BROOKLYN PARK, Minn. (WCCO) – Charles Eide and Mike Danielson have been flying radio controlled aircraft since they little kids growing up in the same neighborhood.
As adults they formed a business, sharing a love of video production and photography.
Soon, they discovered their hobby could merge with their business, which took a huge leap when they began taking on aerial photographic work.
By mounting stabilized cameras onto the bellies of the drone aircraft, Eide and Danielson can offer customers a bird’s-eye view of anything from construction sites, to city attractions, to real estate listings.
“It helps sell houses, which is really in my opinion a huge economic impact in the Twin Cities — helps houses move faster,” Eide said.
Business was booming, until a call came from the Minneapolis office of the Federal Aviation Administration. They were simply told to ground their commercial use of the aircraft. Turns out, current regulations don’t allow unmanned aircraft for commercial purposes.
In fact, their use is strictly prohibited from operating in what the FAA defines as “Class B” airspace. That’s found in densely populated areas around key airport traffic routes, most often the airspace surrounding the busiest airports with a high volume of commercial air traffic.
Eide says he understands the need for safety regulations, but argues that his company has its own flight safety protocols. They rarely fly more than 200 feet above the ground and will never operate near airports.
“What we’re doing is low-range stuff to show off the real estate market and features in a house or property,” Danielson said.
The FAA says the urban airspace demands strict safety restrictions. Eide understands, but argues with tens of thousands of dollars invested in radio controlled aircraft, flying safely is job No. 1.
“I agree that there should be regulation on this stuff because there are more and more hands touching this stuff,” Eide said. “However, we need to work together here.”
The duo wants to work with the FAA over this. The current rules are clear, but the FAA is going to look at these rules on Friday.
Comments
Dwgsparky,
I reached out To Charles after watching the News story, I was really impressed with their interview. I thought they would be interested in some of the discussions we have here at DIY--regarding air-space integration and crafting a legal framework to do commercial aerial.
The local media in Minneapolis is the one who ran the story and brought this to all of our attention. Don't blame Charles for being bold and pushing forward in the face of pressure. I think his response is exactly the right thing to do.
Sparky.. Charles can speak for himself but the classes part is likely a response to show the FAA that everyone that uses UAVs is not a bunch of rogue people that at any moment could accidently bring down a airplane. So as much fun as being a conspiracy theorist can be.. not everything that happens in the world is some sort of secret agenda that you seem to trying to expose.
Getting a phone call from the FAA is rare.. so bringing it to light and trying to force the FAAs hand to allow commercial use.. is a hot topic for EVERYONE on here and more broadly.. so when it happens it a firestorm.
As someone trying to also explore business services using aerial platforms.. I want to help bring the responsible use of UAVs to light... and not the topic that is in the news daily which is military killing machines.. to which 12 states are trying to pass anti drone laws.
Hi
Am I alone in looking at all the hype and attention this post has provided and now see that the same company allegedly "grounded by the FAA " are now offering classes in how to do this UAV stuff correctly.?? Has this all been some kind of publicity stunt at our expense?? I hope I am wrong and I have no issue with the company but it looks very suspicious to me, no evidence , no letters , no verification.
I think we have been had, big time.
I really only think the way to resolution is to fight it... especially when you can do the same exact thing as a 'hobby'... an as far as the FAA is concerned it should be about safety not preventing legitimate businesses from growing and filling a huge need.
There is huge support that wants to see resolution on this manner... so please fight.
I would love to read through your workshop notes after your event as I won't be able to make it up there.
Thanks for all of the love guys. We are going to keep fighting. One of our first steps is to hold a workshop. Its about AP, and safety but we will be addressing how to band together to make this a legitimate commercial opportunity. Here is the website http://flysafetraining.wordpress.com/
Again. Thanks for the love! My email is Charles@eidecom.com Feel free to reach out.
Charles
Hi Charles,
Good to see you here :-)
Go bot go!! :) I think there is some serious backers in the MPAA that would be more than willing to bank roll it.. since they have been using aerial drones in many of their productions for a while now.. and only recently have been showing up on the FAA radar and told to stop.
Its bad that it is easier to ask for forgiveness then for permission.. all the while being responsible commercial entities.. which would not do things that would jeopardized the business or the safety of people
Hey Bot_1, Give me a call or shoot me an email. My info is on www.EideCom.com
I will do some research and contact Charles to see if he wants to sue the FAA. I will see if I can take it as a pro bono case and have some law students work on this. I need to determine the specifics. I am on the road right now so it will take some time. Chis Anderson, I am in San Diego and would like discuss this in person to get your thoughts on this approach. I sue govenrmental agencies all the time so that part is easy.
sweet.. absolutely stay in touch.
I still don't understand how the FAA has any jurisdiction in the immediate airspace above private property of which you are flying under the permission of the land owner.. seems to conflict with constitutional rights.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next