Flights that require operator to have a Part 107 certificate.

[Photo Beaty]

I live 200 miles from the nearest testing site and I don't drive much anymore. I allowed my 107 to expire because of the problem of getting to a testing site.

 

[Montana John]

I live 200 miles from the nearest testing site and I don't drive much anymore. I allowed my 107 to expire because of the problem of getting to a testing site.

I'm thinkin' you're old enough to have learned sneaky?. Be careful, be clever, and don't let any kid under 70 tell you what to do!
If you live in Montana, I'd be honored to give you a ride to a test site.

 

[Texbow]

$150 is the cost of doing business and a drop in the bucket. How many people spend 6x that' for a new pair of FPV goggles? The FAA doesn't make any$$ from the test so your $150 doesn't even cover the cost of the paperwork for Part 107 let alone anything else.

If you're going to be a Big Boy and fly in the NAS then you need to pony up, learn the rules/regs, and be held accountable as such.

I agree with @sar104 as I'm eager to see what part 349 of the FAA ReAuthorization Act of 2018 ends up looking like when it's finalized.

I'm not confident that requiring hobbiest to take a test etc will solve the problem of irresponsible flying with a drone. Until there are meaningful consequences we will have nim wits doing things with drones that shed a negative light on responsible users. It may be wishful thinking that anything can be done to solve this. Take the problems we see with people misusing firearms as an example. When an idiot does something wrong using a gun the outcry is to punish all firearm users regardless if they are responsible owners or not.

 

[Texbow]

The fishing part of this may be OK with the FAA, but you local game warden may not be pleased.

It's perfectly legal to use a drone to drop your bait into the surf in Texas assuming all other regulations are maintained (distance to airport etc). I've never done it nor will I because I'm not a surf fisherman but I see it being done often.

 

[BigAl07]

I'm not confident that requiring hobbiest to take a test etc will solve the problem of irresponsible flying with a drone. Until there are meaningful consequences we will have nim wits doing things with drones that shed a negative light on responsible users. It may be wishful thinking that anything can be done to solve this. Take the problems we see with people misusing firearms as an example. When an idiot does something wrong using a gun the outcry is to punish all firearm users regardless if they are responsible owners or not.

While I agree that won't SOLVE the problem I can tell you from first hand experience that I see sUAS operators every day that simply don't know/understand the regulations. The vast majority sincerely want to follow the rules but simply don't know them. How can we expect everyone to be playing the same song if we aren't on the same page of our music?

You can't think that having NO LAWS will make the industry safer? While there will always be renegades in this industry (every industry in the world actually...it's human nature ) we need education and regulation in order to HELP maintain Aviation Safety.

Don't even get the Gun Control topic started. Let's just nip that one in the bud as it will not end well for this thread....

 

[Texbow]

While I agree that won't SOLVE the problem I can tell you from first hand experience that I see sUAS operators every day that simply don't know/understand the regulations. The vast majority sincerely want to follow the rules but simply don't know them. How can we expect everyone to be playing the same song if we aren't on the same page of our music?

You can't think that having NO LAWS will make the industry safer? While there will always be renegades in this industry (every industry in the world actually...it's human nature ) we need education and regulation in order to HELP maintain Aviation Safety.

Don't even get the Gun Control topic started. Let's just nip that one in the bud as it will not end well for this thread....

I agree with you that more education is better under any circumstance. We will always have trouble makers. Sorry about the G word. I haven't seen anyone triggered over that subject on here yet and really didn't consider that.

 

[BigAl07]

I agree with you that more education is better under any circumstance. We will always have trouble makers. Sorry about the G word. I haven't seen anyone triggered over that subject on here yet and really didn't consider that.

No problem. It happens and it's def a Powder Keg for some (see what I did there LOL) and we try to stay on top of it and keep it from blowing up (see what I did there LOL). It usually results in someone getting a vacation from the forum in just a few heated posts (sometimes just a break and sometimes a perm vacation depending on how bad it gets). It's just easier to try and head them off before they get any steam.

Safe flights,
Allen

 

[Photo Beaty]

Just a note on the 107 requirement for commercial work. Lately, especially since I did not renew my 107, I have done some drone shots for clients as a bonus and no additional cost to them, added to my regular photography business. This may be splitting hairs but I feel ok about it.

 

[sar104]

Just a note on the 107 requirement for commercial work. Lately, especially since I did not renew my 107, I have done some drone shots for clients as a bonus and no additional cost to them, added to my regular photography business. This may be splitting hairs but I feel ok about it.

If by "splitting hairs" you mean "illegal", I guess that's true.

