FAA FINES PHILADELPHIA DRONE PILOT

[Morkie-Drone]

If getting the process for obtaining Part 107 is anywhere near as antiquated as 121 Dispatcher, then we've got a long way to go. Half the stuff being taught in Dispatcher certification so pilot-centric and has little to do with actually "dispatching" and flight planning, etc. - FAA is like any other gubmint bureaucracy... hopelessly antiquated in too may ways :-(

 

[FASTFJR]

Is he still broadcasting?

Yes, Frighting Lol

 

[dirkclod]

Guys I know this guy is odd and guess you have to like stuff like
he puts out but let’s not start making fun of him as enough of
that has been posted. This thread all 183 pages now is started to
just be repetitive post. If nothing new on this isn’t posted such as updates to what’s happening with him I’m going to close it.
Just a heads up as this is getting old. Most of you guys know me and know I mean what I say. The guy has a issue we
know that but let’s stop making fun of him.
Thanks.

 

[maelstrom]

The only thing I can add to this that the Man is fearless! I don’t have the nerve or intestinal fortitude to fly like that! If he needs donations to help him, I’m down for that!

I think the word you're looking for is reckless. That aside, are you saying that you'd be happy to fund someone who knowingly broke the law and was caught re-handed doing so?

 

[BigAl07]

If getting the process for obtaining Part 107 is anywhere near as antiquated as 121 Dispatcher, then we've got a long way to go. Half the stuff being taught in Dispatcher certification so pilot-centric and has little to do with actually "dispatching" and flight planning, etc. - FAA is like any other gubmint bureaucracy... hopelessly antiquated in too may ways :-(

Maybe look it up and do some research before making half cooked "assumptions".

Antiquated is about as far from Part 107 training & testing as you can get.

 

[Spongebon257]

I am not a drone pilot, but I have seen this guy's videos, and he's really annoying. I don't condone him breaking rules, but I am writing just to question whether people agree with the rules.

It seems like there are rules against flying over people and traffic and flying beyond the line of site. It seems like those rules basically make it impossible to fly in a city. That does not seem fair or practical to me. Why do you need line of site when you're really going to be controlling the drone from the view on the drone's camera? Why can't you fly over people and traffic if you're high enough not to hit anyone or anything, and you're able to control the drone and land safely? It does not seem likely a drone is going to fall out of the sky and hit people.

For however idiotic Mikey is, for however much he ignored the rules, he never seems to have come close to doing anything that could have hurt any people or property.

Again, I'm not condoning Mikey's behavior. I'm not saying he should break the rules. I'm just asking whether people think the rules are too strict. People can lobby the government to change rules they don't like.

 

[Classic flyer]

I am not a drone pilot, but I have seen this guy's videos, and he's really annoying. I don't condone him breaking rules, but I am writing just to question whether people agree with the rules.

It seems like there are rules against flying over people and traffic and flying beyond line of site. It seems like those rules basically make it impossible to fly in a city. That does not seem fair or practical to me. Why do you need line of site when you're really going to be controlling the drone from the view on the drone's camera? Why can't you fly over people and traffic if you're high enough not to hit anyone or anything, and you're able to control the drone and land safely? It does not seem likely a drone is going to fall out of the sky and hit people.

For however idiotic Mikey is, for however much he ignored the rules, he never seems to have come close to doing anything that could have hurt any people or property.

Again, I'm not condoning Mikey's behavior. I'm not saying he should break the rules. I'm just asking whether people think the rules are too strict. People can lobby the government to change rules they don't like.

The rules are in place for safety concerns....RISK MANAGEMENT/MITIGATION

 

[Vic Moss]

I am not a drone pilot, but I have seen this guy's videos, and he's really annoying. I don't condone him breaking rules, but I am writing just to question whether people agree with the rules.

It seems like there are rules against flying over people and traffic and flying beyond line of site. It seems like those rules basically make it impossible to fly in a city. That does not seem fair or practical to me. Why do you need line of site when you're really going to be controlling the drone from the view on the drone's camera? Why can't you fly over people and traffic if you're high enough not to hit anyone or anything, and you're able to control the drone and land safely? It does not seem likely a drone is going to fall out of the sky and hit people.

For however idiotic Mikey is, for however much he ignored the rules, he never seems to have come close to doing anything that could have hurt any people or property.

