Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Anyone know FAA regs on octocopter flights with an Epic ?

James L. Perry

James L. Perry

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
115
Reaction score
1
Points
18
Location
LOS ANGELES, CA.
I'm looking for an aerial service for a feature film using the octocopter and Epic.

Anyone know what is prohibited by FAA regs?

Thanks, JP
 
I think the rules are if you're over 400ft you need to let the nearest air traffic control know about your plans, unless your near an airport, then it may be lower than 400ft, depending on distance.
 
Thanks Louis. That helps. JP
 
I was going to try to answer this question in depth including airspace restrictions and current legislation, but why not send you to a much better source of information-- check out Bill Clary at www.gotaerial.com
He can pretty much answer any and all aerial questions you have
 
Unfortunately, it is illegal if you're doing it for commercial purposes no matter what. If it's not for commercial purposes, you can currently do anything you want as long it is under 400ft. The current laws are total BS and are in place as a temporary "place holder" while they work out the details of actual legislation. Unfortunately, the chances of our government actually getting something accomplished in the near future is nil at this point. In the mean time, there are many companies that specialize in multirotor camera platforms specifically for film/commercial work(http://www.dronedudes.com), I would contact them to see what they can do for you.
 
Thanks everyone. Very helpful info.

Best Regards, JP
 
James,

As I predicted several years ago, the current interim period we find ourselves in (with no specific FAA commercial UAV regulations in place) will be contested/decided in the courts. A landmark case has recently been filed. (see brief link below) It is a long read but very clearly defines why the current FAA policy in this matter does not carry the weight of law, and rather, is a significant departure from the long established regulatory lawmaking process for a federal regulatory agency. For something to be "illegal", laws or regulations must be on the books in the federal register as FAR's. These do not currently exist and the FAA is trying to cheat and morph existing full size regulations into applicability for UAV's while they continue to not do their jobs and fall behind the rest of the worlds developed nations in this arena. This case calls their bluff and should be interesting to follow.

http://www.kramerlevin.com/files/upload/FAA-v-Pirker.pdf
 
Wendell Adkins said:
These do not currently exist and the FAA is trying to cheat and morph existing full size regulations into applicability for UAV's while they continue to not do their jobs and fall behind the rest of the worlds developed nations in this arena.
Click to expand...

The regulations and laws here in Australia are quite harsh too.
At least its possible to fly commercially though and run a proper UAV business....however it takes about 6-9 months for all the certificates, permits and approvals to get through.
We received the operators license for our pilot only last week.
 
There is nothing illegal about UAV shoots unless you do reckless endangerment or disturb the peace somehow. We just talked to the FAA and it appears they are no longer trying to stop commercial cinematography operations as they have for the most part been safe and professional compared to all the amateurs out there.
 
Jim i will talk to you about this when gail and i get back from vacation. I have some more info. Essentially though anything above 400 feet agl and for hire is currently prohibited. In all cases you must stay out of controlled airspace which requires an airspace chart (current) and a knowledgeable person aka pilot to interpret. As a licensed (real) helicopter pilot i am fully knowledgeable of the regs and airspace delineation for any location. I have contacted the faa and will let you now when i hear back.
 
This case is just that and not a regulatory mandate. The faa holds the cards and can cite an airspace violation regardless of specific law to address a particular aircraft or operation. The consequences can be extreme and life/business altering if the feds push a violation. Be prepares to accept the risks if you are not absolutely certain of what you are doing in federal airspace and all airspace is federally controlled. As s licensed helicopter pilot I am aware of many cases imvovlving violations with full scale aitcraft and can say that the consequences can be devastating
 
Agree with Ernest - at this point, it is just a brief in a case. Both sides file arguments that eventually lead to a decision and you don't know until the ruling which side will prevail - and which parts of the brief are applicable.


As I mentioned in a recent thread Wendell started - I am hoping that he will provide further information as it becomes available.

You might want to jump over to that thread - I provided another link there that shows even those working professional jobs take on a risk.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?106410-Landmark-Case-for-UAV-Filming-in-the-US


Edit: If you can trust NPR and the show "All Things Considered", they did a story on this subject. Interesting, and might fill in some blanks: http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechcons...o-Come-By-2015
 
Last edited:
James...

Three comments/observations:

--- Wendell's link is informative as we have had many US inquiries about the same subject. I tried to explain to a client recently that the current status of the US sUAV regulations (or absence of...) was akin to the decision of visiting Cuba... Many US citizens fly through Cancun Mexico into Havana. Mexican/Cuban Customs knows not to stamp an American passport while transiting those control points...

In certain circumstances, is it legal for American's to visit Cuba - sure (just ask B and Jay Z). For "unofficial" visits, statistically, you're not likely to get caught... HOWEVER, should Treasury give you a call, that's probably not a discussion that will end without spending lots of time and money...

--- Second, many States have passed legislation to "override" the general disdain shared by many American's over the "drone" issue and resulting privacy. Should you elect to shoot somewhere, do a little extra homework on the State statues.

Texas just passed a law (effective this last September 2013) that makes it a Class C misdemeanor to "take a picture" without permission of the landowner...Sounds simple enough...but wait, what if I get 10 feet of the neighbor's adjoining property -- am I in violation if I don't have their release too?

Here is a good overview of the level of State legislation being passed -- This article is about the Texas statutes...

http://rt.com/usa/texas-drones-new-rules-876/

--- Finally, don't forget about the public perception should something go wrong...this is priceless (be sure to view the video from the on-board go-pro)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/02/drone-crash-new-york-city_n_4033566.html

Cheers.
 
Aaron McLane said:
There is nothing illegal about UAV shoots unless you do reckless endangerment or disturb the peace somehow. We just talked to the FAA and it appears they are no longer trying to stop commercial cinematography operations as they have for the most part been safe and professional compared to all the amateurs out there.
Click to expand...

Aaron...Did you tape record that conversation...? I'd be interested to see if someone else calls up and asks the same question whether or not we would get the same answer...per my link above on the NY incident, the "commercial" definition portion may be a thin line.

On a side note, some of our Houston staff were in a UAV training session last week and had a catastrophic material failure - a nut and bolt had stripped on a 500 class Century Radikal - resulting in rotor separation at about 2200 rpms. The AMA instructor had 20 years of experience and had never experienced that type of incident before -- You can never be too cautious...those birds are complex machines and they will break...
 
Brian F Kobylarz said:
Agree with Ernest - at this point, it is just a brief in a case.
Click to expand...

Brian...Technically, its a motion to dismiss. Should the presiding judge agree with the motion's arguments at the hearing, he/she could rule that Pirker's counsel is correct and the case be immediately dismissed -- that is the best outcome for Pirker... Such a dismissal, in my opinion, would severely curtail the FAA's "aggressive" behavior that was laid out in the document.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Pirker...
 
Jack Cooper said:
Brian...Technically, its a motion to dismiss. Should the presiding judge agree with the motion's arguments at the hearing, he/she could rule that Pirker's counsel is correct and the case be immediately dismissed -- that is the best outcome for Pirker... Such a dismissal, in my opinion, would severely curtail the FAA's "aggressive" behavior that was laid out in the document.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Pirker...
Click to expand...

Jack... Appreciate the clarification. I never had aspirations towards the legal profession and it shows - I can take pride in that!

Glad that you have joined the discussion. There has been a lot of speculative information presented as fact which can get folks in hot water. I'm really looking forward to the day the regulations are nailed down.
In the right hands, with the right equipment and a good safety checklist, these platforms have the potential to provide stunning POV's for our cameras.

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top