msinger
Approved Vendor
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2014
- Messages
- 32,152
- Reaction score
- 10,911
- Location
- Harrisburg, PA (US)
- Website
- phantomhelp.com
FAA rules, AMA suggestions......
- Thread starter Couchie
- Start date
Actually, no... A PPL can NOT make any compensation for his/her flight.
In order to be compensated for a flight, you must be a commercial pilot and the craft you are flying must be certified to fly commercially which in the 'real world' is a daunting task. Record keeping, annual inspections, 100 hour inspections, FAA inspected parts (increases prices by four fold if not more) etc...
I will disagree with only one thing you said. When your hypothetical friend went up with you on a pleasure flight, took some photos and later sold them. No, he didn't break any FAR's, but you did. That is how ridiculous the FAA interprets the rules. It could have happened six months after the flight, but as soon as your hypothetical friend sold a photo taken from your pleasure flight, it became a commercial flight. One aviation lawyer who hangs around this forum asked, hypothetically, If I share video from my Phantom with family and one of them posts the video on YouTube and ads get shown next to the video, does it become commercial? The answer is yes. The way the rules are written, the FAA could come back to the plot for a certificate action.
Well, let's see, a farmer with a 100 acre plot wants to take a single photo to see how his irrigation is working, so he takes his Phantom up to 1000 ft to get the photo in one shot.csauer52 said:
An architect wants a video of his latest high-rise building from the ground floor to the top - but according to you, there's no reason to proceed past the halfway point.
A city wants to use a Phantom to do a quick look at the top of the Golden Gate Bridge, for example, but the top of the bridge is 750 feet above the water.
There are lots of reasons a commercially operated drone could need to go above 400 ft. Hobbyists, maybe not. So you license the commercial users, make sure they know what to watch for, and everyone should be safe.
On the other hand, other than an outright ban on personal UAVs, no rules will stop those who would ignore them anyway.
Well, ya know... with the advent of ADSB and with the transmitters getting smaller and smaller... is that our cure? Attaching something like the Flytrex to our Phantoms so that they show up on ATC's radar, big iron's TCAS, and PPL's ADSB transceivers? I mean this is the FAA's pet project that is the cure all to cure all.... I can only imagine that is where we are going to have to go if you wish to fly your Phantom for 'commercial' purposes.
Which by the way, a full sized airplane has no business being anywhere near! Full sized aircraft are required to be 1,000' above the bridge when flying over under VRF rules (Urban area assumed). So not only does the Phantom need to be above 400', but even at 750' it should STILL be 1,000' below the nearest aircraft baring any special circumstances for the full sized aircraft. But then again see-and-avoid on both pilots parts would strengthen the safety factor...
I agree, some...
It would do a Phantom pilot some good to understand airspace, VFR rules, IFR rules, private and commercial rules, approach patterns to airports (large and small), TFRs, and many other rules that PPL's must know to operate safely and pass the written, practical, and BFRs.
Why does this NOT surprise me? I'm certainly no lawyer and only have a dangerous understanding of the FAR's and AIM. I haven't looked that deep I guess to know that even an incidental ad would suddenly shift a flight to being commercial. Argh!
The thing that gets me is the commercial regs and the fact that I can't use my new tool to provide images that I could in my airplane, but now at a cheaper, safer, faster and more reliable fashion. I'm cautiously waiting to see what is going to be required to use my Phantom for commercial purposes. What I'm afraid of is that as usual, only large companies with big budgets will be able to afford the hoops that will need to be jumped through. The little guy has no hope of getting anywhere without the backing of some big $$$.
The possible future requirement for a PPL or higher is only for commercial operations. I think the FAA wants it for 2 underlying reasons:
1) demonstrates an understanding of airspace and flight rules
2) It gives them something to revoke in an enforcement action.
But none of that has any bearing on hobby pilots. People need to separate the two and stop twisting them together. The sUAS Rule NPRM should be out fairly soon, then we can have actual discussions about what the FAA is proposing for commercial operations.
1) demonstrates an understanding of airspace and flight rules
2) It gives them something to revoke in an enforcement action.
But none of that has any bearing on hobby pilots. People need to separate the two and stop twisting them together. The sUAS Rule NPRM should be out fairly soon, then we can have actual discussions about what the FAA is proposing for commercial operations.