Again, I'm not condoning Mikey's behavior. I'm not saying he should break the rules. I'm just asking whether people think the rules are too strict. People can lobby the government to change rules they don't like.

The FAA tried for quite a while to get Mikey's attention. He continued to blow them off. They finally used this ploy to get his attention. It worked.

Yet he continues to fly way BVLOS, as well as blatantly over people.

To answer your question, yes, it is very difficult to fly in urban environments and not fly over people or moving vehicles. However, with appropriate safety mitigations, it's not that big of an issue. Anyone who's flown in the city can't say with 100% certainty that they've never flown over people or vehicles.

But if you do, be prepared to face the consequences if there is an incident. It's all about safety.

 

[MickF]

Interesting read...

FAA Fines Philadelphia Drone Pilot And Youtuber $184,500

The FAA has fined drone pilot Mikey from Philadelphia, better known as Youtube comedian PhillydroneLife, for $184,500 in civil penalties.

dronexl.co

Good. It needed to happen.

 

[Classic flyer]

You sir are 100% spot on

 

[Rich QR]

It seems like there are rules against flying over people and traffic and flying beyond line of site. It seems like those rules basically make it impossible to fly in a city. That does not seem fair or practical to me. Why do you need line of site when you're really going to be controlling the drone from the view on the drone's camera? Why can't you fly over people and traffic if you're high enough not to hit anyone or anything, and you're able to control the drone and land safely? It does not seem likely a drone is going to fall out of the sky and hit people.

I agree with the rules. Maybe not every word of every rule, but I broadly agree with the requirement to be able to see our drones as we're flying them, and I agree with the prohibition on flying over members of the public. After all, I'm a member of the public, and I don't particularly want drones crashing down on me or my kids. I enjoy having the right to fly, but with that right comes a very strong responsibility to avoid endangering anyone who didn't sign up for the risk.

A drone's camera can only see air traffic coming from within its field of view, and its field of view isn't wide enough to see to the sides and behind. Our drones fly much slower than most manned aircraft, and our drones are much smaller and more difficult to see than they are. As VFR pilots, we are responsible for seeing and avoiding other traffic, and to do that, we need to see.

In popular areas, I've encountered other UAVs while flying my drone. I was able to see and avoid them only because I had VLOS (they're really hard to see on that tiny screen, even when I know where to look). True, the "big sky" theory often works to avoid collisions, but over the long term, it's not reliable enough.

Read the "Crash and Flyaway Assistance" forum on this site long enough, and you'll see that drones do fall out of the sky, frequently enough, to the surprise of their owners. Propellors break, battery connections disconnect, ice forms on aero surfaces, etc. In cities, GPS can be lost in the canyons between buildings, causing the drone to go into ATTI mode, and many pilots don't have experience controlling a drone in ATTI mode, especially not while BVLOS.

 

[Spongebon257]

The rules are in place for safety concerns....RISK MANAGEMENT/MITIGATION

But that does not answer the question of whether the rules represent correct requirements for risk management and mitigation.

 

[Classic flyer]

But that does not answer the question of whether the rules represent correct requirements for risk management and mitigation.

I personally believe they do

 

[Thomas B]

But that does not answer the question of whether the rules represent correct requirements for risk management and mitigation.

Which is not the topic of this thread at any rate.
Maybe time to lock this thread.

 

[socaldronezone]

I am not a drone pilot, but I have seen this guy's videos, and he's really annoying. I don't condone him breaking rules, but I am writing just to question whether people agree with the rules.

It seems like there are rules against flying over people and traffic and flying beyond the line of site. It seems like those rules basically make it impossible to fly in a city. That does not seem fair or practical to me. Why do you need line of site when you're really going to be controlling the drone from the view on the drone's camera? Why can't you fly over people and traffic if you're high enough not to hit anyone or anything, and you're able to control the drone and land safely? It does not seem likely a drone is going to fall out of the sky and hit people.

For however idiotic Mikey is, for however much he ignored the rules, he never seems to have come close to doing anything that could have hurt any people or property.

Again, I'm not condoning Mikey's behavior. I'm not saying he should break the rules. I'm just asking whether people think the rules are too strict. People can lobby the government to change rules they don't like.

I would imagine some rules are to prevent mid air collision with other aircraft. Most others have been pushed by Amazon lobbyists.

