Weak FAA response

[allen.engler]

I was contacted by a new commercial customer who wanted to be quoted for a drone shoot of 20+ buildings of work they completed as a "customer spotlight." They told me they needed a licensed pilot because they wanted to do this, but they don't have the FAA107 license though he has a nice drone. I informed him of our hourly rare for his projects and through talking to the owner, he had wanted us to use his drone so the shoot would cost less money [emoji626]. The next evening, the owner posted his commercial drone imagery every day on Facebook for advertising for a few weeks without a 107.

We contacted the Indianapolis faa center, " I forget the name of the branch" by email. Two days later, I get a call requesting additional detail. Thirty minutes after talking to the faa, I get a call back saying they have investigated. I will paraphrase their response,

"The pilot is thinking about getting their 107. I have instructed to them the difference between flying for personal use and commercial use. If you don't have any questions, I am marking this complaint as completed."

I was shocked and failed to push the concern.

It made me wonder how many times this happens throughout the [emoji631]. The actual commercial 107 pilots that spend time and money to go through the proper channels is for what if it's not being upheld?


Does anyone have a similar story?

 

[brett8883]

I was contacted by a new commercial customer who wanted to be quoted for a drone shoot of 20+ buildings of work they completed as a "customer spotlight." They told me they needed a licensed pilot because they wanted to do this, but they don't have the FAA107 license though he has a nice drone. I informed him of our hourly rare for his projects and through talking to the owner, he had wanted us to use his drone so the shoot would cost less money [emoji626]. The next evening, the owner posted his commercial drone imagery every day on Facebook for advertising for a few weeks without a 107.

We contacted the Indianapolis faa center, " I forget the name of the branch" by email. Two days later, I get a call requesting additional detail. Thirty minutes after talking to the faa, I get a call back saying they have investigated. I will paraphrase their response,

"The pilot is thinking about getting their 107. I have instructed to them the difference between flying for personal use and commercial use. If you don't have any questions, I am marking this complaint as completed."

I was shocked and failed to push the concern.

It made me wonder how many times this happens throughout the [emoji631]. The actual commercial 107 pilots that spend time and money to go through the proper channels is for what if it's not being upheld?


Does anyone have a similar story?

I’m just curious more than anything did you offer him a discount for just standing around being PIC or did you take the stance that if you are gonna be there it costs you the same in opportunity cost wether you are doing the flying or not?

The FAA did call him which probably had more of an effect then you think. They have said that’s what they do for first time offenders. It’s somewhat ironic that him reaching out to you trying to do the right thing is how he got in trouble. If he just did it and didn’t even try to do it right probably nobody would have been the wiser. Just an observation.

I can’t help but feel like if they FAA came down hard on very infraction that might not be good for us 107 pilots in the bigger picture.

 

[Bxr532001]

I was contacted by a new commercial customer who wanted to be quoted for a drone shoot of 20+ buildings of work they completed as a "customer spotlight." They told me they needed a licensed pilot because they wanted to do this, but they don't have the FAA107 license though he has a nice drone. I informed him of our hourly rare for his projects and through talking to the owner, he had wanted us to use his drone so the shoot would cost less money [emoji626]. The next evening, the owner posted his commercial drone imagery every day on Facebook for advertising for a few weeks without a 107.

We contacted the Indianapolis faa center, " I forget the name of the branch" by email. Two days later, I get a call requesting additional detail. Thirty minutes after talking to the faa, I get a call back saying they have investigated. I will paraphrase their response,

"The pilot is thinking about getting their 107. I have instructed to them the difference between flying for personal use and commercial use. If you don't have any questions, I am marking this complaint as completed."

I was shocked and failed to push the concern.

It made me wonder how many times this happens throughout the [emoji631]. The actual commercial 107 pilots that spend time and money to go through the proper channels is for what if it's not being upheld?


Does anyone have a similar story?

I make two points when quoting a job, I am FAA licensed and I carry flight insurance. I also stress the importance of being a licensed pilot.

 

[allen.engler]

I’m just curious more than anything did you offer him a discount for just standing around being PIC or did you take the stance that if you are gonna be there it costs you the same in opportunity cost wether you are doing the flying or not?

The FAA did call him which probably had more of an effect then you think. They have said that’s what they do for first time offenders. It’s somewhat ironic that him reaching out to you trying to do the right thing is how he got in trouble. If he just did it and didn’t even try to do it right probably nobody would have been the wiser. Just an observation.

I can’t help but feel like if they FAA came down hard on very infraction that might not be good for us 107 pilots in the bigger picture.

Very true. I was hoping to have more discussion with him about the drone projects. I've reached out several times without success though we have worked on different business together with him but the drone stuff doesn't get brought up. This was all before the report.

 

[Ty Pilot]

Sounds to me like the 'potential' customer may have already been using their own drone to take pictures and found out that they would need a certified PIC to be legal. At that point they contacted you just to see what that would cost and decided they didn't want to pay and went ahead and posted imagery for commercial purposes anyway. Now they know you turned them in; but to me, thats no big loss as they have demonstrated that they don'r respect your efforts to do things correctly and by the book nor the time and expensive you have put into your craft.

If they won't follow the rules of the FAA, why would they listen and follow the commands of a PIC during a flight? This is not someone I would build a working or business relationship with.

 

[usaken]

The question I have is if they are asking you to Fly their bird, can they, as unlicensed owners, register their drone as commercial 107?

 

[Wilbur]

No, you, or a 107 holder. He is a hobbiest and would have to register his drone accordingly.

The question I have is if they are asking you to Fly their bird, can they, as unlicensed owners, register their drone as commercial 107?

 

[sar104]

You could fly his drone on a 107 mission even tho he registered it under hobbiest. If that helps.

Are you sure about that? As far as I can see the only way that you are not required to satisfy 107.13 is if you are flying under the Exception for Limited Recreational Operations of Unmanned Aircraft, which such a flight would obviously not be covered by.

 

[Ty Pilot]

If a 107 is asked to fly (or PIC) a drone commercially, that is currently used for recreational purpose, he/she would need to register it under their 107 certification, even if the owner of the drone is a recreational user and registered. Keep in mind that recreational users do not register individual aircraft - they are in fact registered themselves. Only when flown for commercial purposes would the specific aircraft (serial number) then need to be linked to the Pilot in Command

 

[Wilbur]

Not 100% learned something. Thank you.

Are you sure about that? As far as I can see the only way that you are not required to satisfy 107.13 is if you are flying under the Exception for Limited Recreational Operations of Unmanned Aircraft, which such a flight would obviously not be covered by.

 

[sar104]

I'd feel better if my bad info could be deleted. Thank you.

If you think that it is incorrect you can edit the post. I asked the question because it doesn't seem to be specifically addressed in the law - all the provisions read as if it is assumed that the owner and operator are the same entity.