Flying over people...

[ac0j]

This would in fact be a flight that requires Part 107 Certification. It is irrelevant whether or not any money changes hands.

We have been advised, even flying as a hobby and posting any imaging is commercial. Monies are generated by likes and shares on you tube or Facebook.

You better have a disaster plan as well as probably a waiver or 2.

The purpose of your flight is to benefit a city tourist attraction and generate "commercial" activity for the city. Your flight is not for your own personal enjoyment or relaxation (a hobby flight). The fact that you would do it for free doesn't matter. People try to skirt the 107 requirements all the time, but there is no question that you'll need a 107 certification to do this legally. Chances are you'll never get caught/fined over a flight like this, as enforcement is lax at best, but the laws are quite clear on this.

The intent of the flight sets how it is classified. You can receive compensation after-the-fact as a recreational flier, as long as your intent at the start of the flight was truly recreation.

"Commercial" does not mean what most people think it does, in this context.

Why are you picking on me @neggy ? My statements are based on these "professionals" advice to the OP. Is what I am saying not right in line with these reports? Maybe you can tell me what is wrong with my statement other than you dont want to agree with it?

 

[ac0j]

The FAA has clarified their stance since the hub-bub in 2015.

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Notice/N_8900.292.pdf

So, if the OP does this for the city and they put it on a "video website or social media" He is OK.

 

[microlinux]

So, if the OP does this for the city and they put it on a "video website or social media" He is OK.

Not quite. His intent at the start of the flight has to be for personal recreation. This is not the case here.

Had the OP been out doing this for fun . . then posted it on Youtube and the city somehow found it, they could use ask him to use it.

 

[ac0j]

Not quite. His intent at the start of the flight has to be for personal recreation. This is not the case here.

Had the OP been out doing this for fun . . then posted it on Youtube and the city somehow found it, they could use ask him to use it.

Intent is a hard thing to prove or disprove. Even more so if there is no money involved.
So many experts, so many interpretations. If you look at my multi quote post, My comments make sense based on the answers to the OP question. I feel sorry for people who come here with questions, and cant get a straight answer. Bottom line, He could do it with less than a .001% chance of anything happening to him for it. THAT is the reality.
Where is "intent" mentioned in this from your post?
"Electronic media posted on a video Web site does not automatically constitute a commercial operation or commercial purpose, or other non-hobby or non-recreational use."

 

[microlinux]

You can ask the FAA themselves if you are still in doubt. I agree, it is confusing.

As far as intent, this is it: I have a local, city owned, tourist site that wants a drone video of route to the site.

They are making a request, he didn't do it for fun with no original intent to give it to the city.

 

[ac0j]

You can ask the FAA themselves if you are still in doubt. I agree, it is confusing.

I dont really care to be honest. If I thought there was any value in having these totally worthless discussions with no real good answers I would go pass the part 107 test.
So, I will stick with telling the OP to go do a solid for his little town and not worry about it.

 

[bushie]

Thank goodness it is clearer here. (Australia) . Comercial flying is flyhing "For hire or reward" same as with manned aircraft.

I have over 1000 hrs on GA aircraft. Much of that was done as part of my work flying around north Australia to attend meetings etc. None of it was considered commercial. My employment did not require me to have a PPL, it just made me more efficient.

Same for my UAV. Unless someone is paying for my service it is not commercial

 

[cheolk]

You pray if the AC suddenly drop onto people

 

[Kcobello]

It goes back and forth with some great opinions. I have and know our local FSDO officer who sent us a letter regarding what we were doing wrong. We also use Traverse Legal who also explained the complexity in this matter with basically posting of videos and images. We were also accused by a competitor of us having posted images on our Smugmug account which we did get a letter for but was proven wrong because we had a 333, now a 107. Do what you want but my problem is we jumped the hoops, paid the money, have insurance and an atty., for our aerial business, but yet we still deal with the underachievers who skirt the rules. Its the American way right?

The cool videos that people post of beaches, nightflights, etc we could care less about. Its when reputable companies look to cheapen a product by hiring people who are not certified. Someday it will bite those companies in the can...

 

[ac0j]

Herein lies part of the issue. Just because you did all you did doesn’t mean everyone has to.
People that want to make a video for someone with no intention of making a dime should not get advice from people that feel like they are in competition. It’s a little different wouldn’t you say? You have a business based on using your flying cameras. The OP is just a guy with a toy willing to help out. I can see how this would disturb the people that see it as a missed chance to charge $500 to $1000 for the same thing just because of a 107 ticket and a business card.

