Got a call from the FAA today

[Rick Stef]

After reviewing my videos it is a far stretch to come to a conclusion that I presented a hazard to bystanders but, after all, that's my opinion.
One lesson I have learned.....I won't be posting my Phantom videos to the public anymore.

When you post your videos (or i post my videos) on You Tube for free, how is that considered at a commercial level. It's FREE, I'm not at the pay level with in You Tube, I don't make any money.

 

[snerd]

When you post your videos (or i post my videos) on You Tube for free, how is that considered at a commercial level. It's FREE, I'm not at the pay level with in You Tube, I don't make any money.

YouTube makes money when they place ads in your videos, I believe.

 

[johan]

When you post your videos (or i post my videos) on You Tube for free, how is that considered at a commercial level. It's FREE, I'm not at the pay level with in You Tube, I don't make any money.

Because the FAA has established that the pilot does not have to make any money in order for the flight in question to be considered a commercial operation. Youtube makes money from it. Youtube is a company. You post on youtube, its a commercial operation. Or so they're trying to say.

 

[snerd]

Post on Vimeo instead. I'm looking at it now. No ads so no one makes money unless you choose to.

 

[SteveMann]

So Steve, when do you suspect the new rules to go into effect. The comment period is now closed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The comment period closed months ago (April 24) and I tried to gen some interest on this forum to discuss the proposed rules, but only two or three people ever responded. And I never saw a response from any of them. I read as many of the comments that I could, except for the moronic cut and paste ones, mostly from AMA members. It was easy to see them because 1) the respondents obviously did not read the proposed rules, and 2) they didn't even read the cut-n-paste response. The AMA template starts with:

I am writing in response to the FAA’s proposal to regulate small unmanned aircraft systems, including model aircraft. [Insert personal introduction details such as: I am a [job/profession], a member of the Academy of Model Aeronautics, and have been safely and responsibly flying model aircraft for ___ years. I am also a model aircraft club officer/educator/designer, etc.]​

And that is exactly how it was pasted into the FAA online response system.
And the signature on the template was:

Respectfully,
[Name]
[Optional] AMA Member Number: _________​

And, of course, this is exactly how they were signed.

There were at least a thousand responses filed like that.

Worse yet, even the AMA didn't read the NPRM. The body of the AMA template was railing against something not even in the NPRM and did not directly address a single line of the proposed rules. Way to go, AMA. Really elevates your credibility with the FAA. (Yes, I am a member).

I expect to see the new rules announced late next year with an effective date 90-days later. Hopefully some of my comments will be used.
The comment period is closed, but the comments are still online: [link]

Another reason I expect to see such a fast NPRM finalization is because three petitioners asked for an extension to the comment period. The Helicopter Association International, The U.S. Hang Gliding & Paragliding Association and The National Agricultural Aviation Association (four, but one of them was clearly a kook). The FAA denied all of them.

 

[SimonCB]

I don't have time to read all 8 pages but the pages I read nobody seems to have a problem with what you did.

When you fly over crowds, when you fly above 500, when you fly at night, you make us all look bad. The more people that fly over crowds the more people will get hurt and the more the laws will crack down.

Its stupid.

 

[dirkclod]

I don't have time to read all 8 pages but the pages I read nobody seems to have a problem with what you did.

When you fly over crowds, when you fly above 500, when you fly at night, you make us all look bad. The more people that fly over crowds the more people will get hurt and the more the laws will crack down.

Its stupid.

No time but to comment eh

 

[SimonCB]

So you think what he did was fine too do you?

 

[dirkclod]

So you think what he did was fine too do you?

Did I say that Mr no time to read but only comment

 

[SimonCB]

After reading 2 pages and only seeing support for what he did I'd rather read other posts here. It didn't look like anyone had an issue except me but hopefully I'm not alone.

We only have ourselves to blame for how the public see UAVs. Every guy that hurts someone is a major step back for something we all love.

Why take the risk?

 

[SimonCB]

Did I say that Mr no time to read but only comment

I apologise for jumping to that conclusion.

 

[snerd]

I don't have time to read all 8 pages but the pages I read nobody seems to have a problem with what you did.

When you fly over crowds, when you fly above 500, when you fly at night, you make us all look bad. The more people that fly over crowds the more people will get hurt and the more the laws will crack down.

Its stupid.

No, your post was stupid. If you don't want to bother to read the entire thread, you can't then make an informed post about it! I counted at least THREE (3) posters who challenged the OP on reckless flying.

 

[SimonCB]

No, your post was stupid. If you don't want to bother to read the entire thread, you can't then make an informed post about it! I counted at least THREE (3) posters who challenged the OP on reckless flying.

Then good. But its sad that just 4 people out of everyone who posted in the 8 pages took issue with it.

 

[dirkclod]

After reading 2 pages and only seeing support for what he did I'd rather read other posts here. It didn't look like anyone had an issue except me but hopefully I'm not alone.

We only have ourselves to blame for how the public see UAVs. Every guy that hurts someone is a major step back for something we all love.

Why take the risk?

Why did you take this one Simon

Last week I flew out to 4.8km (15,700 feet) I was on a slight hill with line of sight (no obstacles between me and the drone but of course I couldn't see it)

 

[snerd]

Then good. But its sad that just 4 people out of everyone who posted in the 8 pages took issue with it.

There is simply no way I or anyone else can influence others or tell them how to fly their birds. It's just not gonna happen. I can only be responsible for my own flying, and I quit worrying about everyone else long ago. I have much more fun now, too!

 

[LuvMyTJ]

Constructive post welcome, harassing post are not.
This thread is degrading rapidly.

I haven't met my quota for warnings yet this month so watch out

 

[Stevenas]

Why did you take this one Simon

"We only have ourselves to blame for how the public see UAVs. Every guy that hurts someone is a major step back for something we all love.

Why take the risk?"

Bravo Dirkclod, anxiously awaiting Simon's reply.....

 

[SimonCB]

"We only have ourselves to blame for how the public see UAVs. Every guy that hurts someone is a major step back for something we all love.

Why take the risk?"

Bravo Dirkclod, anxiously awaiting Simon's reply.....

What risk?

 

[Stevenas]

I don't have time to read all 8 pages but the pages I read nobody seems to have a problem with what you did.

When you fly over crowds, when you fly above 500, when you fly at night, you make us all look bad. The more people that fly over crowds the more people will get hurt and the more the laws will crack down.

Its stupid.

Hey, I'm new to this hobby and still learning. Yeah, I make mistakes, I guess you didn't starting out, right?
But my original post was concerning how the FAA contacted me and also I was asking if anyone had a similar experience.

 

[dirkclod]

What risk?

BLOS ..Ya know what was under ya when it was BLOS ?
Just saying Simon !