Ok, help me out... am I wrong?

[tlyons]

Like the recent ruling (South Carolina?) about not being able to use drones for mapping unless you're a licensed professional surveyor, are we going to see similar restrictions on drones being used by unlicensed roof inspectors?

I understand the reasoning behind that, legitimate trained professionals want to protect their trade. But why should the FAA give two hoots over whether anyone "gained" anything from flying their drone versus simply flying for fun? Flying for fun isn't any safer when nobody gains anything other than enjoyment.

If it's about safety, then the SAME rules should apply to everyone. Or, if it is considered acceptable that drones can be operated "safely" when they're being flown just for fun, then why can't they similarly be operated "safely" when checking your neighbour's roof?

If you're not having fun while flying, then much more stringent rules should apply? It makes no sense.

I like your thinking but you forget one thing: The FAA basically says everything you do with your drone is commercial. But we can make an exception, a very narrow exception and that is: If you start your flight with the intent to have fun, then you qualify for a recreational flight. Otherwise, if that sentence is not true, basically you are part 107. It's not going to matter the definition of commercial or work or money or any of that. And that's dangerous but I won't get into that now.

Two things:
1. Read the law. It says what it says. The FAA does not have authority to write laws, they are in the executive branch. The FAA cannot simply decide that everything is commercial.
2. The only sticking point is whether looking at your roof is recreational or commercial. Don't get tied up in knots. It is plainly *not* commercial and I find it difficult to believe any normal judge would think it was. So if it is not commercial, what is it? Here's the FAA when they are in a more normal mood, "Recreational or hobby UAS or drone use is flying for enjoyment and not for work, business purposes, or for compensation or hire."

From: https://www.faa.gov/faq/what-definition-recreational-or-hobby-use-uas-or-drone#

Unless you can cite a law or court case that says something else, looking at your or your neighbor's roof is clearly recreational. Assuming someone from the FAA cared (they don't) any other interpretation is a government overreach. What's next? They see you frowning while piloting and decide you're not enjoying it so its part 107?

Personally, I have never witnessed or even heard of an accurate account where the FAA was anything but very nice and willing to warn rather than punish unless the pilot was completely off the rails. I just surveyed my RV roof and since I saw some issues it was clearly not enjoyable. I will turn myself in and see what they say.

Good luck!

 

[Vic Moss]

Two things:
1. Read the law. It says what it says. The FAA does not have authority to write laws, they are in the executive branch. The FAA cannot simply decide that everything is commercial.
2. The only sticking point is whether looking at your roof is recreational or commercial. Don't get tied up in knots. It is plainly *not* commercial and I find it difficult to believe any normal judge would think it was. So if it is not commercial, what is it? Here's the FAA when they are in a more normal mood, "Recreational or hobby UAS or drone use is flying for enjoyment and not for work, business purposes, or for compensation or hire."

From: https://www.faa.gov/faq/what-definition-recreational-or-hobby-use-uas-or-drone#

Unless you can cite a law or court case that says something else, looking at your or your neighbor's roof is clearly recreational. Assuming someone from the FAA cared (they don't) any other interpretation is a government overreach. What's next? They see you frowning while piloting and decide you're not enjoying it so its part 107?

Personally, I have never witnessed or even heard of an accurate account where the FAA was anything but very nice and willing to warn rather than punish unless the pilot was completely off the rails. I just surveyed my RV roof and since I saw some issues it was clearly not enjoyable. I will turn myself in and see what they say.

Good luck!

You’re looking at it wrong.

The FAA does not define “commercial”. Nowhere in the regs is that does that word even appear.

107 is simply the default set of regulations for flying drones in the NAS. 44809 is the recreational exception.

And the FAA didn’t decide that anyway, it was Congress. Who absolutely has the full authority to define whatever it wants. Whether is passes judicial review is discussion for another time.

And I have little doubt you were being facetious, but don’t turn yourself in. The FAA doesn’t give a rip. That’s already been established.

 

[jsflyrv]

Speaking of "Don't base your actions on internet knowledge...", you fall into that category. Because you're wrong.

