The 1st FAA Prosecution of a Civilian Drone UAV

[JasonEricAnderson]

This thought has been bugging me for a while now and I haven't shared it because it seems to... elementary. If a reporter shows up at an event and they hoist up their news van's mast and use it to get an overview of the scene there isn't a problem. The FAA doesn't have any jurisdiction.

If I had an aerial lift and taped a camera to it, no problem.

It's a camera on a long stick.

If I wanted to film a birds eye view of a local business and get paid for it I could tape a camera to a flagpole and go running around with it filming and unless that business is right next to an airport I wouldn't have any problems. FAA could just butt right out.


If the reporter used a tricopter with a camera and flew it up to the same height as the mast cam... FAA loses their &%$ing minds.

So what if there was a tether on the tricopter? What if there is nothing more than thread that hangs off my multirotor to a ball of string at my feet?

At that point isn't it just a 'camera on a stick'????

 

[Craftydan]

There are several companies using the "tether" method to keep clear of any FAA trouble, but airial mapping projects and fixed wing projects become trouble.

Well the times, they are a changing, and *hopefully* the AMA will press for sensable, scaled (light/medium/heavy platform rules), and liveable regulation. if my scratchbuilt, less than 3lbs autonomus rotorcraft needs to conform to a simple safety checklist, a 10lbs work platform needs an inspection by someone local, but a 50lb platform needs a thourogh check at one fo the regional test sites . . . I could live with this.

will we get something as nice as this? dunno, but it won't take much to have something better than the current rules

 

[eagle4]

In Australia they have a pretty good system.
If your model is under 1.5kg its all good, stay away from people and buildings and under 400f fantastic. You have to fill out a form on their website, just in case they need to let you know if there are any regulation changes, and so they are aware of it, but that's only if you want to earn money from it.

 

[utrmultirotors]

The other interesting issue with all of this is, in the past 30 years the FAA has not seen fit to really worry about what we do with our gear, other than a roughly 20 year old policy statement that isn't technically law. However, even in that situation, "safety" is pretty much only a cursory bullet point (most of their voluntary regulations are common sense), and it's not until money is involved that they want to enforce anything. TBS flew all over the country without a problem, and any time they've been questioned or detained, they've been let go with nothing more than a warning, because the actual LAW did not find them at fault. Their gear pushes the limits of what's possible within our hobby, and they've made it a point to push the limits of what's possible from a legal standpoint. Do I agree whole heartedly with everything they do? No, there are definitely some rough edges, but as far as the flights and such, I don't think there's any more risk in most cases than say driving a car down a highway, or taking a motorcycle out for a spin. There is a big difference between calculated risk and blatant disregard. I would offer, having discussed this with many people, including other hobbyists, pilots of real aircraft, FAA employees and even lawyers... there is something bigger afoot than we realize. The FAA makes nothing from these fines, it's not like they get a bonus, or use it for any specific purpose, it just gets dumped in a big gov't coffer to be used for some random something. And not EVERYONE is being tagged for this... it's obvious they're trying to make a point with Trappy, and there have been cease and desist letters to many small businesses, but there are others who aren't being touched. Several TV shows have used "drones" to do filming, and there are even companies out there still actively doing aerial photography and ADVERTISING it... Someone is pushing the FAA to go after people, and after much deliberation, I'm willing to bet it's the aerospace industry in this country. Think about it. Millions of dollars for an aircraft, that takes thousands of dollars to operate, not to mention the crew and maintenance folks to train, pay, etc. just to get some film footage, or take photographs from the air, patrol wildlife sanctuaries, study migration, survey storm damage, or any of a hundred other applications... OR you hire a local guy who can do it for you quicker, cheaper, and more personal. Lobbyists are powerful people, my friends, and the principle of C.R.E.A.M. doesn't just apply to rap lylrics. (Cash Rules Everything Around Me - WuTang Clan)

 

[Justin]

What I hate is people getting confused between multirotors and drones. In my perspective, drones are fully automated. A multirotor is used for hobby purposes and is not automated. I just made a 500 dollar purchase for a quad, it better not become illegal, which sadly, our hobby is being crushed by the drone war.

 

[Tritium]

I Fly two 6 rotor craft with APM's and yes they ARE capable of FULLY Automated flight.

I remember back in my model rocket days in the 1960's that the hottest item for the "Estes" rocket was a camera that would take still shots during flight. Nobody had a problem way back then with aerial photography, in fact it was HIGHLY encouraged.

Thurmond

 

[xuzme720]

I forget the name, but we flew one in the early 80's that used 110 film. Estes bird as well, might even be the same rocket...

 

[JasonEricAnderson]

I wanted one of those so badly.

But then I ended up launching Lego astronauts on parachutes with my rockets.

