Just wondering if anyone here has started using their quads for business purposes. I have gotten requests to film events & parties by friends, and seveal had menitoned i should start
an aerial photography business. I have a full-time job, but it would be nice to get more flight time.
I'm proficient with the flying aspect, and am pretty familiar with the camera/photography part.
In looking around online, I don't find any aerial photography businesses in the area. I wouldn't  
intend to undertake a full-fledged busines venture, but we all love to put these things in the air.

And if I could get paid a few bucks to fund more equipment, why not right?              

Anyone?

Have you gotten your Section 333 exemption from the FAA?

For commercial UAV operations current FAA regulations require you to get a 333 exemption and have licensed pilot in control of the aircraft.

Minimum of a "sport" pilot license to do commercial photography.... about $5,000 will get you there...

mjlstudios@yaho Posted at 2016-4-5 14:13
Have you gotten your Section 333 exemption from the FAA?

I wouldn't be operating outside of friends and family at first.
I have an offer to cover several "events" over the summer.
I'd be covering fishing charters for several friends. taking video for
website advertising and recording the trips for customers at no charge to them.
If I got that serious, I guess I would go that route.
They look pretty busy over at the FAA... :-)     

The FAA must be busy! I submitted my 333 exemption about three weeks ago and haven't heard any thing yet

I like many others film people houses, farms, ect. Ect. And no I don't have the 333 exemption nor will I ever get it. The only thing I will take as payment is CASH! Green smelly untaxable CASH. I also work full time so just word of mouth advertising is keeping me busy enough filming.

Not that I'm condoning anything against the "rules" but is a 333 exemption truly a valid requirement? I had heard from a fellow quad pilot (who also happens to be in law enforcement) that the FAA is currently in a lawsuit with the federal government because a few years back the FAA said they weren't ever going to issue new rules, and then they did, blah blah blah. However, I was also told by another law enforcement officer who is also a quad pilot that yes, the 333 needs to be filed for business purposes. So... which is it? Should we just wait and see what the 107 will say?

Again, I'm not "condroning" (hehe, see what I did there? ) any illegal behavior, but rather questioning people who have more knowledge on the subject than I do.

medicdanderson Posted at 2016-4-5 14:52
Not that I'm condoning anything against the "rules" but is a 333 exemption truly a valid requirement ...

Presently, the FAA 333 Exemption is mandatory for all commercial use of any kind of a UAS.  The *only* exceptions for requiring the exemption for the commercial use of a UAS is for certain public, government use (ex: Massachusetts Water Resources Authority).  Sure, folks can hope that they don't get caught for having taken a few hundred bucks cash for video-recording their friend's pizzeria from a hundred feet up for their website.  But at the same time, they had better also hope that a cop who's having a bad day doesn't happen to drive by while they're recording, or hope that a meddlesome neighbor doesn't call the police or FAA, or hope that, while recording the video, their quad doesn't develop an issue resulting in it falling either on a moving car, on someone's roof or on a stroller with an infant in it.

Secondly, a pilot certificate (Sport will suffice, as JustGo indicated) is required for any commercial operation of a UAS- even for such 333 Exemption-excluded operation as referenced above ;).

Finally, for any commercial use of a UAS, a *commercial* registration is required (even if the operator already possesses a [first] registration for their recreational/hobby use).  This second registration number would be an actual "N..." number, as opposed to the "FA..." number issued for non-commercial use.  All registration numbers must be affixed to the aircraft.

The issue I'm dealing with is two fold.  Multiple sources that say new FAA requirements will be coming early this year and a 333 is not going to be required.  While all this is speculation I don't want to spend all the $$$$ to get a 333 or pilot license if it becomes moot.  I think (personally) that a  lot of people that have a 333 are going to be pissed and are going to espouse for the requirement to the end.