All three of the first scenarios are not recreational. They each are flights to determine damage to roofs, which is definitely NOT recreational. Since they're not recreational, they automatically fall into 107 territory. So you're wrong there.

Even your link to 44809 disagrees with you. First test for the recreational exception is: "The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes." Flying to check a roof is not "strictly for recreational purposes."

The bigger question is if the FAA would care. See my post above for that explanation.

Not trying to be a hard case here, we just need to make sure we give people the correct information. Your post didn't.

Nonsense, if you are not compensated in any way you are not flying commercial. I am a commercial pilot, If my neighbor wants me to fly him to grandmas house and he wants to give me gas money then it is a commercial operation. If I offer to fly him to grandma’s house just because I want to do it for fun then it is not a commercial operation. Same if I want to show my neighbor the roof of his house just because I want to it is not a commercial operation. If he gives me a beer afterward for doing it then that is compensation and makes it commercial.

 

[Robert Prior]

This is why I prefer Canada's approach (although I have some quibbles about the implementation). The intent of the flight doesn't matter at all for what level of pilot certification is required: all that matters is the drone used and the flight profile.

Intent still matters for things like insurance, in the same way that drivers insurance for personal and commercial drivers is different, but it doesn't govern the certification needed for sRPAS (drone) pilots.

 

[mavic3usa]

Nonsense, if you are not compensated in any way you are not flying commercial. I am a commercial pilot, If my neighbor wants me to fly him to grandmas house and he wants to give me gas money then it is a commercial operation. If I offer to fly him to grandma’s house just because I want to do it for fun then it is not a commercial operation. Same if I want to show my neighbor the roof of his house just because I want to it is not a commercial operation. If he gives me a beer afterward for doing it then that is compensation and makes it commercial.

Sorry, you're wrong. We are talking about flying drones not piloting aircraft. It's different than what you know from being a commercial pilot. It's just simply not the same. We aren't talking about whether what you are doing is commercial or not, we are talking about whether you need to acquire a part 107 license to fly your drone on that flight, or not. I doesn't matter what happens before or after the flight or even during the flight, the only thing that matter is what your intent when you lift off:

Let's think about it from a drone perspective only.

if I want to show my neighbor the roof of his house just because I want to it is not a commercial operation. If he gives me a beer afterward for doing it then that is compensation and makes it commercial.

When you lift off with your drone and your intent is to "show my neighbor the roof of his house" then you ask yourself are you flying for fun and is this recreational and if not, you need a part 107. It's not going to matter what happens in the minutes or hours or days after you land.

If your neighbor comes to you and says "Can you use your drone and show me the roof of my house, I want to see if there is a piece missing." You need a part 107 to do that. Every flight you take with your drone is a part 107 flight except the flight you lift off with only the intent of flying for fun and recreational purposes.

If you happen to be out flying your drone for fun (a recreational flight) and your neighbor walks up to you and says "cool, do you mind moving over a couple hundred yards and let me take a peek at my roof" and you show him, the flight is still recreational because when you took off, you intended to fly for fun. Later that night, you see him at the bar and he says "Let me buy you a beer for letting me see my roof" you honestly think if you drink that particular beer paid for by him, you think that drone flight you took this morning over his house converts into a illegal commercial flight? C'mon. You'll probably answer by saying "well you shouldn't accept the beer because you don't have a part 107...."

In case you haven't noticed, I'm trying to make a point.....

 

[Vic Moss]

Nonsense, if you are not compensated in any way you are not flying commercial.

You're missing the entire point. 107 is NOT the "commercial" regulations, they are the "default" regulations if you want to fly a drone in the NAS. Default, not commercial. Huge difference.

I am a commercial pilot, If my neighbor wants me to fly him to grandmas house and he wants to give me gas money then it is a commercial operation. If I offer to fly him to grandma’s house just because I want to do it for fun then it is not a commercial operation. Same if I want to show my neighbor the roof of his house just because I want to it is not a commercial operation. If he gives me a beer afterward for doing it then that is compensation and makes it commercial.

