Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

FAA: Busting Myths about the FAA and Unmanned Aircraft

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by DeweyAXD, Feb 26, 2014.

  1. DeweyAXD

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Messages:
    818
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Oxfordshire, UK
    While not an American my self, I just saw this on the Phantom ownwers FB page.

    http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=76240

    Food for much discussion I'm sure. Myth #2 Makes me wonder what the so called '$18k inverstment for an FAA Legal Tether' would have to say.
     
  2. mikeydaddio

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2014
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since the subject comes up from time to time, I have an interesting question. Last night I was watching Amish Mafia which, knowing it's fake, I still enjoy watching. Anyway, several times they showed cut scenes showing overhead shots, coming up over trees to show a farm, etc. Having shot some video with the Phantom now, I can kinda tell sometimes when it was shot with a quad or something similar. Two shots in particular come to mind. One was shot up and through trees in such tight quarters it could not have been a full size aircraft. Another shot across a farm field showed (briefly) what appeared to be the shadow of a quad on the ground. Both were too high to be a boom.

    So... how do these shows get away with using those shots. They can't be considered anything other than commercial in nature since the shows make money for the networks! Are they just using them knowing no one can prove how they got them?

    Mike
     
  3. The Editor

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    568
    Likes Received:
    7
    Hmmmm... the last para of 'Myth #3 is interesting.....

    This means that every kid flying one of these in the neighborhood will need to adhere to FAA regulations. http://www.poweruptoys.com/

    Of course this means that the FAA are going to need to monitor every paper plane flight in the US to make sure whether it constitutes an R/C aircraft and then whether their guidelines are being followed !! :lol:

    Hmmm... there will need to be a big recruitment drive at the FAA.
     
  4. DeweyAXD

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Messages:
    818
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Oxfordshire, UK
    Ahhhh the discovery channel and their decline into awful fakeness :lol: - Very good question. They use them all a load of shows. One of their contractors crashed an S800 on a shoot for Jungle Gold in Ghana iirc (its on youtube somewhere). I've often wondered how they get approval to do this... according to that article it couldn't be FAA sanctioned (ok in Ghana it never needed to be but for Amish Mafia it would). They are commercialised TV shows so there is no way of hiding the fact the flight was for commercial use. All question we'll never get the answer too unless some court case comes up. Problem the FAA has is who to make the example of... a large TV network with deep pockets and big legal teams or a small scale (yet profitable) aerial photography business that can't afford to fight the case in court.

    It may also simply be a case of the FAA doing a similar thing to the CAA over here... abiding by the letter of law on paper (and on their website) but totally undermanned to enforce even fairly clearl cut violations so just making people aware of the trouble they 'should' get into on the hope it will prevent the masses from breaching it. Just my opinion on it of course.
     
  5. OI Photography

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2013
    Messages:
    5,542
    Likes Received:
    17
    Location:
    Clarksville, TN
    It's getting hard to watch an hour of prime-time TV over here now without seeing at least one drone-sourced shot in the program and/or commercials.
     
  6. mikeydaddio

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2014
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting. In the case of Amish Mafia, I did notice that not once was there a person in the frame. One thought was that the only real law on the books that the FAA can currently use to prosecute for commercial use of UAV's is their "flying in an unsafe manner" rule. And I guess if they are flying over what is obviously not a populated area that would be a hard case to try in court.

    Ultimately I think the FAA seems to be trying to use scare tactics on the "little guys" because as you said, the legislation not really being in place, I think if they tried to prosecute an entity with deep pockets, the FAA would likely fail... and that would set a precedent the FAA probably doesn't want.

    Mike
     
  7. OI Photography

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2013
    Messages:
    5,542
    Likes Received:
    17
    Location:
    Clarksville, TN
    Btw thanks for the link Dewey, I hadn't seen that yet.