SteveMann said:
Well, I was speaking from the context of being a hobbyist, I would consider the use cases you proposed as commercial endeavors.
flyNfrank said:
I am not sure what you mean exactly, but I will say this. I have been a pilot for over 30 years. As a pilot you rely on many things to avoid a collision. A few include the transponder which says "here I am in the airspace", your radio, air traffic control when you are within range of one, and finally your eyes. As a pilot in command, you are constantly scanning your instruments and the airspace. As a very experienced pilot I will tell you it is very difficult to spot a full size aircraft at times. A lot depends on where the sun is and so on. Spotting a drone is next to impossible, especially at the speeds the aircraft is traveling at. Yes, I know the odds of an impact are low, maybe even very low. But it will take just 1 incident that will bring this issue out to the general public. And when that happens, don't you think the politicians and the various bureaus' are going to force some major restrictions that may put us all out of the drone flying hobby? Or force us into tiny flying areas like other RC aircraft. I love flying my Phantom and other RC aircraft. And I love flying in general. Two things have made flying for me a little more stressful. First is 911 and the subsequent restrictions put in force to make our airspace safe. The second is the proliferation of the drones. You know they are up there somewhere, but hopefully not in your flight path. All because some drone owners want the thrill of flying high......I guess. So yes, I am one who believes "it could be ruined for us all".
msinger
Approved Vendor
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2014
- Messages
- 32,152
- Reaction score
- 10,911
- Location
- Harrisburg, PA (US)
- Website
- phantomhelp.com
Couchie said:
Actually, a PPL is allowed to make compensation for his/her flight in the world of UAVs. Go research the petitions that the FAA has approved so far. All require the PIC to have a PPL.
Couchie, I totally agree. I'm a recently retired LEO and I agree that these YouTube videos will be used as evidence against this hobby. Always some idiots making things bad for the rest. Common sense tells us to do things safely and I think that's what we all would like. I also think self responsibility should be part of the equation.
But as we discuss safety I can't help but think that any decisions, regs, or rules that might be handed down in the name of safety will be about money and greed. I'm sure the big boys getting ready for the drone boom in commercial use will do all they can in the name of safety to be allowed to make all the money they can!
My .02
But as we discuss safety I can't help but think that any decisions, regs, or rules that might be handed down in the name of safety will be about money and greed. I'm sure the big boys getting ready for the drone boom in commercial use will do all they can in the name of safety to be allowed to make all the money they can!
My .02
Excellent write up and very healthy conversation/discussion happening here.
I agree with most everything said to a certain extent thus far. I have been flying RC for 37 years and full size aircraft for 16 years (PPL, single engine land). I will take a "Drone Flight Proficiency Course" with no problem in order to be able to legally fly for $$ but the idea of requiring every UAS pilot to have PPL is almost silly. My hopes are that this regulation, if it becomes official and given some teeth, will be the first step to allow some people to fast-track to being able to legally "fly for compensation". Then while the dust is settling the FAA can come up with a more stream lined and appropriate training process that is more "UAS" specific and hopefully more cost effective. I agree that a good portion of the PPL course is helpful to a UAS pilot there is also a good portion that is completely irrelevant and a gross waste of time and resources.
What really cracks me up is that this "Ban on commercial UAS" is like trying to put a band-aide on a waterfall on the dry side of the falls:
A) Commercial UAS pilots (at least to my knowledge) haven't brought any negative media attention or caused any problems. Those who are (were) or have attempted to do this have been doing so in a safe and healthy way. They have more invested, more to lose, and are most likely to be safe and smart about what they do.
B) Commercial UAS pilots (in most instances) aren't flying in high risk areas and anyone who IS should have to get the correct authorization to do so regardless of purpose of the flight
C) Commercial UAS pilots are such a small sector of the whole industry (if you take our the Amazon type of delivery fleet) and once again this is concentrating on the wrong group
IMHO if the FAA/DOT/NTSB want to get the most bang for their buck they should create a program where every UAS/Part manufacturer, hobby shop, flying club etc is given materials for proper education, notification, and training to make SAFE UAS pilots of the new batch of people who are coming into this industry with zero training and zero knowledge of the rules, the aircraft they are flying or the ramifications of what their actions could cause. Flyers, brochures, webinars, public meetings etc to educate the public. Hold the individual accountable for their action and not the whole collective.
Unfortunately if we don't get this under control ourselves and something DOES happen it will significantly curtail our flying privileges and those for generations to come.