"they had better also hope that a cop who's having a bad day doesn't happen to drive by while they're doing it, or hope that a meddlesome neighbor doesn't call the police or FAA, or hope that, while recording the video, their quad doesn't develop an issue resulting in it falling either on a moving car, on someone's roof or on a stroller with an infant in it."  Knock off the drama, the last thing a cop with a BA is going to want to do is harass a dronie.  Maybe fly it for a little stress relief, not add to his paperwork....  When was the last time a stroller was hit?
My apology.  I had not seen that report.

Capt. Bill, a quick anecdote.  I'm a life long photographer and I hear variations of your post all the time.  Digital cameras are cheap so people think buying one makes them  a photographer.  If you really want to do it learn your craft (no pun intended) before flying around people or property.  Having an automatic function doesn't make you a pro...

Well that is a good question. The regular hobbyist just needs to slap on his FAA number on his bird, and away you go.
Commercial is slightly different and new rules are in the works.
Example: For real estate you need a 333 exemption from the FAA, but for other type of film and production work is another matter.
Is has gotten way out there in what you can and cannot do that people are quite lost.
https://www.faa.gov/uas/legislative_programs/section_333/333_faqs/

Good news, it that the FAA have been working on making some new changes so hopefully this helps us all.
In short, if you are not charging to fly for a customer to make a profit then you are fine.
Freinds, Family, does not matter, If you are making a profit, you need a commericla license.

Listen to CaptRuss
commercial operation of your UAV, in addition to the FAA 333 exemption mentioned above  (http://www.faa.gov/uas/legislative_programs/section_333/), you will also need to register your UAV a second time, on paper.  See this:

http://www.faa.gov/licenses_cert ... rcraft_registry/UA/ , and this:

http://www.faa.gov/uas/registration/  (specifically, the link indicating the following:  "...Owners must register their UAS by paper if it meets the following guidelines: ... You are required by a Section 333 Exemption or a certificate of waiver or authorization...")

CaptRuss Posted at 2016-4-6 03:12
Presently, the FAA 333 Exemption is mandatory for all commercial operation of any kind of a UAS.   ...

I'm starting to wonder if this whole commercial pilot issue wasn't drummed up by pilots them selves. They seem to be the most vocal when it comes to trying to instill the FAA fear into people. Keep in mind folks, who stands to loose the most from drones legally being allowed for commercial usage without a pilots license? Thats right, certified pilots.

The problem is registered drone owners out number manned pilots. Each and everyone of those drone owners has dreams of maybe making a go at a business one day. And very few of them has the money or would spend $5,000+ on a pilots license only to fly toys. Then at the same time, I can't imagine a pilot in their right mind who would surrender their wings to fly toys either. Oh sure, you would do it for a part time money but not full time.

Zdrone Posted at 2016-4-5 15:32
The issue I'm dealing with is two fold.  Multiple sources that say new FAA requirements will be comi ...

"...Knock of the drama... When was the last time a stroller was hit?"

Do whatever you wish, but to answer your question, above, this is when:

http://www.latimes.com/local/lan ... 20150916-story.html

"The Federal Aviation Administration announced Wednesday that it will investigate a drone accident that injured an 11-month-old girl in the head when it crashed last weekend (9/12/2015: 6+ months ago) on a Pasadena street.  Authorities said the baby was being pushed in a stroller by her mother when she was hit with debris from a small, privately-owned drone that came down... The baby suffered a large contusion on her forehead and a small cut to the side of her head, according to police. She was treated at a hospital and released.  Her mother also was hit by parts of the aircraft... Police said they found the owner of the drone at the accident site. He reportedly told officers that he lost control of the unmanned aircraft..."

SVTRay Posted at 2016-4-5 15:42
I'm starting to wonder if this whole commercial pilot issue wasn't drummed up by pilots them selve ...

"I'm starting to wonder if this whole commercial pilot issue wasn't drummed up by pilots them selves..."

No, pilots simply do not want things to get any more regulated than they presently are or than they need to be.  Ironically, folks dancing to the beat of their own drum don't always help their own & our common cause.

