Advantages to part 107 current

[SmilingOgre]

I'll apologize up front. I feel as if I should be able to gather this information from existing threads as well as google search but I'm seeing too much disagreement and it is making my head spin. I am ready to purchase a course which I would want to finish by end of May. I am hoping to achieve an up to date list of advantages before making the purchase. I don't plan on "selling" any footage but I do plan on making a number of videos that will be used for promotions and advertising. Friends and family will get financial benefit from the videos.

 

[BigAl07]

I'll apologize up front. I feel as if I should be able to gather this information from existing threads as well as google search but I'm seeing too much disagreement and it is making my head spin. I am ready to purchase a course which I would want to finish by end of May. I am hoping to achieve an up to date list of advantages before making the purchase. I don't plan on "selling" any footage but I do plan on making a number of videos that will be used for promotions and advertising. Friends and family will get financial benefit from the videos.

• A small amount of "Street Creed" for takin the time/effort to get Part 107
• Flying LEGALLY when doing "stuff" for others.
• Better understanding (assumed) of Rules & Regulations and test results to verify
• Able to make $$ should the opportunity arise
• Save a LOT of $$ over getting caught "flying under Part 107 without having Part 107"
• It's the RIGHT thing to do if you want to fly with the INTENT to deliver DATA to others (notice I did not mention $$ at all).

 

[SmilingOgre]

• A small amount of "Street Creed" for takin the time/effort to get Part 107
• Flying LEGALLY when doing "stuff" for others.
• Better understanding (assumed) of Rules & Regulations and test results to verify
• Able to make $$ should the opportunity arise
• Save a LOT of $$ over getting caught "flying under Part 107 without having Part 107"
• It's the RIGHT thing to do if you want to fly with the INTENT to deliver DATA to others (notice I did not mention $$ at all).

Thank you. I also have caught blurbs about the relaxing of FAA regs to allow more flying over people and flying at night. Again, having a hard time getting definition to those two assertions.

 

[Starz]

flying at night.

The above is the main reason I’m not a fan of the 107. I live in the desert and during the summer it’s too hot at times during the day for flying cameras and the tender batteries that run them. If the FAA would provide some leeway on that item, I would reconsider my position.

 

[Rich QR]

I assume your question is asking about advantages of having a Part 107 certificate versus not having a Part 107 certificate? Or is it about using a course versus self-study, or advantages of one course versus a different courses?

BigAl07 already posted a good list of advantages to having a Part 107 certificate.

There are a few detailed things (like flying with less than 3 miles visibility) that are illegal under Part 107 but allowed under recreational rules, and there are other things (like flying above 400 feet AGL while near a tall structure) which are legal under Part 107 rules but illegal under recreational rules. If you have a Part 107 certificate, you can fly under either set of rules. Of course, you can only use the recreational rules if your flight is strictly for recreational purposes, but if you have your Part 107 certificate you can use the Part 107 rules while you're flying just for fun, too. Either way, your entire flight should be conducted under one consistent set of rules.

 

[BigAl07]

Thank you. I also have caught blurbs about the relaxing of FAA regs to allow more flying over people and flying at night. Again, having a hard time getting definition to those two assertions.

The rules are changing in Operations Over People shortly.... at least to some degree but not a lot yet.

Flying At Night training and allowance will SOON be included in Part 107 by default for those taking the training (or initial test) after March 16th. .

 

[Rich QR]

The above is the main reason I’m not a fan of the 107. I live in the desert and during the summer it’s too hot at times during the day for flying cameras and the tender batteries that run them. If the FAA would provide some leeway on that item, I would reconsider my position.

Operation at night under Part 107 is coming soon. Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR)

That's supposed to take effect after March 1, 2021 (real soon now) but I'm not sure if the training mentioned in that amendment is available yet.

 

[BigAl07]

Operation at night under Part 107 is coming soon. Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR)

That's supposed to take effect after March 1, 2021 (real soon now) but I'm not sure if the training mentioned in that amendment is available yet.

Things are currently delayed (new Admin needs time to review):

FAA Part 107 testing pushed to 3/16/21

Hi all. @BigAl07 asked me to post about a change to the Part 107 recurrence training will change from 3/1/21 to 3/16/21. This was so it would be in "accordance with the memorandum of January 20, 2021, from the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, titled “Regulatory Freeze Pending...

mavicpilots.com

 

[SmilingOgre]

Of course, you can only use the recreational rules if your flight is strictly for recreational purposes, but if you have your Part 107 certificate you can use the Part 107 rules while you're flying just for fun, too. Either way, your entire flight should be conducted under one consistent set of rules.

This is something I totally missed. I was under the impression that once one had the part107 the rules therein were binding and the recreational rules were no longer applicable. This makes it totally a no loose option. I'm completely in favor of getting the 107 just for the knowledge however I am old and most likely will not retain all of it for long. Just a fact of life. Per this and other responses, I will go ahead with a course. I anticipate that the new rules will be included prior to me testing as I don't plan on testing until late May. All of the projects where I will be able to take advantage of the license will occur June, July, and August.

 

[kshaw]

I am on the Board of a non-profit conservation organization that owns 51 acres of land near Washington, DC. I just got my Remote Pilot license and proposed that we permit members of our club and affiliated Scout troops fly drones on the proerty as a recreational youth/ family activity. I developed the rules that we would follow and effectively designed them to do recreational flying uner Part 107. The two main differences between Recreational rules and Part 107 is that Part 107 requires a Remote Pilot in Command and requires a Visual Observer.

 

[sar104]

I am on the Board of a non-profit conservation organization that owns 51 acres of land near Washington, DC. I just got my Remote Pilot license and proposed that we permit members of our club and affiliated Scout troops fly drones on the proerty as a recreational youth/ family activity. I developed the rules that we would follow and effectively designed them to do recreational flying uner Part 107.

If they are flying recreationally then why would you require them to do that under Part 107?

The two main differences between Recreational rules and Part 107 is that Part 107 requires a Remote Pilot in Command and requires a Visual Observer.

Part 107 does not require a visual observer.

 

[Tomk_]

Uhm...every drone flight has a remote pilot in command. Doesn't matter is recreational of part 107.

 

[Rich QR]

Uhm...every drone flight has a remote pilot in command. Doesn't matter is recreational of part 107.

Actually, the section 44809 rules (the rules for recreational flying without a pilot certificate) use the term "operator" and never mention the term "pilot in command". I believe this is because they want to reserve the term "pilot" for someone who holds a pilot certificate, but I'm not 100% sure about that reasoning.

U.S.C. Title 49 - TRANSPORTATION

In contrast, Part 107 uses the term "remote pilot in command" for the person who holds a remote pilot certificate and holds ultimate authority for the safety of the flight, and "person manipulating the controls" for the person who is actually moving the sticks around. Of course, those two roles may be filled by the same individual, and for most flights, they are.

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR)

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR) published by the Government Publishing Office

www.ecfr.gov

(see 107.12 and 107.19 in the above link)

I don't believe the terminology difference between "operator" for a section 44809 flight and "remote pilot in command" for a Part 107 flight has a significant real-world effect, other than the obvious one that a Part 107 pilot in command must hold a valid remote pilot certificate, while anyone is allowed to operate a 44809 flight, even if they hold no pilot certificate.

Both sets of rules allow for, but don't require, a separate individual designated as a visual observer.

 

[Tomk_]

You are correct. I hadn't thought it through. You are not a pilot unless certificated.