RunRyder RC
WATCH
 7 pages [ <<    <     3      4     ( 5 )     6      7     NEXT    >> ] 7905 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterMain Discussion › The 1st FAA Prosecution of a Civilian Drone UAV
10-22-2013 07:34 PM  4 years agoPost 81
whoamis

rrVeteran

san francisco, ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Perhaps the root issue here is that Mike is maintaining that FAA policy is not "law."

The secondary issue is that there seems to be some lack of clarity on what "speaking to the issues and not making personal/disparaging comments" means.

It seems pretty clear that this conversation has fully stalled.

I wish I could identify some nice upcoming event upon which this disagreement could evolve into some good healthy wagering.

oops, bounced it!

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-22-2013 07:51 PM  4 years agoPost 82
TrexVbar

rrNovice

Austin, Texas, USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I would like to say I'm shocked that individuals can't see the danger and risk to lives and property (on land or in the air) when it comes to flying drones for any use (private or otherwise) but that would be a lie.

The feds think there is an increased risk with commercial use of drones and therefore it is illegal. That is all there is to it. Like I said before, if you want to fight it, send a letter to your congressman. Or read the documents Nqna has provided to you and learn how you can make your operations legal. You asked for the regs and now that you have it, you don't want it? Silly.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-22-2013 08:18 PM  4 years agoPost 83
LaDon

rrVeteran

Fort Dodge .Ia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I have been reading all of this and this is my take whether right or wrong. You can mount cameras on helis and use them to film stuff providing you don't endanger anyone. You can take the film home and show it to ppl and say look what I did and that is great you can do that. You can film your neighbors house and GIVE it to him and that is ok. This guy did nothing wrong as far as the model part of the industry goes till one thing, He accepted money for his film. The reg that was posted here says you can video from your recreational model but the minute he accepted money that is where the FAA is stepping in and saying it is not recreational anymore. Do I think that is wrong sure I do as I think we are a country of free enterprise or supposedly are and he should be allowed to do it. Problem is the Feds will want their cut of the pie so they are sticking their nose in. I know a guy that flys powered parachute and takes pics for realestate companies in a big city and he is looking at it as hey I don't have wings so it is legal for me. I hate to see what happens when they catch up to him. This guys lawyer submitted a 40 page report on why it should be dismissed? Well of course he did that is his job whether he is right or wrong. 50% of the lawyers were wrong in this country because only one wins in a court battle. Charlie Mansons lawyer turned in paperwork stating how his client has done no wrong and look where he is. This will all play out in court and not a one of us can say for absolute 100% how this is gonna go. We can think it is gonna go this way or that but nobody knows for sure not even the lawyers and judges. The bad thing about all of this is even if the FAA loses in the end we will. I will guarantee you that if they do lose there will be laws and more restrictions put on us so what we should be doing here is telling ppl to be careful on what we do so that nothing is brought to their attention. Bottom line is even if the guy gets out of this we all are going to lose in the end because they will write the laws and pass them. I know AMA is fighting for us and hopefully they can stop them but the bad thing is the AMA is just not the NRA and don't carry the power that they do. This will all be interesting on how it plays out.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-22-2013 08:37 PM  4 years agoPost 84
TrexVbar

rrNovice

Austin, Texas, USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

It is federally owned airspace. Everywhere. Look up... the feds own it. They say what can and can not be done in their airspace.

It is easy to look at the drone hobby as a harmless hobby, an individual just hovering around their back yard with a camera on it, and that is where most people are at. Harmless fun. But there are plenty of youtube videos with privately owned drones a few miles up in federally controlled airspace. Did they have permission to be up there? I doubt it. So the line has to be drawn.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2013 02:54 AM  4 years agoPost 85
Mike Fortin

rrElite Veteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

It's shocking really.

However based on your interpretations, there should be no sponsored heli or airplane pilots, no heli or airplane competitions, no auto contests, no Speed Cup, no IRCHA and even weekend fun flys are considered commercial events since someone and or a club is profiting off of people flying models.

These are all commercial events and or sponsorships and by your interpretations illegal.

If there were such "laws" than why is it their cease and desist letters don't hold any weight and are dismissed by companies?

Why is a pilot fighting an "FAA" ruling that's very nature is based on 20+ year old language regarding FULL Size aircraft AND don't offer an exact definition of "business or commercial purposes" or "model aircraft"?

Either way, to each there own. If you don't have a dog in the fight, simply bow out and go on flying your helis and enjoying yourselves.

Those that choose to make a living fly models, so be it and let them worry about their industry and how they will govern themselves.

The FAA doesn't need fanboys like yourselves going into the model community and regurgitating what they already do.

Have Rotors, Will Fly!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2013 02:58 AM  4 years agoPost 86
TrexVbar

rrNovice

Austin, Texas, USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Mike, you lost. Let it go.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2013 03:06 AM  4 years agoPost 87
Mike Fortin

rrElite Veteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Yes, I lost.

