Seriously? This is illegal?

[mavic3usa]

What??!? Why?

Perhaps a mod would care to weigh in and explain what was wrong with that post that necessitated removal.

probably because it wasn't the right answer.

 

[Droning on and on...]

So, what I'm gathering is there's people on both sides of the argument.
Which is exactly what a debate is.

Here's what the FAA said regarding a similar situation with a sailboat mast:



Everyone must make their own judgement, but I feel comfortable this applies generally to activity with one's own property, the de facto state of the rules given the FAA obviously hasn't the resources nor the interest to harass private citizens looking after their own property.

There's a bigger "common sense" principle at play here... You can get on a ladder and inspect your own gutters, and no one would ever think to force you to get a business license, follow all OSHA rules, etc. It's your house.

I believe people generally view simply using a drone in close proximity to do similar things is no different. Including the FAA, and this is why, as I've stated elsewhere in the forum FAA regulations are not God's word. They're regulations necessarily subject to interpretation, just like all regulations.

 

[Droning on and on...]

The law is the Law no matter where or HOW you break it.

Correct, but keep in mind the "law" is much more than simply the naked words passed by a legislative body.

It includes all findings and rulings by courts, administrative rulings, etc. The older the law, the larger this body of "clarification" may become, especially if the topic is controversial.

This is why it's a mistake to go to the letter of the regs and than use it as a bludgeon to beat someone into submission.

You might be wrong, despite what a strict reading clearly says. A strict reading lacks context, and context is a very important part of jurisprudence, all the way to the most extreme but rare instances of jury nullification.

When in doubt, best to ask those with the authority to make a judgement.

 

[mavic3usa]

I believe people generally view simply using a drone in close proximity to do similar things is no different. Including the FAA, and this is why, as I've stated elsewhere in the forum FAA regulations are not God's word. They're regulations necessarily subject to interpretation, just like all regulations.

I would tend to agree with this but the same can be said about the opposite when you are flying near or above someone else's property. When it's their property the distances start to enlarge and you have "you can't fly that drone 100 feet over my swimming pool." Can't have it both ways.

Honestly if I had my vote, ownership of the property below the NAS is irrelevant in either case.

I wish the other provisions were also open to interpretation. VLOS, 249g, 400 feet....are those fluid as well?

 

[Cafguy]

I am not defending the letter of the law just giving my interpretation of it. I, like you DO NOT agree with alot of it BUT its the law and I do try and read "The letter of the law" if you will, because that's what the Government would do.IF something like this was even investigated by the FAA I myself would be more concerned with the Tax evasion charges I may face from the IRS for not filling out the correct forms before doing the work.

 

[Daytona500]

Really time to lock this thread its getting stupid

 

[Meta4]

I myself would be more concerned with the Tax evasion charges I may face from the IRS for not filling out the correct forms before doing the work.

It's a strange world inside your imagination.
How has this got anything to do with the IRS?
If you climbed a ladder to check your roof, do you "fill out the correct forms before doing the work"?
Why would you have to fill out any forms to fly your drone?

 

[Bad Santa]

Really time to lock this thread its getting stupid

As the OP, I don't feel it's getting "stupid".
And why ask for a thread to be locked? It's just as easy for you to block it from your view.

With the respectful replies, and the points being made on both sides, I feel this is a good debate.

 

[Bad Santa]

Here's what the FAA said regarding a similar situation with a sailboat mast:

View attachment 178878

Everyone must make their own judgement, but I feel comfortable this applies generally to activity with one's own property, the de facto state of the rules given the FAA obviously hasn't the resources nor the interest to harass private citizens looking after their own property.

There's a bigger "common sense" principle at play here... You can get on a ladder and inspect your own gutters, and no one would ever think to force you to get a business license, follow all OSHA rules, etc. It's your house.

I believe people generally view simply using a drone in close proximity to do similar things is no different. Including the FAA, and this is why, as I've stated elsewhere in the forum FAA regulations are not God's word. They're regulations necessarily subject to interpretation, just like all regulations.

Assuming the email is legit, I think that makes it pretty clear that if "I" wanted to inspect "my" property, above eye level, a drone would be legal.
Reading the regulation regarding inspecting a roof, I believe that it was part of the commercial purposes context, rather than establishing the commercial purposes.

An example that I'm VERY knowledgeable about (in my area). If I want to do new construction on a house, that's not mine, I need a contractors license. Especially if I'm doing electrical or plumbing work.
Now, if it's MY house, I can do it all without a license. Just need to appropriate permits to do it.

I believe THAT is the intent of the regulation. If doing something for yourself, it's not commercial. If you're doing it for someone else, it IS commercial.

And, knowing a little about the FAA regulation in pilots licenses, there's a recreational license and commercial license (or rather certification). A private pilot (recreational) can fly with a friend as long as there's no commercial purpose to the flight. Simply put, if a pilots friend says "Hey, can you fly me over my property so I can see the layout from the air?" and doesn't pay the pilot, it's perfectly fine. If, however, the pilot charges the neighbor (including, but not limited to, trade) then it's commercial.
In both instances, if the friend takes pictures, it's none of the pilot's concern. There's nothing transactional about the flight. Conversely, the pilot taking pictures for the neighbor while the neighbor isn't on the plane, it becomes a dark grey area.