Compensation is irrelevant. The difference between the default set of rules (107), and the recreational exception (44809), is intent of flight. And the very first limitation listed under the 8 in 44809 states that "The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes."

Flying to check your neighbor's roof, while certainly neighborly and nice, is not recreational. Therefore, according to regulations, requires a 107.

But no FAA ASI is going to give a darn if you do it or not. There is the technical aspect of 107, and the spirit of the regulation.

And using manned aviation to define unmanned regulation is a non-starter. We don't fly under the same regs, and are subject to different rules. They're not equal.

You can say "nonsense" all you want, but that doesn't make you right. In the UAS world, it's either recreational or it's 107. At least in 99.99+% of all drone flights taken in the U.S.

 

[jsflyrv]

You're missing the entire point. 107 is NOT the "commercial" regulations, they are the "default" regulations if you want to fly a drone in the NAS. Default, not commercial. Huge difference.



Compensation is irrelevant. The difference between the default set of rules (107), and the recreational exception (44809), is intent of flight. And the very first limitation listed under the 8 in 44809 states that "The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes."

Flying to check your neighbor's roof, while certainly neighborly and nice, is not recreational. Therefore, according to regulations, requires a 107.

But no FAA ASI is going to give a darn if you do it or not. There is the technical aspect of 107, and the spirit of the regulation.

And using manned aviation to define unmanned regulation is a non-starter. We don't fly under the same regs, and are subject to different rules. They're not equal.

You can say "nonsense" all you want, but that doesn't make you right. In the UAS world, it's either recreational or it's 107. At least in 99.99+% of all drone flights taken in the U.S.

And the answer is still nonsense. Seems none of you understand the intend of 107. If I am not a 107 operator there is nothing in any regulation saying I cannot show my neighbor his roof. Get real.

 

[Vic Moss]

And the answer is still nonsense. Seems none of you understand the intend of 107. If I am not a 107 operator there is nothing in any regulation saying I cannot show my neighbor his roof. Get real.

Are you saying I don’t understand the intent of 107? Or other people in this thread don’t understand the intent of 107?

 

[jsflyrv]

Are you saying I don’t understand the intent of 107? Or other people in this thread don’t understand the intent of 107?

Yup you are mis interpreting it. If you are not Part 107 flying over your neighbor’s house is not for work or compensation….It “comes down to the purpose of your flight. Recreational or hobby use is flying for enjoyment and not for work, business purposes, or for compensation or hire….” Do you really think every person taking off with their drone is suppose to ask themselves is this a recreational flight or a business flight? If it is a flight for compensation or hire that is going to be established ahead of time and the operator will know they need to be Part 107.

 

[mavic3usa]

Do you really think every person taking off with their drone is suppose to ask themselves is this a recreational flight or a business flight?

I hate it too but it's what we are stuck with.

Every person taking off with their drone is supposed to ask themselves is this for fun/recreational and if the answer is NO then you need a part 107.........for anything else besides fun/recreational. Honestly, how difficult is that to understand? Recreational/fun is an *exception* and to my knowledge, it's the *only* exception.

 

[Vic Moss]

Yup you are mis interpreting it. If you are not Part 107 flying over your neighbor’s house is not for work or compensation….It “comes down to the purpose of your flight. Recreational or hobby use is flying for enjoyment and not for work, business purposes, or for compensation or hire….” Do you really think every person taking off with their drone is suppose to ask themselves is this a recreational flight or a business flight? If it is a flight for compensation or hire that is going to be established ahead of time and the operator will know they need to be Part 107.

Of course it comes down to the purpose of your flight. That's what I've been saying. And there are basically two options (we'll stay away from public COAs and 333). Those options are 107 (the default set of rules, NOT the commercial rules!), or 44809, the recreational exception.

Also as mentioned, in order to fly under 44809, the drone must be "flown strictly for recreational purposes". So yes, "every person taking off with their drone is suppose to ask themselves is this a recreational flight or a business default flight" (fixed that statement for you).

