I was thinking of using my Mavic Pro 1 as a steady cam and it occurred to me, if I am not flying do I need to do the RID thing with it?
Will it still let me film, even in NFZ
Will it still let me film, even in NFZ
Can I use my Mavic Pro as a steady cam without RID registration?
- Thread starter marnat3
- Start date
The camera still works, but it won't have z-axis compensation, so to counter the bounce you get with forward movement, you'd have to adopt the 'ninja walk'.
Just great, I already have a "Silly Walk" (insert Monty Python image here.) from back surgery. Can a ninja walk with a limp?
Droning on and on...
Well-Known Member
The FAA has absolutely no jurisdiction or authority over any aircraft unless it flies.
While I agree that there's no issue with what the OP proposes, I think that statement is just a bit too simplistic to be accurate. I can't agree that FAA regs apply to a 767 rolling down the runway at 135 kts only when the wheels lose contact with the runway. And that 767 could never even get an airworthiness certificate without an ADS-B transponder.
I agree with you. I guess he should have said unless the aircraft is being operated.
Not even that. "And that 767 could never even get an airworthiness certificate without an ADS-B transponder."
We're singing off the same hymn sheet regarding lumbar slice'n'dice, so best wishes for the best possible outcome.
I recall seeing a z-axis compensator built into one of the twin handled Mavic pro cradles you can buy from eBay, whether that is still in production or not, I don't know. But if you've got a few hundred bucks spare, the Osmo Pocket 2 is possibly the best and most portable option and you can definitely get the z-axis rig for that... AND the footage would match almost seamlessly with the drone camera.
Last edited:
I have an Osmo mobile 3 but my phone (Galaxy S10) is a little heavy for it. I have tried it before and its a little slow to react to a panning shot if I remember right. I have not tried the tracking option yet. been a while since i have used it. Might be worth a revisit. Thank you.
I believe if it’s not being flown, you have absolutely nothing to worry about.
Droning on and on...
Well-Known Member
It was brief, but meant to make the point, assuming the obvious.
I've played this "find the irrelevant but correct exception" game enough in my life, not biting this time
The 767 has nothing to do with the FAA regs governing a UAV under 107.
The ops question is referring to a hand-held drone being carried not flown.
To his question about RID, it would not apply, he is not flying. And since the motors are not running, nor will they start if in a controlled area, he has nothing to worry about. The camera will still operate.
The OP said he wanted to use it as a ground based steady cam. In your stated hypothetical 767 scenario, if you were using that B767 as a steady cam (because you fitted a camera and gimbal to it), then it would not even need an airworthiness certificate, would it? Therefore, you would not need to have an ADS-B transponder fitted which makes your comment pointless and irrelevant. As has been stated, if you have a flying machine that you no longer will be flying, wishing only to use it as a land based camera, and that includes a drone through to your mentioned 767 aircraft, if you were never again going to leave the ground with it, you would not need any FAA certifications and would not come under any FAA requirements either.
Actually, it was already properly answered in post #6, simply and clearly, without any confusing reference to any 767 or irrelevant ADS-B to add confusion.
EssenYVR
Well-Known Member
This is a bit of an old thread, but I'm going to chime in for the benefit (amusement?) of others who may come across the thread.
My biggest concern with using the drone as a hand-held gimbal would be that it may still be detected as a drone by drone scanning tools that could be used by, for example, law enforcement or medivac flights. Even when not in flight, handheld use of the drone relies on it being in communication with the controller in order to start recording the video and monitoring it, and that means its radio signals could be picked up by such tools. So it could conceivably interfere with the ability for such flights to save lives.
This may be overthinking it, nevertheless I'd exercise caution and avoid using the drone this way if I was aware of any such nearby activity.
My biggest concern with using the drone as a hand-held gimbal would be that it may still be detected as a drone by drone scanning tools that could be used by, for example, law enforcement or medivac flights. Even when not in flight, handheld use of the drone relies on it being in communication with the controller in order to start recording the video and monitoring it, and that means its radio signals could be picked up by such tools. So it could conceivably interfere with the ability for such flights to save lives.
This may be overthinking it, nevertheless I'd exercise caution and avoid using the drone this way if I was aware of any such nearby activity.
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
1. Mini 2
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
New Threads
-
-
-
-
3 Arkutino beach, Ropotamo river and biggest sand dune
- Started by alex_markov
- Replies: 0
-
Forum statistics
