Is this Legal? Looking for opinions

[spamgnome]

What does the community think about the legality of filming a commercial like this?

Cookies – Truck Advertising – Cannabis

Outdoor advertising on mobile billboards, truck ads, and moving billboards with Patented Beacon Impression Analytics and Mobile Device Retargeting.

movia.media

 

[BigAl07]

What does the community think about the legality of filming a commercial like this?

Cookies – Truck Advertising – Cannabis

Outdoor advertising on mobile billboards, truck ads, and moving billboards with Patented Beacon Impression Analytics and Mobile Device Retargeting.

movia.media

It's hard to say for sure.... WHAT aircraft are they flying? What airspace is it in? Way too many variables to know for sure but it's not something I would put my name/company name on for sure.

 

[Yorkshire_Pud]

If, where the advert was made, the 'item' being advertised is legal and the flight was legal then why would there be a problem with it?

 

[spamgnome]

If, where the advert was made, the 'item' being advertised is legal and the flight was legal then why would there be a problem with it?

To me it looked like the drone was flying low over moving traffic and people.

 

[Yorkshire_Pud]

If the actual flight was illegal then, from comments I have seen on here, both the pilot and the company paying the pilot would be risking getting hammered by the FAA. If correct then given the product I would be somewhat surprised if they would fall into that trap.

 

[Ty Pilot]

As mentioned by BigAl07, it's hard to tell from a video and be positive about anything in regards to whether or not the flight is legal, but right off the bat (assuming the PIC is at least 107 and even assuming he is flying a Mini in Cat 1 operations) these might be some reasons the flight could be illegal.

§ 107.23 Hazardous operation.​

No person may:

(a) Operate a small unmanned aircraft system in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another; or
(b) Allow an object to be dropped from a small unmanned aircraft in a manner that creates an undue hazard to persons or property.

§ 107.39 Operation over human beings.​

No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft over a human being unless -

(a) That human being is directly participating in the operation of the small unmanned aircraft;
(b) That human being is located under a covered structure or inside a stationary vehicle that can provide reasonable protection from a falling small unmanned aircraft; or
(c) The operation meets the requirements of at least one of the operational categories specified in subpart D of this part.

§ 107.110 Category 1 operations.​

To conduct Category 1 operations -

(a) A remote pilot in command must use a small unmanned aircraft that -
(1) Weighs 0.55 pounds or less on takeoff and throughout the duration of each operation under Category 1, including everything that is on board or otherwise attached to the aircraft; and
(2) Does not contain any exposed rotating parts that would lacerate human skin upon impact with a human being.
(b) No remote pilot in command may operate a small unmanned aircraft in sustained flight over open-air assemblies of human beings unless the operation meets the requirements of either § 89.110 or § 89.115(a) of this chapter.

§ 107.145 Operations over moving vehicles.​

No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft over a human being located inside a moving vehicle unless the following conditions are met:

(a) The operation occurs in accordance with § 107.110 for Category 1 operations; § 107.115 for Category 2 operations; § 107.125 for Category 3 operations; or § 107.140 for Category 4 operations.
(b) For an operation under Category 1, Category 2, or Category 3, the small unmanned aircraft, throughout the operation -
(1) Must remain within or over a closed- or restricted-access site, and all human beings located inside a moving vehicle within the closed- or restricted-access site must be on notice that a small unmanned aircraft may fly over them; or
(2) Must not maintain sustained flight over moving vehicles.
(c) For a Category 4 operation, the small unmanned aircraft must -
(1) Have an airworthiness certificate issued under part 21 of this chapter.
(2) Be operated in accordance with the operating limitations specified in the approved Flight Manual or as otherwise specified by the Administrator. The operating limitations must not prohibit operations over human beings located inside moving vehicles.

 

[spamgnome]

Thanks for the replies. I turned down a gig that would have aimed to recreate such flights just because it seemed like it would break many rules, as Ty Pilot points out.

 

[FLDave]

Was this video done with a drone or just an elevated camera?

 

[spamgnome]

Was this video done with a drone or just an elevated camera?

As far as I know, it was a drone. I answered an ad for a drone pilot, and this is what I got back as an example of what was expected.

 

[Ty Pilot]

Was this video done with a drone or just an elevated camera?

I've seen big camera jibs but to be above two story buildings and travel 100 or more feet in a linear plane - in and around those locations would be next to impossible. This was shot with a drone.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Did you see that drone flying over our van

 

[LoudThunder]

It's hard to say for sure....

I disagree with your assessment…

I would definitely call the section at 0:24 seconds as the drone flies over the moving traffic entering the intersection from the light illegal (sustain flight - not transiting… over moving vehicle) and again at 0:35 seconds as the truck moves down the street. As for the rest, I cannot say definitely about any thing illegal, but I would guess that the drone is being controlled from a moving vehicle that is not located in a "Sparsely Populated Area…"

 

[LoudThunder]

Was this video done with a drone or just an elevated camera?