Coming from a guy who's a "new heliman" on this forum and hiding behind a name like "Trexvbar"

Nice.

It's always interesting how guys like Chris who has 20+ years in this industry and myself with 11 years just have no idea what we are talking about.

I love the forums and the keyboard cowboys that roam them.

Oh and yes, completely disregard the fact that Chris and I have both met with FAA reps face to face.

Have Rotors, Will Fly!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2013 04:00 AM  4 years agoPost 88
TrexVbar

rrNovice

Austin, Texas, USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I like Vbar and Align. The two make one heck of a heli.

So the FAA has given you rights to fly drones "face to face?" Wow you must be special.

Reject reality all you want, the regulations are all there in black and white. The cease and desist letters aren't writing themselves. The individuals being prosecuted aren't prosecuting themselves.

I'm sure you gained a lot of customers from this exchange on here.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2013 04:21 AM  4 years agoPost 89
Mike Fortin

rrElite Veteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Again here we are beating a dead horse.

Believe what you wish and whatever makes you sleep well at night.

Have Rotors, Will Fly!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2013 04:53 AM  4 years agoPost 90
rcflyerheli

rrKey Veteran

Granbury, TX USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The only way for us all to put this to bed is to just wait and see what the outcome of the litigation will be. Only then will it prove which side is right. BTW, I have my opinion, but I'm not a lawyer or judge.

Goblin 700, Trex 700DFC, Gaui X7, Logo 690SX, Logo 600SX; Trex 470 Trex 500
Amain Team Rep

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2013 04:54 AM  4 years agoPost 91
thenewguy

rrElite Veteran

Corvallis, Oregon Where there is liquid sunshine!

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I sent this message in a PM, felt is was more appropriate.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2013 12:01 PM  4 years agoPost 92
Retired2011

rrElite Veteran

Lee's Summit, MO

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I'm sure you gained a lot of customers from this exchange on here
From what I've read here, he has gained me.

I still haven't seen any laws cited saying it was illegal...and that is what this is all about.

Chet

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2013 01:12 PM  4 years agoPost 93
unclejane

rrElite Veteran

santa fe, NM, USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Oh and yes, completely disregard the fact that Chris and I have both met with FAA reps face to face.
Speaking of that, if any of you guys are interested in the FAA's take on all this, you can take Mike and Chris's lead here and call your local FSDO (Flight Standards District Office). They're googleable and also in the local phone book. These are your local arms to the FAA.

I've used ours locally a couple times - once with an airspace question when something wasn't labeled on a sectional in an expected way and the other when I made a prop change on my big FPV platform. They're good folks there who are usually willing to help and exchange information.

It's worth a shot. Sometimes the local offices don't have ready access to everything and they may not know the answer to your questions. But eventually they can find something out for you.

My interests aren't and won't be commercial, since FPV is the only thing I plan to do. But if you do plan to build a business, FSDO should probably be on speed-dial in your phone. You definitely want to communicate with FAA and keep that communication going, especially if money is going to change hands.

That's what Mike and others are clearly doing, which IMO is the right way to approach the FAA on these issues. That can save a lot of really nightmarish legal problems later...

LS

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2013 01:25 PM  4 years agoPost 94
Mike Fortin

rrElite Veteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

In my area I actually met with the person who specifically handles UAS integration and not just a local office as they usually don't have much of a clue.

Funny, FAA doesn't even call them "drones" as he said its sort of a"dirty word".

The FAA is primarily concerned with crafts over 50lbs and hardly at all with smaller crafts.

Here is a great example, recently some goof in NYC crashed his Phantom into a building.

When local news agencies contacted the FAA, they specifically said what the guy was doing was not illegal according to them BUT they would prefer that people not fly over heavily populated areas.

Had there been a law against it, the FAA would have filed charges... They did not.

The guy in VA that had his Octo fall into a crowd at a race track.. Again nothing charged by the FAA.

Both of these stories made international headlines and nothing from the FAA.

Have Rotors, Will Fly!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-23-2013 02:03 PM  4 years agoPost 95
unclejane

rrElite Veteran

santa fe, NM, USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

In my area I actually met with the person who specifically handles UAS integration and not just a local office as they usually don't have much of a clue.
Funny, FAA doesn't even call them "drones" as he said its sort of a"dirty word".
The FAA is primarily concerned with crafts over 50lbs and hardly at all with smaller crafts.
Here is a great example, recently some goof in NYC crashed his Phantom into a building.
When local news agencies contacted the FAA, they specifically said what the guy was doing was not illegal according to them BUT they would prefer that people not fly over heavily populated areas.
Had there been a law against it, the FAA would have filed charges... They did not.
The guy in VA that had his Octo fall into a crowd at a race track.. Again nothing charged by the FAA.
Both of these stories made international headlines and nothing from the FAA.
See, now here you go fellers... This is some excellent info from a guy who's actually going down the commercial UAV/model aircraft usage path... Ya'll should quit attacking 'em and listen to what they're saying...

