what I am finding

[kcobello]

We are going through the 333 process using an attorney. We like what they are doing. What I am finding as titled thread states is that with each passing moment we are being sent tighter restrictions for doing any AP RC imaging, for you people that are commercial now with all certs and pilot license. One reg is the 500' rule which I think eliminates a lot of what we do. I don't mean flying over crowds or in cities but do the math and the 500'. You just might be trapped imaging cornfields. In saying that I see where this could lead to exemptions which cost or tax you to death to maybe be able to have that 500' rule reduced to 250' and so on. We are getting a little upset because of how I preached and still do on the regs and the positives they can do.
Just a little rant on Friday the 13th... Kevin

 

[msinger]

One reg is the 500' rule which I think eliminates a lot of what we do.

The FAA will probably exempt you from that if you are in direct communication with spotters that are in VLOS of your aircraft.

 

[The Editor]

We are going through the 333 process using an attorney. We like what they are doing. What I am finding as titled thread states is that with each passing moment we are being sent tighter restrictions for doing any AP RC imaging, for you people that are commercial now with all certs and pilot license. One reg is the 500' rule which I think eliminates a lot of what we do. I don't mean flying over crowds or in cities but do the math and the 500'. You just might be trapped imaging cornfields. In saying that I see where this could lead to exemptions which cost or tax you to death to maybe be able to have that 500' rule reduced to 250' and so on. We are getting a little upset because of how I preached and still do on the regs and the positives they can do.
Just a little rant on Friday the 13th... Kevin

Is that 500' stand off still required for buildings, structures, vehicles, people etc that are deemed under your control?
If that is the case then it seems total bonkers and unworkable.
In the UK the CAA stipulate a 50 meter (30 metres when take off and landing) stand off for buildings/people etc NOT UNDER YOUR CONTROL. If you gained the relevant permission from the building owner they are deemed under your control and then you can do what you like....fly through open windows, up chimneys and land the aircraft on someone's head if they are happy for you to!
500' for everything including under your control and with permissions is just idiocy!

 

[kcobello]

I will send the link. There is more to it, but I just see the constant spending to be able to survive in the AP world. We really have not made a dime yet ( ) but have invested in five years about $25 or $30,000 dollars. It is great, I enjoy what we are doing and met some great people working for a paper and our own business but sooner or later we need to have some positive finances coming in. We will never give up though we just keep plugging away....

 

[kcobello]

The link to the rule.

FAA Rules Say You Can't Fly Your Drone Within 500 Feet of People or Property. - Hire a Drone Law Attorney - Section 333 Exemptions

 

[The Editor]

The link to the rule.

FAA Rules Say You Can't Fly Your Drone Within 500 Feet of People or Property. - Hire a Drone Law Attorney - Section 333 Exemptions

Ahhh - OK, got it. Seems sensible apart from the 500' is too far. It's not necessary.
Additionally you guys in the US do not seem to differentiate by weight class of UAV and the distance limits.

I think the CAA over in the UK are taking a much more proactive and sensible approach to the whole emerging UAV industry.
Under my standard permissions/exemptions I can operate 120' from any Building, structure, vessel, person etc not under my control (reduced to 100' when landing or taking off), and as close as a **** well like to anything under my control.
There are less stringent restrictions for sub 7kg aircraft. Slightly tighter for 7-20kg and a lot tighter for anything over 20kg. Again, all sensible.
Additionally, if you prove a need and safety case you can have less restrictions imposed - there is a company in London who are allowed to fly 30' from people, buildings, vehicles without their permission.

 

[Outta Control]

The link to the rule.

FAA Rules Say You Can't Fly Your Drone Within 500 Feet of People or Property. - Hire a Drone Law Attorney - Section 333 Exemptions

That is entirely accurate thus why some news agency are reluctant to use their drones for news coverage.

 

[John Locke]

I expect the new FAA rules next year will have provisions to do commercial work without a pilot license. However I do expect another type of course and certification to emerge and be required by the FAA to do commercial work. That only makes sense, since an airplane pilot doesn't necessarily make a good drone pilot. I expect the course to include study time, flight training time, flight testing and passing a test like a car driver test type scenario, to do commercial drone work. I'm all for this kind of approach to keep things safe and the press at bay. I am definitely not going to get a pilot license. If the new commercial drone rules accommodate non-pilots as I describe, I'll be entering the commercial drone world next year. I hope the Inspire 2 comes out at the same time .