    Interesting how they say "There are no shades of grey in FAA regulations"
     
  8. DeweyAXD

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Messages:
    818
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Oxfordshire, UK
    It would be an interesting case that is for sure.... hell it would make a better documentary program than most of the stuff on there (except I do have a soft spot for Fast'n'Loud these days :lol: )
     
  9. OI Photography

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2013
    Messages:
    5,542
    Likes Received:
    17
    Location:
    Clarksville, TN
    Yeah if something like that does go to trial, I'd love to see a bunch of drones among the reporters on the courthouse steps.

    "This is Bob Propwash, reporting live for Irony News..."
     
  10. mikeydaddio

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2014
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    0
    You know, the more I think about this, the more ludicrous the FAA's stance on this becomes. Think about it... The FAA says it is OK for you to fly your quad for a "hobby" as long as you meet some reasonable guidelines like under 400', certain distance from an airport or populous areas, and so on. But then... if you charge a fee for editing or supplying the footage captured during that same flight, somehow you charging for supplying footage captured in your "hobby" it makes it "illegal" or "unsafe"? Or, they would argue, you are flying safely until you charge but the moment you charge a fee, you are suddenly flying in an "unsafe manner"? This flies in the face of the FAA's charter and I'm pretty sure the FAA telling you that you are not allowed to charge for something that is (otherwise, without the fee) legal probably is contradictory to other rights in the U.S. constitution such as the right to be compensated for something you do (involuntary servitude as it were)! I mean really: it's not prostitution!

    I really think all the FAA is doing is propagating scare tactics in hopes it'll slow down the UAV industry long enough so that they can pass legislation on it before it "flies" out of control. I don't see how they could possibly win any case brought to trial given the status of the current regulations but, as someone else pointed out, it might not stop them from trying... and you having to pay hefty fees should they pick you to be the first to actually have to go to court to fight it.

    Mike
     
  11. ianwood

    ianwood Taco Wrangler
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2014
    Messages:
    4,910
    Likes Received:
    1,788
    Location:
    Lost Angeles
    Exactly, the FAA is totally full of crap. The distinction between commercial and personal makes no sense.

    I am really (seriously) tempted to set up an LLC, get some discount liability insurance and then get my friends to buy videos from me. I'll set up a website advertising my services and rates and testimonials of satisfied customers. At least one of my customers will be a dog or a cat. The videos will be of nothing in particular. Maybe dogs running on a beach, someone's house and yard or some friends sailing in their boat. I'll charge $10 for each video and email the FAA copies of the receipts.

    All will be flown safely and within the guidelines suggested by the FAA for RC hobbyists. I'll need to capture GPS data to prove the compliance and I'll provide Google Earth KML animations of each flight showing height and position. Each video will have a statement of safety precautions taken and compliance associated with it.
     
  12. Tripnman

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Messages:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Northern California
    Here's the part that sticks in my head after reading the linked article...

    Are these the only enforcement tools available? What comes after an order to stop? Is their only recourse to file suit against the UAS pilot or owners?

    Since the UAS operator would (likely) not have a certificate, FAA would have no threat of revocation (or black marks on your record) to use as leverage. Even their fall-back "Civil Penalty Action" (fines) only apply to certificate holders. FAA does work closely with NTSB and federal law enforcement when investigating serious infractions, accidents and criminal complaints but since none of their policies are law (yet), merely piloting a UAS for commercial gain is not illegal. If you're flying beyond LOS and crash into a lamp post that falls on tracks causing a train load of kittens to derail into a school for blind seals well then yes, there could be criminal and civil suits. But for taking photos of a property for sale and posting them online? I want to know what comes after an order to stop.
     
  13. DeweyAXD

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Messages:
    818
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Oxfordshire, UK
    Hey it could happen! Poor seals would never see it coming either :lol:
     
  14. ericdes

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2014
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Alright, so it seems clear the lwas in Canada, but the states...

    After all that has been said, nothing is in stone.

    Is it still for recreational purposes, no license, under 400 feet, 3 miles from an airport?
     