You can read all 8 limitations of 44809 here: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml...lim-title49-section44809&num=0&edition=prelim

Also, I've helped craft 107 regulations (as former DAC and AAAC member) as well as work with the FAA waiver office in order to help craft waiver approval policy. So yes, I know exactly what I'm talking about. There is NO commercial set of drone rules in the United States. They do not exist.

If you don't believe me, reach out to [email protected]. Ask them. Tell them I sent you. Ask them if 107 regulations are "commercial" or "default" rules. They'll say default. Because commercial drone regulations do not exist in the United States. At least not under 107. There are some Part 135 commercial rules, and we'll be seeing Part 108 likely Q3 for the NPRM, and those may include "commercial", but it's too early to say at this point.

 

[Vic Moss]

I hate it too but it's what we are stuck with.

Every person taking off with their drone is supposed to ask themselves is this for fun/recreational and if the answer is NO then you need a part 107.........for anything else besides fun/recreational. Honestly, how difficult is that to understand? Recreational/fun is an *exception* and to my knowledge, it's the *only* exception.

There are also Public COAs and a few remaining 333s. And we have Part 135 for deliveries, as well as Part 137 for ag spraying. But 99.99+% of all drone flights in this country are either 107 or 44809.

 

[jsflyrv]

I hate it too but it's what we are stuck with.

Every person taking off with their drone is supposed to ask themselves is this for fun/recreational and if the answer is NO then you need a part 107.........for anything else besides fun/recreational. Honestly, how difficult is that to understand? Recreational/fun is an *exception* and to my knowledge, it's the *only* exception.

This is my last comment, and I will only say this, You know before taking off if you are going to be compensated or not and if you need to be Part 107. I may go out this afternoon and fly my drone and decide wow this just is not fun today, you really think I need to be Part 107 because I am not having enjoyable time?

 

[msinger]

I may go out this afternoon and fly my drone and decide wow this just is not fun today, you really think I need to be Part 107 because I am not having enjoyable time?

While recreational flights aren't always enjoyable, they are always recreational.

 

[Vic Moss]

This is my last comment, and I will only say this, You know before taking off if you are going to be compensated or not and if you need to be Part 107. I may go out this afternoon and fly my drone and decide wow this just is not fun today, you really think I need to be Part 107 because I am not having enjoyable time?

"Compensation" has nothing to do with whether or not it's 107, except that it would then disqualify you from bring recreational. You're hung up on "Compensation". That's your problem. It's about recreational or default.

I have no doubt won't reach out to the FAA. But that would help educate you. Because you've got to let go of the "compensation" or not. There are a lot of non-compensated 107 flights. Because that doesn't matter.

 

[tstr14]

Perhaps this will clear the matter. I recently contacted the FAA about a flight to checkout my radio antenna. I have not yet tested for my license and was told in very clear terms "no". The flight would not be considered recreational and therefore would be a violation. That is straight from the "horse's mouth", though I will say he was very nice about it. So if I wish to inspect my antenna, I can either get licensed or climb up the tower myself.

 

[Zbip57]

Let's say you wake up one morning and decide to jump your drone over your house, just for fun. Assuming your house is under 400' tall, you're allowed to do that within the recreational exemption, as long as you're not being compensated for the flight with a Red Bull sponsorship, and are not intending to monetize your video.

If it's just for fun, you're all good to go, even if someone subsequently offers you a Red Bull sponsorship, or you subsequently choose to sell or monetize your video? The only thing that matters is your recreational intent at the time of the flight.

While overflying your own house just for fun, you happen to notice a crack in your chimney cap, or a loose shingle on your roof, or leaves blocking your rain gutters. That's all still fine and permissible under the recreational exemption, as long as your original intent for flying over your own house was just for fun.

But if you repeat the exact same flight over your own house the next day with the deliberate intent to take a better look at that crack in the chimney cap, the loose shingle, your rain gutters, or your radio antenna, that requires a full Part 107 licence, because any flight conducted for any useful purpose (other than for your idle amusement) requires you to know how to decipher a METAR report, read an Aviation Sectional Chart, etc., etc., etc.