I agree with most everything said to a certain extent thus far. I have been flying RC for 37 years and full size aircraft for 16 years (PPL, single engine land). I will take a "Drone Flight Proficiency Course" with no problem in order to be able to legally fly for $$ but the idea of requiring every UAS pilot to have PPL is almost silly. My hopes are that this regulation, if it becomes official and given some teeth, will be the first step to allow some people to fast-track to being able to legally "fly for compensation". Then while the dust is settling the FAA can come up with a more stream lined and appropriate training process that is more "UAS" specific and hopefully more cost effective. I agree that a good portion of the PPL course is helpful to a UAS pilot there is also a good portion that is completely irrelevant and a gross waste of time and resources.
What really cracks me up is that this "Ban on commercial UAS" is like trying to put a band-aide on a waterfall on the dry side of the falls:
A) Commercial UAS pilots (at least to my knowledge) haven't brought any negative media attention or caused any problems. Those who are (were) or have attempted to do this have been doing so in a safe and healthy way. They have more invested, more to lose, and are most likely to be safe and smart about what they do.
B) Commercial UAS pilots (in most instances) aren't flying in high risk areas and anyone who IS should have to get the correct authorization to do so regardless of purpose of the flight
C) Commercial UAS pilots are such a small sector of the whole industry (if you take our the Amazon type of delivery fleet) and once again this is concentrating on the wrong group
IMHO if the FAA/DOT/NTSB want to get the most bang for their buck they should create a program where every UAS/Part manufacturer, hobby shop, flying club etc is given materials for proper education, notification, and training to make SAFE UAS pilots of the new batch of people who are coming into this industry with zero training and zero knowledge of the rules, the aircraft they are flying or the ramifications of what their actions could cause. Flyers, brochures, webinars, public meetings etc to educate the public. Hold the individual accountable for their action and not the whole collective.
Unfortunately if we don't get this under control ourselves and something DOES happen it will significantly curtail our flying privileges and those for generations to come.
msinger
Approved Vendor
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2014
- Messages
- 32,152
- Reaction score
- 10,911
- Location
- Harrisburg, PA (US)
- Website
- phantomhelp.com
There is no ban on commercial UAS use. The problem is that it's impossible to follow the FAA regulations, so exemptions from certain regulations must be requested and approved by the FAA. There is a process that can be followed for those who want to fly commercially.BigAl07 said:
No such requirement exists. The FAA claims the law is requiring this though.BigAl07 said:
I fully understand that it's not currently "Law/Regulation" but in the most current proposals that is indeed one of the requirements. And thus far each of the 13 or so companies who have requested and granted said exemptions status to fly commercial operations have met that requirement.
Yes there is a process in place to request exemptions but if you sit down and see what's required it is indeed comical. The paperwork and the documentation is literally mind boggling and what makes it worse is you're requesting exemptions for things that just simply don't apply to our UAS. It takes a crap load of hours to get the documents in order and the whole time you're doing this you look at it and say, "Seriously? I'm requesting an exemptions for "THIS" for my quadcopter?"
It's really a matter of how badly (aka how much money you want to spend) you need/want to fly for $$ with your UAS. Right now the return on your time investment for the average A/P job is upside down in regards to getting the approval to fly.
Yes there is a process in place to request exemptions but if you sit down and see what's required it is indeed comical. The paperwork and the documentation is literally mind boggling and what makes it worse is you're requesting exemptions for things that just simply don't apply to our UAS. It takes a crap load of hours to get the documents in order and the whole time you're doing this you look at it and say, "Seriously? I'm requesting an exemptions for "THIS" for my quadcopter?"
It's really a matter of how badly (aka how much money you want to spend) you need/want to fly for $$ with your UAS. Right now the return on your time investment for the average A/P job is upside down in regards to getting the approval to fly.
msinger
Approved Vendor
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2014
- Messages
- 32,152
- Reaction score
- 10,911
- Location
- Harrisburg, PA (US)
- Website
- phantomhelp.com
And a requirement that should be challenged since there is no regulation/law that requires this for UASs.BigAl07 said:
This part has me floored as well and I hold the same opinion. So once again, the little guy, the small business owner/entrepreneur is screwed at this point unless of course he has deep pockets. I can assure you that this soon-to-be-retired police officer's pockets are pretty shallow.
Now, the paperwork for the waiver. If anyone familiar with commercial aviation has looked at this paper trail, basically you are going to be held to the same standard as if you were flying a 777. Look at the requirements that will need to be met. I mean what's next, 100 hour inspections, annual inspections, sky high insurance, and the many other ways we've already made full sized aviation as struggle to afford.... unless of course you have deep pockets or a lot of people behind you!
Similar threads
