Please see this warning from the Los Angeles Police Department, sent to the California Association of Realtors. Discussion on helifreak here. More background and discussion here. I'll be talking to the NYT about this tomorrow.
Short form: Amateur UAV use within the usual FAA guidelines (under 400ft, within visual line-of-sight, away from built-up-areas) is allowed, as always. But commercial use requires a COA, which you're not going to get. So there's nothing new here, but it's a reminder that the guidelines will be enforced.
LAPD Warning Against Hiring Unmanned Aircraft Operators for Aerial Photos
Los Angeles authorities have asked C.A.R. to communicate this warning to REALTORS® who hire unmanned aircraft operators to take aerial photographs for marketing high-end properties. Using these devices (also known as drones) for flight in the air with no onboard pilot may violate, among other things, the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) policy on unmanned aircrafts, and Los Angeles's local ordinance requiring permits for filming commercial motion pictures and still photographs.
The Los Angeles Police Department's (LAPD) investigation has apparently revealed that aerial photos where unmanned aircraft were observed have appeared on certain real estate sales websites. According to FilmL.A., the LAPD Air Division has issued this warning as it intends to prosecute violators in the near future. FilmL.A. is a public benefit company created by the City and County of Los Angeles to manage film permit activity and related issues.
Under the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)'s current policy, no one can operate an unmanned aircraft in the National Airspace System without specific authority. Operators who wish to fly an unmanned aircraft for civil use must obtain an FAA experimental airworthiness certificate, which will not be issued to an unmanned aircraft used for compensation or hire. Although the FAA allows hobbyists to fly model airplanes for recreational purposes under specific guidelines, that authority does not extend to operators flying unmanned aircraft for business purposes. More information is available from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Notice on Unmanned Aircraft Operations and the FAA's policy.
Comments
Actually, many people have made fuel efficient vehicles, but the oil cartels stand to lose and use Mossad Assasination/Imtimidation techniques to take down any competition. Google this yourself. That was a statement made by someone who knows nothing of what he is saying on this subject..
Well people, claim to have invented extremely fuel efficient devices. None of them panned out. If any of them were real, they would definitely have gotten funding. Look at the Telsa Automotive cars, basically flawed in design, but all the high tech moguls, throw money at that company to prop it up.
Also the Real Estate industry is about as big business, as you can get. If they want to use UAVs, they will use UAVs.
The Fly-in is an interesting idea. However, there may be technical issues. I'm not sure that even the current 2.4 ghz radios can work properly, when that many people come together. There's only a limited number of channels that are available for even frequency hopping radios to use. You get to a point where there's just to many collisions and planes and quads start to drop from the sky.
Why would LA spend time and money to process and grant a permit to allow you to do AP when the FAA says you can't do it period?
But there is likely a money issue (there aways is), here. It costs thousands of dollars an hour to hire a helicopter or boom crane to take video. Us hobbyists think we can do the same job for a fraction of that and if allowed we would likely put some of the big boys out of business. Now factor in that the city, state and IRS are paid a tax for income received for this type of service. Now, what do you think is in the best intrest of LA and California, expensive or cheap video services?
As simple as these technologies are that we have in our hands, I think we can consider it to be a "Disruptive to Industry". People have been inventing extremely fuel efficient automotive technologies for decades but not a one has made it to the assembly line. And that's because they were "Disruptive" so they were bought up by the big auto makers and lost in a vault somewhere in Detroit.
If all we wanted to do was make a few bucks doing something no one else was doing then there would be little to no push-back. But we stepped on the toes of people who have money and influence and now we are feeling the wrath of the American Way.
I have been a little argumentative the last few days (just had surgery...maybe it was the drugs) but I have also tried to share the facts that we are dealing with but we don't always see or understand. I think my goal has been to focus our energy and anger to do something. I don't know what that "something" might be but anything is better than nothing. I have two ideas rattling around in my head: first is a Fly-In where we get as many people as possible to simultaneously fly AP flights in a common geographic area and have as much press there as possible to cover it, and the second is a campaign called "Fly Free", where we all go out and do the work we want for realtors and Hollywood but we do it for free. Either of these options would take much thought and each would have their own unique impact.
America will remain the land of the free only as long as it,s the home of the Brave !
I also agree with John. But the problem is that the LAPD states categorically, that permits will not be granted. This is not good for commerce. Although I'm not sure LAPD can read the minds of the FAA.
However, I suspect that what will eventually happen is that the Real Estate lobbyists will win out, at the end of the day. , if indeed using UAVs will help increase their bottom line.
What John said, spot on.
im personally thinking that the worst thing about our country is going to be your friend. im truely not trying to start an arguement, but there is always a loophole.
Steven, your home is your castle. The airspace above it is controlled by the FAA and protected by the DoD. But you and many others keep posting which are apparently contain only partial information. You can legally invite people to your home to take aerial photos any day of the week. But when you say "invite", I think you mean "hire" or "give compensation", and that is illegal. Making a play on words will not make your argument any stronger.
This is even true for the Native Americans. They have their reservations which are sovereign nations, but the airspace above these sovereign nations is controlled and regulated by the FAA.
I think the big picture here is that the advancements in technology has increased exponentially allowing the hobbyist to create systems which can produce results equal or better than that of the current professionals. But the hobbyist is not likely to have the business knowledge to go with it and does not understand the requirements they must meet like everyone else does. I would bet that of all those complaining about these laws and regulations than not a single person has both a small business and airspace management background. If you did have these backgrounds and wanted to start making money doing aerial photography, you would instinctively know to research FAA regulations and apply for the appropriate licenses and permits where you will be doing business.
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
of 12 Next