Hi everyone I am ready to buy a P3P and have a question. My daughter has a small photography business and I thought it would be fun to help her every now and then with photos from a drone. I have had numerous rc coppters, planes and cars so I do have experience to some degree. Would I have to have any speacial license or permit to take some images for her? I live in WV if that makes a difference. Thanks in advance for your help.

FAA Section 333 permit.  Don't forget insurance, etc.   https://www.faa.gov/uas/legislative_programs/section_333/

That looks like more than I want to do at this time. Do you think it will get any easier in the future.

hittman Posted at 2015-10-13 19:14
That looks like more than I want to do at this time. Do you think it will get any easier in the futu ...

Probably worse.

Get the 333 exemption. The cost of fines and court hearings will kill you.

Skypan got caught flying without the license. http://www.faa.gov/news/press_re ... ry.cfm?newsId=19555    Depends on where you are located, but do you want to be the test case for your area?

From what I read in getting the 333 exemption you also have to have a pilot license. That would cost a fortune.

hittman Posted at 2015-10-13 19:49
From what I read in getting the 333 exemption you also have to have a pilot license. That would cost ...

Search Gowdy Brothers. They can help you thru the 333 exemption process. They're not cheap, but then again they're faster than trying it on your own.

There are some companies charging $300 to walk you thru, but Gowdy has been doing this a long time.

Not only will you have to have the 333 exemption you have to be a licensed pilot.  You can get by with a spot pilot license, that is the minimum license you can at present.

-Dog

If I open a footage (with ad) in Youtube, do I need to have 333 exemption?

Also, word is, if you get a 333 NOW, you'll likely have a MUCH easier time when the new rules go in next year.  Grandfathering possibly.

gregg1r Posted at 2015-10-13 19:38
Probably worse.

Get the 333 exemption. The cost of fines and court hearings will kill you.

I read up on Skypan. The issue was not about  flying without a license. They were flying in restricted airspace in and around Chicago and had previous run-ins with the FAA!!!

Flying over a stadium in downtown Chicago is an FAA violation and they had been previously contacted by the FAA to stop doing that and they didn't!!!

gregg1r Posted at 2015-10-13 19:38
Probably worse.

Get the 333 exemption. The cost of fines and court hearings will kill you.

Sorry but Skypan didn't get fined for a lack of a license. Even if they had a license, the fine would have been levied because they violated restricted airspace!

gerald@theberzi Posted at 2015-10-16 13:02
Sorry but Skypan didn't get fined for a lack of a license. Even if they had a license, the fine wo ...

Agreed! Skypan - in spite of its exemption - simply got too big for its britches and apparently felt they were "entitled" to do whatever the hell they wanted. "Above the Law" so to speak.  They played with fire, flying in congested areas, over crowds, in restricted airspace, etc, and now are in deep doodoo because of it.

The FAA has concentrated their warnings and punitive actions so far exclusively on reckless or unsafe flying, and on invasion of restricted airspace.

Use your head, be safe, watch out for ANY potential of danger, never fly over people, check and recheck your aircraft...and you should be alright helping your daughter, occasionally. That is my UNofficial, UNprofessional, and probably forgettable feeling about it.

PS: I am pursuing the 333 Exemptions for several types of activity, but not the pilot license. KNOWING I can't fly without the license, I am hoping the new rules will be in place soon (FAA now says April '16, after missing the 30 September 2015 deadline) requiring only the ground school + exam + cert + aircraft registration.  Of course, will still have to keep detailed maintenance and flight records/logs; I have the expanded droneprep "UAS Pilot Log" for that.

gerald@theberzi Posted at 2015-10-16 13:02
Sorry but Skypan didn't get fined for a lack of a license. Even if they had a license, the fine wo ...

I suggest that you read the FAA announcement again.

https://www.faa.gov/news/press_r ... ry.cfm?newsId=19555
SkyPan operated the 43 flights in the New York Class B airspace without receiving an air traffic control clearance to access it, the FAA alleges.  Additionally, the agency alleges the aircraft was not equipped with a two-way radio, transponder, and altitude-reporting equipment.

The FAA further alleges that on all 65 flights, the aircraft lacked an airworthiness certificate and effective registration, and SkyPan did not have a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization for the operations.

http://forum.dji.com/forum.php?m ... 33907&fromuid=44483
Skypan did not receive their FAA 333 exemption until April, 2015. I questioned why with enforcement action against them, why the application wasn't placed on administrative hold.

What has not been established is if Skypan did or did not violate the airspace as they were operating various helicopters for a lot of their work. Until this goes to court, it's all speculation.

I'm in no way excusing their operation if they operated a UAV in class B airspace. If they did, they better have deep pockets.

I take it that this is the run in with the FAA that you are referring too?

http://motherboard.vice.com/read ... ining-it-19-million

Looks like someone is going to get their wishes. The FAA is supposedly moving to require registration of all UAV's.

With the efficiency of government, it will probably take 60 days to perform the registration by which time, either the UAV will have crashed and forgotten about, or there will be a bunch of ticked off people about why it's taking so long for registration before they can pick up their new purchase.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-n ... -registered-n446266

gregg1r Posted at 2015-10-16 18:14
I suggest that you read the FAA announcement again.

https://www.faa.gov/news/press_r ... ry.cfm?ne ...

Thanks for the follow up gregg1r. Now I'm even more confused! I didn't realize that Skypan operated manned helicopters too?? So was it the drone operation or the manned helicopters in restricted airspace??

Puzzling

So if I understand your question, you want to help her, does that mean you're doing it strictly for the fun and giving her your photos?  It's my understanding that you can do that all you want if it's just for fun.  What she does with it is her business.  Maybe she's charging for a finished product, I don't think that would apply to you.  Just my 2 cents after all the previous replies seem to focus on a revenue producing enterprise, which I don't think you are.

ag0n Posted at 2015-10-15 15:18
Also, word is, if you get a 333 NOW, you'll likely have a MUCH easier time when the new rules go in  ...

Mind sharing where you heard that?

Thanks

gerald@theberzi Posted at 2015-10-22 22:34
Thanks for the follow up gregg1r. Now I'm even more confused! I didn't realize that Skypan operate ...

I haven't been able to locate the formal complaint the FAA filed against SkyPan.

If you look at their site, you'll see they've been in business a fairly long time providing these types of services. I doubt that they own any helicopters, but rent by the hour.

When I was doing regular helicopter aerial photographic work, and by regular, I mean 3-4 times a year. there was a one hour minimum on air time. Some pilots I worked with understood what shot I was attempting to get. For SkyPan shooting images, before construction started, after ground breaking, and during construction, could amount to 10-12 hours per job.

New York City rental rates for a turbine powered helicopter would be close to $1200 an hour with today's rates.

If I had to venture a guess as to how the encroachments were discovered, I'd say that the helicopter service they previously used might be a good place to start. Can't imagine a business wanting to lose the aerial bookings of probably 100 hours per year to a piece of plastic.