make some money on this rule, is asinine. 90% of the training a PPL goes through has no bearing on UAS pilots, at least not Phantom craft. Now, I certainly agree that Phantom pilots should be very familiar with the rules and regs the FAA has in place. This would put the Phantom pilots and full sized craft pilots on the same playing field. Knowing what rules are in place would certainly help keep this a safe hobby. (Hobby, just in case someone with the FAA is watching).
One thing I touched on earlier that I left alone, but the more I think about it, I need to say something. The groups lobbying for tight restrictions on UAS/UAVs. AOPA (Airplane Owners and Pilots) and APA (Airline Pilot's Association) are going to throw alot of money at this. I was once a member of AOPA. Don't get me wrong, they do a lot of good work. The AOPA though spends a LOT of money lobbying. I grew tired of every year when my membership came due, of the 'renew now or the FAA will invoke user fees'. Well there are more things going on in aviation then user fees. Granted I didn't agree with user fees and most pilots don't, but that seemed to be the common threat AOPA would use to keep you enlisted. AOPA's stance on UAS/UAVs is pretty strong and the lobbying dollars AOPA spends will have a lot of weight with the FAA/NTSB.
Take a look at this article:
http://www.14news.com/story/27716521/key-decisions-on-drones-likely-from-congress
This one chapped my butt!
Really?!? Nearly every day?
Ok, this next one really burns me:
It has been said on this and many other forums. Folks bragging about blowing the suggested operating rules out of the water, ignoring them an blatantly doing so. The AOPA, which remember is a strong lobbying group, is going to use all these Youtube videos you guys are posting as evidence! He mentions this in his quote! People flying their phantoms up through the clouds or even over a layer, and posting the video for the world to see. Hello!?! This is just begging for attention. Attention is going to come, but not in a favorable way!
And once again, the press gets it wrong:
Stating there are regulations, of which there are none as of yet. Just suggestions.
Ok, I'm stepping off my milk crate and getting my first aid creme ready. Let the flaming begin. I've stated my opinion...