CaptRuss Posted at 2016-4-5 15:42
"...Knock of the drama... When was the last time a stroller was hit?"

Do whatever you wish, but t ...

The biggest issue for new UAS owners is that the tend to leap before they think.
When you get yourself an awesome new tech such as the DJI Phantom, sadly excitement over shadows knowledge.
We have all been there.  You get a new fancy toy and you just want to rip it open and start playing.

There will always be cases of people crashing their drone right out of the box and also sadly crashing into people, cars, homes, buildings, etc.

Clearly a pilot needs to first prove he/she has taking all the required courses and been certified in a slew of different categories, but that was due to years of crashes when the first aircraft took to the skies.

Now, is the Era of UAS folks just repeating history.  not as deadly true, but I bet there will be years of laws and regulations being made or changed till everyone is comfortably numb like a spot pilot. {:3_41:}

microcyb Posted at 2016-4-5 15:53
The biggest issue for new UAS owners is that the tend to leap before they think.
When you get your ...

":There will always be cases of people crashing their drone right out of the box and also sadly crashing into people, cars, homes, buildings, etc...."

Precisely my point ;) .

SVTRay Posted at 2016-4-5 15:42
I'm starting to wonder if this whole commercial pilot issue wasn't drummed up by pilots them selve ...

Yes and No.  Really boils down to how does the U.S. government can make a buck and not hurt anything or anyone.
The laws were written up a while ago before the UAS frenzy really took off.  There is a FAA UAS conference this month in Florida, but seems no one wants to attend and help the FAA classify the Phantom as a Micro Drone and allow us to make a profit without the FAA 333.

Good news, it that the FAA have been working on making some new changes so hopefully this helps us all.  In short, if you are not charging to fly for a customer to make a profit then you are fine.


Er.... almost.  Like the FCC, the FAA considers if anyone makes something from the product, it is commercial.  If you donate your flying, photography, and/or time to video or still shoot the front of a guys pizzeria, and he puts it on his web site, it is commercial.  If he puts it in his personal photo album, no problem.  In other words, he is using it to advertise his commercial concern, so it's commercial work.

The problem with 333 at this point is the lack of a SINGLE source of information.  Even the FAA varies within their own writings.  AND...as has been stated, new rules are coming.  Right now, non-commercial has GUIDELINES, and laws are "coming soon".  But 333 exemption is apparently the law (at least for now).  Whenever the new laws come out, I guess we'll all be smarter, if not more confused.  

CaptRuss Posted at 2016-4-5 15:55
":There will always be cases of people crashing their drone right out of the box and also sadly cr ...

And here I am just doing flips in my own back yard. {:3_50:}

AG0N-Gary Posted at 2016-4-5 15:57
Good news, it that the FAA have been working on making some new changes so hopefully this helps us a ...

And I still cannot find anyone wanting to attend to help us out.
http://forum.dji.com/thread-47476-1-1.html

Darn!  I'd be there, but it is a heck of a long trip!

I took a vacation to Daytona Beach once....

Was a great time. Wish I had a drone back then!

microcyb Posted at 2016-4-6 03:56
Yes and No.  Really boils down to how does the U.S. government can make a buck and not hurt anythi ...

These people can barely afford a Phantom and you're asking them to shell out money of a Florida conference? We're talking very small and  limited budgets, not Warner-brothers or Sony budgets. About the only thing a small drone operator can do is contact their Congressman/woman....even then the FAA tells them to go to hell.

SVTRay Posted at 2016-4-5 16:40
These people can barely afford a Phantom and you're asking them to shell out money of a Florida co ...

Well was hoping someone locally could help be a proxy for us.
{:3_58:}
I have submitted about 20 pages for review to hopefully change the stance of these laws to help us, but cannot fly down there to attend. Boo..

You can email Joseph Geni (Joseph.ctr.Geni@faa.gov) questions. Like real questions not questions like why the f*ck can't i fly commercially, but logical questions like is it possible to divide the UAS industry into smaller categories say micro drones for residential and commercial uses that require no 333 exception, but could still obtain a commercial license?