If it's safe enough for anyone to do the flight when it's just for fun, why is it suddenly so much more dangerous and subject to much stricter regulations if you intend do anything at all useful with your drone?

I'd understand it if the tax department insisted on imposing different rates on your business operations versus your recreational pleasures. But the FAA should be concerned only on SAFETY.

How is it more or less safe to deliberately check your radio antenna versus glancing at it while just having fun?

Yes, I know. Them's the rules, as they apply in your country. But it's a ridiculous criteria on which to distinguish such a significant difference in the level of required regulation, no?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[jsflyrv]

Does not make one bit of difference other than you might cut into the Part 107 guys income. After all they helped set up the FARs.

 

[mavic3usa]

Let's say you wake up one morning and decide to jump your drone over your house, just for fun. Assuming your house is under 400' tall, you're allowed to do that within the recreational exemption, as long as you're not being compensated for the flight with a Red Bull sponsorship, and are not intending to monetize your video.

If it's just for fun, you're all good to go, even if someone subsequently offers you a Red Bull sponsorship, or you subsequently choose to sell or monetize your video? The only thing that matters is your recreational intent at the time of the flight.

While overflying your own house just for fun, you happen to notice a crack in your chimney cap, or a loose shingle on your roof, or leaves blocking your rain gutters. That's all still fine and permissible under the recreational exemption, as long as your original intent for flying over your own house was just for fun.

But if you repeat the exact same flight over your own house the next day with the deliberate intent to take a better look at that crack in the chimney cap, the loose shingle, your rain gutters, or your radio antenna, that requires a full Part 107 licence, because any flight conducted for any useful purpose (other than for your idle amusement) requires you to know how to decipher a METAR report, read an Aviation Sectional Chart, etc., etc., etc.

If it's safe enough for anyone to do the flight when it's just for fun, why is it suddenly so much more dangerous and subject to much stricter regulations if you intend do anything at all useful with your drone?

I'd understand it if the tax department insisted on imposing different rates on your business operations versus your recreational pleasures. But the FAA should be concerned only on SAFETY.

How is it more or less safe to deliberately check your radio antenna versus glancing at it while just having fun?

Yes, I know. Them's the rules, as they apply in your country. But it's a ridiculous criteria on which to distinguish such a significant difference in the level of required regulation, no?

I think you nailed it, 100%.

FAA rules regarding part 107 licensing and recreational flying is not directly related to the safety aspect. All drone flyers and flights are expected to be performed safely.

 

[Ratfink11]

Hi all,

Im still trying to keep frustration in chek over this faa wk safe space dji drone spy hate regs...appologize up front if I come across sideways at times... still really tikd about the investment I have in a three year old dji mavic 2 pro platform.

Have my 107 cert. Not that I care or it matters. It doesnt! Worthless...

All stems from EXTREME NEED for security at my biz location. Literally an hourly, daily challenge dealing with homeless drug addict thief losers, need for bvlos drone perimeter security flight ops on biz property.

Current remote security flight ops on property(32acres), point a ptz camera at drone viewing through internet while flying at 38 feet off ground on biz property "technically" meet vlos rules. Fly at night at times as Im not allowed to sleep or keep my sh#t from theft due to current climate. Security flight ops are always "an emergency" for many reasons. Large, hazardous in parts. Never know when a thief might get stuck to a garbage bag coated with Rodent glue.

Section of biz property required bvlos waiver which took about 6 months. Which if there was another way???

Long ramble, appologies, to explain current scenario, need, and classification.

Inquiry:
--- Any news on part 108 requirements and or exam release dates? Would be nice not to deal with waivers on private property flying 10-38 feet off ground.

---FYI, Law Enforcement are now flying drone bvlos night ops over cities, houses, people, moving cars, etc... from base ops all over the place... Im talkin miles away... someone splain that please?

---Anyone know of anyone that has hacked dji mavic 2 soft/firmware yet? Or who can? Anyone knows of anyone who has extensive knowledge in usb cellular modems?

Thanks