The reason it's grey is because the law prohibits the private pilot from using his flight for commerce but the line is whether he's restricted from taking pictures of the property but not the rest of the world. Again, then it becomes intent.

If the private pilot decided to take pictures of his neighbors property and then give it to him as a "I thought you'd enjoy this", it's a perfectly legal thing.

Summing it up, I don't think the FAA is going to care one iota if a person decided to video his own property, Whether he does or does not utilize those videos to assess repairs needed.

 

[Clipper707]

Greetings from Tampa FL. The night of Hurricane Milton was crazy. My windows were boarded up. The next morning my street, which has never flooded, was flooded and we had no electricity. There were roof shingles all over my driveway, lawn, and on my cars. I didn't know if they were from my own roof.

Turns out they were from my roof, and the reason I know this is because I used my Mini3 to take a look. There was absolutely nothing commercial about this flight.

 

[msinger]

Assuming the email is legit, I think that makes it pretty clear that if "I" wanted to inspect "my" property, above eye level, a drone would be legal.

The problem is you will often get a different answer depending on who responds to the email. That said, it would probably be safest to follow the rules as written.

But, if you have any doubts, certainly contact the FAA for guidance on your specific situation.

 

[msinger]

There was absolutely nothing commercial about this flight

Everything that's not recreational is commercial. That's how the rules are written.

 

[Bad Santa]

The problem is you will often get a different answer depending on who responds to the email. That said, it would probably be safest to follow the rules as written.

But, if you have any doubts, certainly contact the FAA for guidance on your specific situation.

The email would hold up in court. Just sayin'

 

[msinger]

The email would hold up in court. Just sayin'

I'm not so sure. Then again, I'm not a lawyer, nor have I ever played one on TV.

 

[Clipper707]

Everything that's not recreational is commercial. That's how the rules are written.

I guess it comes down to the legal definitions of recreational and commercial.

Perhaps I recreationally wondered what my roof looked like after a hurricane.

 

[msinger]

I guess it comes down to the legal definitions of recreational and commercial

You got it! That sounds simple, but it's apparently not since forum threads like this one keep popping up.

From here, the FAA states roof inspections are not recreational flights:

"Non-recreational drone flying include things like taking photos to help sell a property or service, roof inspections, or taking pictures of a high school football game for the school's website. Goodwill can also be considered non-recreational. This would include things like volunteering to use your drone to survey coastlines on behalf of a non-profit organization."

While you might enjoy inspecting roofs, it's likely not something the FAA would consider "personal enjoyment".

 

[Bad Santa]

You got it! That sounds simple, but it's apparently not since forum threads like this one keep popping up.

From here, the FAA states roof inspections are not recreational flights:

"Non-recreational drone flying include things like taking photos to help sell a property or service, roof inspections, or taking pictures of a high school football game for the school's website. Goodwill can also be considered non-recreational. This would include things like volunteering to use your drone to survey coastlines on behalf of a non-profit organization."

While you might enjoy inspecting roofs, it's likely not something the FAA would consider "personal enjoyment".

With which party do you think lies the burden of proof?

 

[Clipper707]

You got it! That sounds simple, but it's apparently not since forum threads like this one keep popping up.

From here, the FAA states roof inspections are not recreational flights:

"Non-recreational drone flying include things like taking photos to help sell a property or service, roof inspections, or taking pictures of a high school football game for the school's website. Goodwill can also be considered non-recreational. This would include things like volunteering to use your drone to survey coastlines on behalf of a non-profit organization."

While you might enjoy inspecting roofs, it's likely not something the FAA would consider "personal enjoyment".

A neighbor asked me to take a picture of her roof as well, but I was out of town.

Perhaps I'm slicing it thin here, but Is every flight to look at a roof a "roof inspection," given that I am 100% unaffiliated with roofs except for the fact I live under one? The first sentence seems to imply that selling a service/property is the aspect that makes it commercial.

In my case, I would argue that I was merely trying to inspect see if my roof had sustained any wind damage.

When I borrowed a neighbor's ladder to survey the roof more closely, could it be argued that was a commercial roof inspection?

Is taking photos of my house unrelated to a hurricane considered commercial? I took aerials of my house the day before the hurricane, so as to have "before" photos.

I understand "legal" and "logical" are often two different things.

 

[msinger]

I understand "legal" and "logical" are often two different things.

Yep! Per the law, what you're doing is likely not legal. However, the FAA is probably not going to come after you as that is not very logical.

Again though, please do reach out to the FAA if you have any questions. Since you described anything but flying for personal enjoyment here, it seems reasonable they would agree you weren't flying for personal enjoyment (or recreational purposes as the law states) if you describe the same scenarios to them.

 

[mavic3usa]

Am I the only one who thinks about it this way, am I just making this up? Every single drone flight you make requires a part 107 license. Every one...except: However, there is an exception. Qualify for the exception, no part 107 needed. Don't qualify for the exception, part 107 needed regardless what it is. Don't get caught up on the definitions of commercial and recreational, benefits, gains, pay, asking this, asking that, who's watching, who cares, who cares not, whatever.....because it's not a 2-party system. There's only 1 part and it's: you need a license. Except for fun.