So far the FAA is actually seriously trying to help us, but they have to get help from us too.

microcyb Posted at 2016-4-6 04:48
Well was hoping someone locally could help be a proxy for us.

I have submitted about 20 p ...

Sorry, I guess I'm moody for some reason.

Yes, it would be nice if we could some how get the word out to some of the local Florida operators and have them represent.

I'm sure all the obvious questions has been raised. The only thing I can think of and maybe get behind is a drone specific and affordable license. This would fit in with the Exemption 333 no problem and maybe help create a standard in which professional drone operators would follow. I'm not talking anything extreme like a month long $5,000 flight school. Maybe something like $200 week course. Just enough to educate people on the laws, give them ideas how to conduct them selves, and maybe a few business pointers.

SVTRay Posted at 2016-4-5 17:07
Sorry, I guess I'm moody for some reason.

Yes, it would be nice if we could some how get the wor ...

I'm always moody, so no worries.

I hope people will at least email him and get some real questions on the table for the meeting.  Too much stupid media focus on only privacy and crashes because they want the audience.

We have to think about how the UAS and soon to be MAS are the pioneers of this industry.
It took 100 years for the aircraft industry to enact global set of regulations and now it is our turn to take that information and make new regulations for us.

Just like a driver, they stop at a light, stay in their lane, etc., etc., and now we have to help guide the world to understand we take UAS flying very seriously and want to bring this innovation even further.

If we ignore it and whine about it, then those people who hate drones, will get their say and then the FAA and other governments will only listen to them since we stayed silent.
{:3_60:}

microcyb Posted at 2016-4-5 12:58
And here I am just doing flips in my own back yard.

don't forget the plane that landed on the freeway and killed a passenger in a car......  It's sad when tragedy happens but you blame the who industry.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lan ... 20160403-story.html[/url]

don't forget the plane that landed on the freeway and killed a passenger in a car......  It's sad when tragedy happens but you can't blame the whole industry.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lan ... 20160403-story.html[/url]

Zdrone Posted at 2016-4-5 17:03
don't forget the plane that landed on the freeway and killed a passenger in a car......  It's sad  ...

It happens but I would trust most pilots. Now we need to get UAS pilots to be trusted as well.

The other aspect that people aren't mentioning outside of professional clearance – if you're shooting aerial video professionally you better be better than just a "good pilot". You need to have a handle on actual camera moves and proper editing. None of this ugly "yaw the drone to get the shot" type videos and you better learn to do proper dynamic tracking shots. If you have any shots that are more than five seconds, you better be damn sure that shot really calls for it.

AG0N-Gary Posted at 2016-4-6 05:57
Good news, it that the FAA have been working on making some new changes so hopefully this helps us a ...

It's also good news for commercial drone flyers in Australia. Our Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has just announced new regulations commencing September this year (2016).

In essence, the new rules will be,

No change for private (hobbyist) flyers who do not need to register any aircraft under 2KG (4.4lbs) and can fly without any kind of licence provided they follow a number of standard rules such as staying away from airports, populous areas etc. More details of standard rules in the link below.

Under the new regulations, commercial drone pilots will also be able to operate drones less than 2.5kg (4.4 lbs) without a licence provided they follow the standard operating rules (as above).

Land owners (eg farmers) will now be able to fly larger drones  of 2-25kg (4.4 - 55lbs)  on their own land without a licence provided that no remuneration is involved (I read this as meaning they are flying their own drones). This will be a great benefit to Australia's farmers whose farms can be extremely large (largest is bigger than Israel)  and will allow then to check stock and perform aerial spraying etc)

Full details here https://www.casa.gov.au/aircraft ... ly-piloted-aircraft

Australia's CASA has certainly reduced the red tape for commercial users of small drones. Hopefully, owners will abide by those rules and the rules of common sense otherwise the regulations are bound to be tightened again in future years.