Must have been a drone as there were sequences when the camera was moving over moving traffic. A elevated camera would not be moving over civilian, non-participating vehicles as this was toooooo busy a street scene to have been a production…

 

[BigAl07]

I disagree with your assessment…

I would definitely call the section at 0:24 seconds as the drone flies over the moving traffic entering the intersection from the light illegal (sustain flight - not transiting… over moving vehicle) and again at 0:35 seconds as the truck moves down the street. As for the rest, I cannot say definitely about any thing illegal, but I would guess that the drone is being controlled from a moving vehicle that is not located in a "Sparsely Populated Area…"

You are welcome to disagree and guess etc but the fact of the matter is we have no idea the fine details of this flight nor do we know of any waivers etc issued. Also this could have been recorded under a different set of Rules & Regulations and who knows, flown under Section 333. We just have no way of knowing with any amount of certainty if this is illegal or not without some significant research into it.

At the end of the day anything you (or I or anyone else) can say about this is pure speculation and nothing more.

 

[spsphotos]

I disagree with your assessment…

I would definitely call the section at 0:24 seconds as the drone flies over the moving traffic entering the intersection from the light illegal (sustain flight - not transiting… over moving vehicle) and again at 0:35 seconds as the truck moves down the street. As for the rest, I cannot say definitely about any thing illegal, but I would guess that the drone is being controlled from a moving vehicle that is not located in a "Sparsely Populated Area…"

You do not know that. You are making assumptions based on the perspective you can see. You don't know what type of drone used, its zoom abilities or what is directly under it. I could easily take off at a location where there is NO traffic or people under the drone and zoom in to a perspective that makes you think I was flying over the cars. Again, this is not some "Joe Drone Look At Me I Can Fly Where Ever I Want and As Far as I Want" YouTuber, this is a professional advertising company. You also don't know what kind of waivers they might have. Unless that camera is pointing straight down you have NO idea what is under it.

 

[spamgnome]

You do not know that. You are making assumptions based on the perspective you can see. You don't know what type of drone used, its zoom abilities or what is directly under it. I could easily take off at a location where there is NO traffic or people under the drone and zoom in to a perspective that makes you think I was flying over the cars. Again, this is not some "Joe Drone Look At Me I Can Fly Where Ever I Want and As Far as I Want" YouTuber, this is a professional advertising company. You also don't know what kind of waivers they might have. Unless that camera is pointing straight down you have NO idea what is under it.

I can't disagree with you when you say that assumptions are being made, etc. However, this WAS shot by an amateur. The company that made this was looking for drone pilots to do exactly this type of shoot. When they reached out to me, they wanted a demo reel of flying in "high-traffic areas" while tracking a moving object. Waivers? Yeah, right.

 

[BigAl07]

Waivers? Yeah, right.

Debate and argue all you want but do so respectfully and let's tone down this degree of sarcasm. We're better than this.

 

[Ledaig]

Well, whilst I have limited knowledge of the rules where this has been filmed, here's the shadow of the drone if anyone wants to try to identify it

 

[LoudThunder]

You do not know that. You are making assumptions based on the perspective you can see.

You are right, I do not know that, but I do know what I can see, and since I am not partaking of their product, I can see numerous violations!

In Photo 1, the height of the CVS Drug's building and the street lights range approximately 30' to 35' and the drone is flying right over the moving traffic turning right from the street that is moving right to left…



In Photo 2, even more egregious is the drone is flying alongside the truck, over moving traffic at approximately 12' to 13', as the drone is almost level with the roof of the truck.



In Photo 3, the drone is flying at approximately 30' to 40', judging from the street lights and the 3rd to 4th story apartment level windows of the perspective. But once again, it is flying over moving traffic…



From my perspective, I figure that the only way this could be shot would be either flying FPV (beyond visual sight) or from a moving vehicle (also illegal in a non-sparsely populated area), but hey, like you said, "what do I know…"

So, for now, let's agree to disagree and let the FAA make that decision…

 

[spamgnome]

You are right, I do not know that, but I do know what I can see, and since I am not partaking of their product, I can see numerous violations!

In Photo 1, the height of the CVS Drug's building and the street lights range approximately 30' to 35' and the drone is flying right over the moving traffic turning right from the street that is moving right to left…

View attachment 156643

In Photo 2, even more egregious is the drone is flying alongside the truck, over moving traffic at approximately 12' to 13', as the drone is almost level with the roof of the truck.

View attachment 156644

In Photo 3, the drone is flying at approximately 30' to 40', judging from the street lights and the 3rd to 4th story apartment level windows of the perspective. But once again, it is flying over moving traffic…

View attachment 156645

From my perspective, I figure that the only way this could be shot would be either flying FPV (beyond visual sight) or from a moving vehicle (also illegal in a non-sparsely populated area), but hey, like you said, "what do I know…"

So, for now, let's agree to disagree and let the FAA make that decision…

aaaand this is why I turned this job down