 

[jhitesma]

I had two of those astrocams. First one got lost before I had enough flights to use all the film up and get it processed

Second one was a few years later and was half constructed by the person I got it from and missing some parts...I did get a roll of film processed from it...but not a single shot that was "successful" Lots of light leaks and everything was blurry. Really more a novelty than an actual usable aerial camera.

In college I got into higher powered rocketry and since I was majoring in photography I tried to build things to hoist some bigger 35mm camera setups...but never got anything to the point where I was willing to risk the cameras I had available. A few years later digital became an option but was still too expensive for me to risk. By the time digital cameras and video cameras became cheap enough to be viable the regulations around higher power rocketry turned me off - now that RC flight is so affordable though I'm having just as much if not more fun strapping various cameras to planes instead

 

[xuzme720]

Yes, as I remember, we had only one or maybe 2 useable shots off a roll of 24. Ours didn't have the light leaks yours did, but the pics were blurry.

 

[utrmultirotors]

Any personal issues with TBS aside, is it a little bit embarrasing to anyone else that the person most vocal and high profile about the rights of our hobby in our country isn't even FROM here?

 

[rcspaceflight]

(I didn't read everything on this thread)

I remember those rockets with the camera. I wanted one, but never seriously because I wondered what would force the camera to aim down. By luck of the draw you'd get some, but it seems like more photos would be of clouds. Plus I was just a little kid and I didn't have any money.

Before I got into RC planes at all, I built a box with a motor that would press the button on a camera once every few seconds. I mounted this box onto the string of a kite. I don't think this was before multirotors, but it certainly was well before I ever heard of one. This was also before the GoPro. So my set up ended up way too heavy and my kite wasn't stable enough. It kept nose diving and I never really got any photos.

Using kites to take aerial photos has been around pretty much ever since cameras have been around. I think balloons (the ones before hot air balloons) were used when cameras where too heavy to be attached to a kite. But once cameras where light enough, kites where used.

It is silly that a kite is perfectly fine, but a multirotor that flies just as high is a huge no no. Multirotors are safer than kites.

I remember seeing something on PBS about a guy that did aerial photography with kites. He knew which kite was good for which wind conditions. If the wind was low he'd use a certain kite. If it was a faster wind, then a different kite. I also remember that his first set up was a rubber band and silly putty rig to trigger the camera. The silly putty would produce a lot of friction so the rubber band would slowly rotate something that when the rubber band released, it would take a single photo. Really low tech stuff.

Point is, aerial photography has been around forever and is currently at it's safest. It's ridiculous that the safe route is banned. Well, not banned, but certainly isn't supported.

 

[xuzme720]

One of my other hobbies are sport kites, 2 and 4 line. With wingspans on most of them approaching 8' (or better on one of my foils), they have plenty of payload for a camera. I guess I have no excuse for no footage on the windy days now...

 

[Tritium]

One of my other hobbies are sport kites, 2 and 4 line. With wingspans on most of them approaching 8' (or better on one of my foils), they have plenty of payload for a camera. I guess I have no excuse for no footage on the windy days now...

You too huh! (2 line anyway). I like a para-foil style for camera lifting. It flys at a pretty low angle but it has lift to spare. It also will pull a canoe very well although I haven't got my canoe wet in 19 years.

Thurmond

 

[utrmultirotors]

Seems to be a trend... I've got fixed bridle and LEI kites, from 2m to 17.5m... used to kite surf, now just the occasional buggying... but my multirotors keep me busy

 

[xuzme720]

I actually got a 5m 4 line foil for buggying, got a buggy and that was about it. I planned on using it in Galveston but by the time I got the buggy, the season had started for people to be on the beach and I quit going down there. I still fly the foil but don't have anywhere local to run with a buggy...

Plus it's not an inflatable foil so if it goes down it can be a bear to get airborne again...

 

[Guitarzan]

My kinda forum! Been trying to pay attention to these "laws" about making money and "drone" flying...
I'm trying to start a small business for aerial filming/photography. Currently built 2 tricopters, one for stunts/crashing and the other for a stable fpv platform. If permits must be attained then so be it, as long as the price or way of attaining them isn't impossible. Until the laws are clearer, I shall provide 'free' aerial shots to go with my usual ground taken stills and editing services. Now I need to strap my gopro to my 3.4m ozone 3 line foil kite!

 

[xuzme720]

3-line? I guess a single brake line? Oh, Ozone! Kite-boarding kite! Very nice!

 

[DDSFlyer]

Looks like Trappy won out! Wonder how this will all pan out, make them mad? or finally get their stuff in line.
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/commercial-drones-are-completely-legal-a-federal-judge-ruled

 

[xuzme720]

Good question...at this point it reall can go either way. I just hope the people doing the deciding realize just what we do and the differences between the media's version of "drone" and what the hobby is about.