 

[Kcobello]

No Herein lies your issue. I have over 25 years using orthoimagery, over 30 years working with radio control "toys"s, I am a GIS analyst who uses mapping for all types of projects. I built my own rigs (kit) and imagery relay systems for my aerial business before all the click and fly rigs came out. I also have been a photographer for over 35 years (part time). I am not just a 107 and business card. That my friend is a total lack of respect. Understand commercial because right now you dont. We see people flying illegally all the time. Especially this time of year with the festivals, rides and being all lit up. Who cares on those. There doing it for free, which we do a lot of charity work. Just because you have a phantom does'nt make you a responsible person when it comes to this business. Also truthfully I dont think its the 107'ers that are causing the problems with airports, emergency situations and ambulance calls. or at least I hope not.

 

[ac0j]

No Herein lies your issue. I have over 25 years using orthoimagery, over 30 years working with radio control "toys"s, I am a GIS analyst who uses mapping for all types of projects. I built my own rigs (kit) and imagery relay systems for my aerial business before all the click and fly rigs came out. I also have been a photographer for over 35 years (part time). I am not just a 107 and business card. That my friend is a total lack of respect. Understand commercial because right now you dont. We see people flying illegally all the time. Especially this time of year with the festivals, rides and being all lit up. Who cares on those. There doing it for free, which we do a lot of charity work. Just because you have a phantom does'nt make you a responsible person when it comes to this business. Also truthfully I dont think its the 107'ers that are causing the problems with airports, emergency situations and ambulance calls. or at least I hope not.

I do not own the drone because I take photos and video and post it. I have NEVER even had an inclination to do so. I just like to see what is over the hill, behind the trees and so forth.
I am a skilled electronics technician, auto body sheet metal specialist, A certified mobile electronics installer, An extra class amateur radio license holder, a skilled carpenter, A father, and a pretty darn good roller skater. So does that make me more credible now? Resumes dont make either of us a winner.
Nothing in the OP suggests usafe flying. NOTHING about having a part 107 makes you a better pilot than anyone else. Rre you sure it isnt all about the "I had to, why doest he"? He asked a simple question, and look what its turned into!

 

[Kcobello]

Its not about who can fly better. It’s about respect for the rules, airspace, and people who have put in the time, money and energy to try and do it right. I don’t understand the thought process on this. How about we remove and not use certification for an electrician? Remove the need to pay someone $65 an hour to put in a light switch? I work for a Town and I know we use ONLY licensed electricians and plumbers who overcharge for jobs that my grandma can do. The point of my post is to respect who is certified whether it be a sUAS pilot or a person who culls produce.

 

[Kcobello]

And as far as what he asked. He did it the right way. It was some of the comments that needed to be commented on.

 

[ac0j]

We can agree! I didn’t realize a part 107 registrant became certified in some way.
I have been shut down with the boom in new tech a few times. It sucks when something is lucrative then technology advances make it something a 9 year old with a paper route can do.
I used to employ 7 technicians that did nothing but fix VHS players, TVs and CD players. Now they are disposable and can be replaced for less than an hour of labor costs. It was really good while it lasted. Just like the Blockbuster video type places. Technology swallowed them up too!

 

[Kcobello]

Check out SPYMESAT an app for your phone. Drones will be short lived also. So get it while you can or just do your own thing and enjoy it.

 

[Mossiback]

The OP has posted that he will pass on the project. If someone else decides to go ahead with a similar opportunity I would advise that they think about liability. If something goes wrong and damage is done, who pays the bill?

 

[ac0j]

The OP has posted that he will pass on the project. If someone else decides to go ahead with a similar opportunity I would advise that they think about liability. If something goes wrong and damage is done, who pays the bill?

The person that causes the damage is responsible, of course. Whether he be an experienced 107 pilot, a hobby flyer, or a 9 year old that got the drone for Christmas.

 

[Kcobello]

The person that causes the damage is responsible, of course. Whether he be an experienced 107 pilot, a hobby flyer, or a 9 year old that got the drone for Christmas.

Depends on insurance. Doing commercial work you should have insurance. Ours is $600 a year (have to check with wife) and we have 2 million liability. Thats why I shake my head at those who fly over fairs, festivals, carnivals whatever. That is the biggest risk. The guy imaging winerys and farms may have better luck..

 

[ac0j]

If you are paying for insurance, It could be said you are "paying ahead" for any mishaps that may or may not occur.
I wouldnt be surprised that if after any major incident, the insurance company drops you and flags you as risky.
Making it impossible or very hard to get insured again.
As you said, insured or not, it would be a very good thing to think hard about doing risky things.