  15. BruceTS

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2013
    Messages:
    304
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Granada Hills CA
    I'll just wait for the judges ruling on Trappy's case............
     
  16. havasuphoto

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,284
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Lake Havasu, AZ
    To answer your Bold question above-Nothing!!!
    Read here;http://dronelawjournal.com/

    I understand the guy that created that site is an Attorney, and a member here. However, lately we are getting almost 1 post a day, all on the same subject; what the FAA can and cannot do. The answer is; they cannot do Anything!! The end!
    IF, we could just stick with 1 post...and just update that, it would be nice.

    I love the Kitten and Baby Seal analogy.....too funny!!!
     
  17. MILLER4PRESIDENT2020

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2013
    Messages:
    304
    Likes Received:
    17
    Myth #3: Commercial UAS operations are a “gray area” in FAA regulations.


    hahah bullcrap, the entire FAA structure is a gray area. I deal with them everyday and the FAA doesnt even realize their own rules half the time. What a f'ing joke. I used to flight instruct for an aviation lawyer. He told me If i ever get in trouble to call him because there is so much gray area in the FAR's that it is crazy. In the commercial airline world we had for years what was called "Maslows interpretation of flight time duty time rules." I always found it funny that someone who didn't write the rules is now considered to be the official "interpretation" of the rules. How about you just ask the original guy who wrote the rules what was considered right or wrong? because the whole section is so convoluted and open to debate that there is no right or wrong! and what if MY interpretation is different then Maslow's. Who granted Malow the seemingly unquestionable knowledge of the rules that his interpretation is the right one? Now that we have the new FAR 117 rest rules and no longer follow Maslows interpretation of the old rules, I get emails from my Union and from management every day stating "this is how we interpret the new rest rules." What is there to interpret? Tell me what is right and wrong! The answer. They can't! It's one big grey area! They don't even understand their own rules!

    It's like the bible, half the stuff contradicts the other half. And you always get in trouble for half that you broke, not the half that you follow. My guess is some intern at the FAA put this together in response to the case of the guy challenging the FAA saying that you don't have jursidiction over drones because they are not considered "aircraft", as a sort of preemptive strike to cover all their bases for future later court cases.

    Its too bad we dont just have someone from the FAA sit down with a respresentative from one of the model aircraft groups and draft out a set of common sense rules over a cup of coffee in the morning, instead it is going to take 5 years of fighting and people with fines levied against them. Typically government bureaucratic bullshit. I hope someone from the FAA reads this post. You guys are morons. Now the government is interfering with your health care as well.......
    Rant over.
     
  18. Buk

    Buk

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2013
    Messages:
    653
    Likes Received:
    29
    Location:
    Iowa, United States
  19. havasuphoto

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2013
    Messages:
    1,284
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Lake Havasu, AZ
    I flew Part 135....slightly different rules than 121(airlines). But, I've been "tapped out" on my Duty Time before, and had my Employer tell me that the flight from the Hospital back to base, was Part 91!!! I politely told him that it was my certificate that would get suspended, not his. They got me a rental car, I drove home, the "on-duty" pilot took the rental car back to the Hospital and picked up the Helicopter.

    Funny how your Employer, or even your Union(OPEIU here), can "tell" you what to do. BUT, they have nothing to lose!! You have a Suspension possible for the violation.

    Yes, I dealt with the FAA on almost a daily basis when I was flying too(I was also a Check Airman and CFII), and it was laughable, at best. They were my "friends". But, no 2 had the some interpretation of a rule.

    Trust me-the FAA is so far out in left field on this....they haven't a clue.
    IF, the FAA scares you-then do what you want. I'm not afraid of the FAA, at all.
    And the page that was posted, should be called Mythbusters.......because all their Myths, are still that. They DO NO have the Regulatory Authority-the end.
     
  20. mediaguru

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2013
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Utah
    Exactly. The ROSE BOWL had a drone shot flying up the facade of the stadium, over the Rose Bowl sign, and then exposing the stadium. You could see the shadow of the multirotor.