It is true also, that FSDO often won't know the specifics of your particular case. In my case, our local FSDO didn't know much about the regs governing experimentals at all, so it was a long time on the phone. So sometimes it takes a while. Again the FAA's brain just doesn't work like yours and my brains do, they're just a different animal altogether....

LS

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-24-2013 03:26 AM  4 years agoPost 96
Rsams

rrApprentice

Fort Dodge, IA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The thing that is different about the two crashes tho is the fact that the guy in the lawsuit was paid for his film that he made. The other 2 guys were just flying and filming which is totally legal by the way and crashed. The Feds don't care about that at all that falls in the recreational model aviation. Anyone that is arguing that it is illegal to fly a heli with a camera and filming is totally wrong. They can do that. The area that is being questioned by the feds is making film for hire. That is the one and only point that put them involved whether right or wrong It is also totally legal for Mike and anyone else to sell them. Talking to the local FSDO is a good place to start but is not that last place I would check. Not all policemen and feds or cia or anyone for that matter will always be completely right or totally understand every law in this country. Not every lawyer, judge or congressmen or congresswomen know every law. That is why they all have tons and tons of books and ppl to look all this up with./ I am not picking sides here and am willing to wait and see what happens but the bad thing is that we will all still lose in this situation and I will guarantee one thing, If the laws don't exist now they will soon and that is too bad.

Ryan,Team JR, Team Morgan Fuels, Team KDE Direct, RCBearings.com Tech Rep

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-24-2013 01:48 PM  4 years agoPost 97
Mike Fortin

rrElite Veteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

You make good points.

But again there is far more to be considered than just putting a camera on a copter and possibly getting paid for it.

What about the sponsored and paid pilots, events like XFC, Florida Jets and more. What about flying a replica airplane In a feature film or tv show.

These are all forms of "commercial" use.

This IS NOT about putting a camera in a copter and getting paid to provide images it's about "what is business and or commercial use".

Right now nothing has been defined nor has it ever been a problem until one day the FAA woke up and decided to break some chops because the media started throwing around the word "drone" and public perception was skewed to believe that we as hobbyists were suddenly flying Global Hawks and Predators over suburban America "ARMED" with a camera.

So don't make this so much about "aerial photography" so much as it's about everything that we as model aviation enthusiasts do.

Have Rotors, Will Fly!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-24-2013 02:25 PM  4 years agoPost 98
drdot

rrElite Veteran

So. California, Orange County.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

fwiw..

I have been reading this thread, and find three issues missed...People talk about "Government" as an entity separate from the populace...The founding documents declared "We the People" to be the government.
The " Feds" do NOT own the airspace. WE do.
Regulations and "laws" are generally written so that interpretation is possible, hence they are not "laws", but opinions. Lawyers twist opinions to suit outcomes, not facts.
The vast majority of folk participating in the "drone" portion of this hobby have never heard of the AMA, few are aware of any FAA involvement in the hobby, and of those who do, not many care.
Bottom line: We have too much government, life isn't safe....Get over it.

John.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-24-2013 05:29 PM  4 years agoPost 99
Rsams

rrApprentice

Fort Dodge, IA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

As far as.xfc and them go that their beady little brains haven't thought of it yet. It all starts somewhere and whether a guy likes it or not this is it. Same thing has happened in racing not so much here in Iowa yet but they hit them in Wisconsin and some I Minnesota but ppl could use their pickups and rvs to haul their race cars with no problem and then somebody said hey we can haul products with a pickup or rv and get around all the dot regs. Well we all know how that is going now pickups now that haul products have dot numbers on them and fall under the commercial vehicle laws now. Now they are saying you can win money with your racing so it is commercial and you and your pickup has to follow all regulations that a semi does. As far as the sponsored pilots go they are basically an employe for the company and the company already has their business started. Just like you do if you wanted a sponsored pilot you have to account for what he gets and run it through the taxes and everything else. I am kind of guessing here on that but I am pretty sure that is how that is figured. All I do know about this is with the government involved it won't be good that is a fact that can't be disputed.

Ryan,Team JR, Team Morgan Fuels, Team KDE Direct, RCBearings.com Tech Rep

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-24-2013 05:34 PM  4 years agoPost 100
Mike Fortin

rrElite Veteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Rsams,

I agree 100%.

Have Rotors, Will Fly!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 7 pages [ <<    <     3      4     ( 5 )     6      7     NEXT    >> ] 7905 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterMain Discussion › The 1st FAA Prosecution of a Civilian Drone UAV
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 17  Topic Subscribe

Monday, July 16 - 10:01 am - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online