Meta4
Premium Pilot
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2014
- Messages
- 15,300
- Reaction score
- 9,242
You could .. but if you ever came to the attention of the FAA, they wouldn't take a microsecond to see through that.
You'd only be fooling yourself.
Phantom 3 for commercial use
- Thread starter charlie999
- Start date
You'd only be fooling yourself.
Is a list available other than a few violations from the FAA (poster boys) for commercial violations?
At one point the FAA was scolded for spending time watching YouTube on tax payers money.
I did a poll here on how many have seen someone flying a drone other than themselves. The results were No one and maybe once.
Real estate companies large ones are telling agents don't do it.
I know one broker using drone video for a 2.5 million dollar home. the owner said here son did it for her. Yeah right... So if that's the case then fine, but the Broker is using it in his listing. He makes money for the sale thus it's legal.
I'm not getting dragged into this again, I have a several commercial accounts that want this done, and I get a web maintenance fee per month when it happens. One is a small account I really don't think the FAA is going to even find it online of the millions that are most likely doing this now.
Note: Watched this new show last night called The Last Alaskans ( History Channel I think ) Drone footage all over the place! One spin out top shot dead give away.
Do they have a 333? Gold Rush was the other one they even did behind the scenes episode showing how they setup the drone shots, this was two years ago.
Done
At one point the FAA was scolded for spending time watching YouTube on tax payers money.
I did a poll here on how many have seen someone flying a drone other than themselves. The results were No one and maybe once.
Real estate companies large ones are telling agents don't do it.
I know one broker using drone video for a 2.5 million dollar home. the owner said here son did it for her. Yeah right... So if that's the case then fine, but the Broker is using it in his listing. He makes money for the sale thus it's legal.
I'm not getting dragged into this again, I have a several commercial accounts that want this done, and I get a web maintenance fee per month when it happens. One is a small account I really don't think the FAA is going to even find it online of the millions that are most likely doing this now.
Note: Watched this new show last night called The Last Alaskans ( History Channel I think ) Drone footage all over the place! One spin out top shot dead give away.
Do they have a 333? Gold Rush was the other one they even did behind the scenes episode showing how they setup the drone shots, this was two years ago.
Done
Last edited:
Yeah from what get of the spirit of the CAA rules and regs, they would not tollerate this either. Just because people have not been caught yet does not mean it is a loophole.
ianwood
Taco Wrangler
There are tons of drone shots in media everywhere. Way more than the 200 people with 333 exemptions can deliver. Even American Airlines had drone shots on their "welcome" screen on their planes. And this was before the 333 exemption even existed.
- Joined
- May 29, 2014
- Messages
- 408
- Reaction score
- 137
I Accept donations, to help me support my family, and with each donations of over (price here) you get a Free shot, and for donations over (price here) you get a FREE VIDEO !..
The point is , f*** those big governments doing tricks on us to later extorcate us money, if your flying something under 2KG, under 50m altitude, over 3 km from any airport, in LOS, ready to use CSC in lost of control, and over 50m from any living being or easy to damage property there is no risk. A Phantom falling on a roof from 50m would barely cause any damage to the roof, so if you stay away from cars and peoples, and low enough to be 100% sure about air trafic, and ready to use CSC in LOS what can go wrong ?
The point is , f*** those big governments doing tricks on us to later extorcate us money, if your flying something under 2KG, under 50m altitude, over 3 km from any airport, in LOS, ready to use CSC in lost of control, and over 50m from any living being or easy to damage property there is no risk. A Phantom falling on a roof from 50m would barely cause any damage to the roof, so if you stay away from cars and peoples, and low enough to be 100% sure about air trafic, and ready to use CSC in LOS what can go wrong ?
Last edited by a moderator:
The law in this area is increasingly stupid.
The 'must stay in visual range' is another one where legislation seems based on Phantom One technology when it probably was a very good idea to keep it only 200 feet away.
But regarding commercial photography: they want to make you take an expensive course and get a license if you sell a picture - on what grounds?
How is it different to normal use and picture/video recording - because you might sell a few of the pictures taken from a funny angle?