R&L Aerial  Posted at 2016-4-6 02:35
I like many others film people houses, farms, ect. Ect. And no I don't have the 333 exemption nor wi ...

It's all about the money,  best trapper tip is not to be vocal on social media ,2 late

I think the most ridiculous example that I have heard of is: If you are a farmer, you can use your drone to check on your crops. Unless you intend to sell any of those crops, in which case checking to see if they need water is commercial use. On your own property. To look at plants. I've been looking into this like crazy, as I've done stock video for about a decade and am already selling video (although not aerial video) through Getty Images. The only thing I can tell you, is that they say the rules are changing this summer. I wouldn't shell out $5000 to become a hot air balloon pilot just yet. But yeah, I'm pretty sure the FAA also considers putting it on youtube with a logo commercial use.... But I definitely know what you mean - I had a bunch of offers of work the first week I got it. Even the guy in the Apple Store told me he had paid for his Phantom 3 in about 4 flights. It is a very ridiculous situation. I honestly think encouraging commercial use will lead to safer pilots - no one wants to lose their drone, but probably even more so if it is their livelihood. I think if they are viewed more as tools than toys, it benefits all of us - and public safety. I wish I could attend that conference in Florida. I would really like to see a drone specific.... I hate to use the word..... lobby. Maybe like a member organization that uses dues to help advance drone causes. Earlier today I was going to join the Academy of Model Aeronautics, and I think that is a great start, but I would gladly join an organization that was interested in representing drone owners. But, the current situation rewards those who ignore the FAA - remember Trappy only ended up paying like $1000 of that $100,000 fine. And by that point he had likely made over $100,000 in Producer Rewards. It's like every Fortune 500 company out there - if breaking the law is more profitable, they just do it. Pay the fine later with the interest off the money you have made breaking the law. That's not my actual advice, and that's not what I am going to do, but man..... that's the road they are sending people down. I'll just say, the cops sure aren't going to be checking your registration - much less asking for your exemption (15+ years of working with an officer every day).

Zdrone Posted at 2016-4-6 03:32
The issue I'm dealing with is two fold.  Multiple sources that say new FAA requirements will be comi ...

"Knock off the drama, the last thing a cop with a BA is going to want to do ... "

There are always going to be people like this that don't think the rules apply to them and a lot of them do just fine by being careful.

But when it doesn't go fine, they are so, so screwed.

mjlstudios@yaho Posted at 2016-4-6 02:33
The FAA must be busy! I submitted my 333 exemption about three weeks ago and haven't heard any thing ...

I submitted mine back in December and they were estimating six months processing time. I wouldn't expect to hear anything for a while.

jyurkyandsons Posted at 2016-4-6 08:53
It's all about the money,  best trapper tip is not to be vocal on social media ,2 late

Little paranoid are we?

aopisa Posted at 2016-4-6 02:20
For commercial UAV operations current FAA regulations require you to get a 333 exemption and have li ...

Tell that to my pocket full of cash.

Zdrone Posted at 2016-4-6 03:32
The issue I'm dealing with is two fold.  Multiple sources that say new FAA requirements will be comi ...

There are plenty of LEOs who don't mind taking the time to write you a ticket. I had a local county park police officer threaten me and give me a written warning when I was flying in a wide open, unpopulated, rural park. Cops may or may not personally care but they will respond to complaints, even if those complaints are fueled by irrational misunderstandings of sUAVs.

That said, I've seen video posted on YouTube and elsewhere that is taken from a drone which was *clearly* being operated in violation of FAA guidelines for "hobbyists" and pros.

I guess I am just conservative when I am flying my own $2k worth of equipment around and putting my current and future commercial operating privileges at risk.

markdaviesmedia Posted at 2016-4-6 07:35
I submitted mine back in December and they were estimating six months processing time. I wouldn't  ...

Thanks Mark. I live in farm lands and farmers are asking about aerial survey of their fields. I am going to one farm this afternoon to fly fields with a farmers to get an idea what farmers would want in my service.