 

[Photo Beaty]

Illegal is a bit harsh. I usually fly in wide open country that is so far from people, airports, etc that there is little concern that I will harm anyone. Even then I like to have a spotter with me. Surely there is room for being nice to someone by adding some drone photos to my regular land camera photos at no additional cost.

 

[BigAl07]

Just a note on the 107 requirement for commercial work. Lately, especially since I did not renew my 107, I have done some drone shots for clients as a bonus and no additional cost to them, added to my regular photography business. This may be splitting hairs but I feel ok about it.

You pretty much took any hope of it being legal OUT of the equation with your very own statement:

"I have done some drone shots for clients as a bonus and no additional cost to them, added to my regular photography business"

With that one statement you "pierced" the protective bubble of Hobby 2x. You can't HOBBY for another person and you can't add to your BUSINESS as a hobby.

 

[BigAl07]

Illegal is a bit harsh. I usually fly in wide open country that is so far from people, airports, etc that there is little concern that I will harm anyone. Even then I like to have a spotter with me. Surely there is room for being nice to someone by adding some drone photos to my regular land camera photos at no additional cost.

No need to take our word (although it's accurate) for it... call your local FSDO and propose the question to them verbatim. In no way is taking aerials for your client to add to your business project anything but commercial.

Below is a link so you can locate and get the contact # for your local FSDO:

Flight Standards District Offices (FSDO)

www.faa.gov

If it's violating the FAR it's illegal. That's not mean or harsh it's just a reality. You are either following the law (legal) or you're not (illegal).

 

[sar104]

Illegal is a bit harsh. I usually fly in wide open country that is so far from people, airports, etc that there is little concern that I will harm anyone. Even then I like to have a spotter with me. Surely there is room for being nice to someone by adding some drone photos to my regular land camera photos at no additional cost.

Absolutely there is room to be nice to them by including free aerial images. That room is in Part 107 however, not in Part 101.

 

[Photo Beaty]

Thanks for the link to FSDOs. I plan to follow up.

 

[Marko9219]

Unless using your drone as part of your business, why would you EVER get a 107?

 

[sar104]

Unless using your drone as part of your business, why would you EVER get a 107?

Volunteer work, such as search and rescue or other community services, any video or photography work that you might want to do for others, with or without compensation, flying near airports without having to notify them, etc..

 

[clingermac]

Ah, the many things you learn when you read posts on this forum!

If you get paid anything of value, you need 107. Paid nothing, you don't.

 

[sar104]

If you get paid anything of value, you need 107. Paid nothing, you don't.

No - that's incorrect. It has nothing to do with payment.

 

[Texbow]

You pretty much took any hope of it being legal OUT of the equation with your very own statement:

"I have done some drone shots for clients as a bonus and no additional cost to them, added to my regular photography business"

With that one statement you "pierced" the protective bubble of Hobby 2x. You can't HOBBY for another person and you can't add to your BUSINESS as a hobby.

I'm still perplexed about the term "Hobby" for someone else. If I'm flying with or for someone else during an event that can only be described as a hobby (non commercial) why would that not be considered recreational for me the pilot? In short it could be his hobby and my fun and recreation.

I also never see this coming into question by anyone with regulatory authority. HIs hobby, my hobby, my fun, my recreation, were all having fun. As long as I'm flying for recreational purposes I see this a totally non enforceable action.

 

[sar104]

I'm still perplexed about the term "Hobby" for someone else. If I'm flying with or for someone else during an event that can only be described as a hobby (non commercial) why would that not be considered recreational for me the pilot? In short it could be his hobby and my fun and recreation.

I also never see this coming into question by anyone with regulatory authority. HIs hobby, my hobby, my fun, my recreation, were all having fun. As long as I'm flying for recreational purposes I see this a totally non enforceable action.

Non-commercial is not necessarily the same as hobby. And it has been enforced by the FAA, for example in the field of volunteer search and rescue. It's unpaid and even described by many participants as a hobby, but the FAA clarified specifically that while non-commercial it is not recreational because it has a purpose beyond flying for fun, and issued cease and desist notices to a number of SAR volunteer organizations. A number of us on this forum have had these discussions directly with the FAA.

Now, whether the FAA is likely to pursue low-profile examples of this kind of thing is another matter entirely, but that wasn't what the question asked. If you want to expand the question then the answer is yes - it's required by law but no - you might not get caught. I'm well aware that many flights take place without Part 107 certification that are not covered by Part 101. If don't like the reasoning - call your FSDO and ask them. Or don't call them if you don't want an answer that you don't like.