It's a nonsense and when the law is an *** it discredits itself.
It seems like undue weight given to views from those committed to more expensive ways to take pictures like helicopters and light aircraft
The 'must stay in visual range' is another one where legislation seems based on Phantom One technology when it probably was a very good idea to keep it only 200 feet away.
But regarding commercial photography: they want to make you take an expensive course and get a license if you sell a picture - on what grounds?
How is it different to normal use and picture/video recording - because you might sell a few of the pictures taken from a funny angle?
It's a nonsense and when the law is an *** it discredits itself.
It seems like undue weight given to views from those committed to more expensive ways to take pictures like helicopters and light aircraft
Well there are plenty on this forum who insist on licensing and regulations.
They also refer to themselves as "pilots" since they have a phantom
Im with you on this however, its the most ignorant thing I have ever heard, take all the pics you want for your pleasure, but if you make a profit, big brother has to be in your life
Here photographs are just photographs no matter how they were shot. Sell them if you like. There are many companies with drones, shooting for mags/papers/tv series/commercials/real estate photography etc.. Drone is just another creative camera tool to express yourself.
I would imagine that by charging for editing/processing footage obtained by your phantom
I agree, I think that the permission should be based on where you are planning to fly rather than a blanket "if you make money you need permission" If I'm flying and build a portfolio of photos for private use I'm fine but then I decide to sell one and I suddenly need permission, that has nothing to do with safety. If I wanted to film in a congested area then needing permission would make perfect sense.
What if you're flying it indoors? FAA doesn't think they manage the air space inside a building do they?
So you could advertise "Indoor aerial Photography" and make money from it? I'm just playing devils advocate, but seriously anything I could put in an ad for wedding photography to let people know it is a tool in my bag without being penalized by anyone would be nice.
Don't they? You are still piloting an aircraft, according to them. The rule doesn't specify indoor or outdoor, nor does it define it. Would an open air stadium be in or out? Would a stadium with a roof that opens be in or out, etc?
A vague law is an unenforceable law.
The FAA is concerned about airspace and protecting the human beings flying in it. Therefore they do not care what you do indoors because there is no other air traffic indoors which could be operating there which the FAA would be responsible for protecting. There is nothing vague about it. The FAA defines the various classes and boundaries of airspace pretty clearly. And that information is readily available to any who care to look for it and quite frankly, not all that difficult to understand.
You're right, try reading it. Show me in the rule where it defines where the aircraft is flown? It doesn't. It just states that you can't make money using your UAS. So the way it is written, they could fine you for flying it indoors if they wanted to, as written.
I searched https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Sec_331_336_UAS.pdf and here https://www.faa.gov/uas/model_aircraft/ and don't see where their rules begin and end.
I am an instrument rated private pilot with over 35 years and over 2000 hours flying experience in small aircraft. The FAA will fine me if I even make s passenger pay for all the fuel used on a flight. If I get a commercial rating which would basically only require a check ride, I could legally charge for services. Does anybody believe that a 17 year old with 200 hours experience and a commercial ticket is safer than me? The feds are using the same flawed logic for drones. I agree that there should be reasonable regulations, but requiring a pilot's license and not allowing any commercial operations of drones is stupid.
The FAA handles certification of aircraft, certification of airmen and operations of aircraft and airmen conducted within the national airspace system. The inside of buildings do not fall within the national airspace system. If you really want official clarification, call your local FSDO and have them put you in touch with your regional counsel office. The regional counsel will be able to give you an official letter of interpretation which will clearly define for whether or not the FAA is concerned with operations inside buildings and why.
Then why this rule? "Don't fly near people or stadiums" Pretty vague.
Why not specify outdoor operation, in the rule or definition of model aircraft?
The FAA has ruled these are aircraft and are fall within their domain, it doesn't say, "only if used outdoors".
I'm not arguing against flying for money and more power to anyone that does. However, the question you may need to answer is how many times you gave away tour photos or video to a customer for free? Do you explain that they can get this service for free? Attorneys who pursue criminal charges have see this a million times and know how to prove their case.
Similar threads