 

[Meta4]

Most others have been pushed by Amazon lobbyists.

Which rules are you referring to?

 

[spsphotos]

I am not a drone pilot, but I have seen this guy's videos, and he's really annoying. I don't condone him breaking rules, but I am writing just to question whether people agree with the rules.

It seems like there are rules against flying over people and traffic and flying beyond the line of site. It seems like those rules basically make it impossible to fly in a city. That does not seem fair or practical to me. Why do you need line of site when you're really going to be controlling the drone from the view on the drone's camera? Why can't you fly over people and traffic if you're high enough not to hit anyone or anything, and you're able to control the drone and land safely? It does not seem likely a drone is going to fall out of the sky and hit people.

For however idiotic Mikey is, for however much he ignored the rules, he never seems to have come close to doing anything that could have hurt any people or property.

Again, I'm not condoning Mikey's behavior. I'm not saying he should break the rules. I'm just asking whether people think the rules are too strict. People can lobby the government to change rules they don't like.

If you are not a drone pilot are you here to learn before buying one? Ever wonder what would happen if a drone fell out of the sky from 200' and hit someone? Minimum, be cut up and bruised, but, more likely could kill or maim them. If it falls on a moving car could cause an accident where multiple people could get hurt or killed. As for line of sight....while many seem to ignore this rule, it's again for the safety of others. I've had occasions where helicopters have suddenly appeared and I've had to take evasive action..had I not had eyes on the drone I might have not been able to do that. The damage to the drone is nothing compared to causing damage or worse to a manned aircraft. Rules are not there to punish or be restrictive for the hell of it. The VLOS, flying over people/cars is even MORE important in urban areas. Drones are NOT toys. At least serious ones are not. Those $50 ones you fly in your house are toys...but the ones people in this forum are discussing are NOT...they are are AIRCRAFTS and safety rules need to apply.

 

[Badgersurfer]

I am not a drone pilot, but I have seen this guy's videos, and he's really annoying. I don't condone him breaking

OK in non drone pilot layman's terms..."Would you drive your car through a series of crossroads looking through a couple of toilet roll inserts"... The only safety surety are human eyes, brain, hands and the main reason why pilots still fly aircraft and drone pilots fly safe.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

"Would you drive your car through a series of crossroads looking through a couple of toilet roll inserts"

A great analogy.
Without peripheral vision and nearby sounds to alert a pilot, anything can creep in where other humans are present.
Not only manned light aircraft, but hard to distinguish powerlines etc can cause a crash in a populated area.

 

[Yeunglings]

I am not a drone pilot, but I have seen this guy's videos, and he's really annoying. I don't condone him breaking rules, but I am writing just to question whether people agree with the rules.

It seems like there are rules against flying over people and traffic and flying beyond the line of site. It seems like those rules basically make it impossible to fly in a city. That does not seem fair or practical to me. Why do you need line of site when you're really going to be controlling the drone from the view on the drone's camera? Why can't you fly over people and traffic if you're high enough not to hit anyone or anything, and you're able to control the drone and land safely? It does not seem likely a drone is going to fall out of the sky and hit people.

For however idiotic Mikey is, for however much he ignored the rules, he never seems to have come close to doing anything that could have hurt any people or property.

Again, I'm not condoning Mikey's behavior. I'm not saying he should break the rules. I'm just asking whether people think the rules are too strict. People can lobby the government to change rules they don't like.

Im not sure I found the right online calculator but knowing that Mikey was flying a Mavic 2 that weighs roughly 2 pounds and googling that it has a terminal velocity of approximately 45 miles an hour that would equate to being hit with a 1000lb force if he had bounced off of one of the buildings, the battery swelled enough to lose connectivity, a bird had attacked it or any number of other real world situations we have all encountered at least once. I've been flying for just a little more than a year and been attacked then knocked out the sky by some kind of falcon or eagle, did something to force atti mode once where it drifted in to the side of my house before I could recover then crashed and also have been in complete control right up until I wasn't and got blown about a mile away that ate up almost all of my battery getting back to my launch point. Accidents happen and since you can't plan for or prevent them all the FAA puts in rules to mitigate exposure to innocent people. Some rules make less sense than others but you can't pick and choose which ones to follow or ignore because it's not just your $1000 drone in harms way. People can get seriously hurt or possibly killed.