# Drone Photography and the FAA



## wyogirl (Jun 30, 2014)

I was sent a link to this article from the attorney I work for:  Drones Used for Real Estate Photos Could Be Grounded | Realtor Magazine

It basically says that photographers using model aircraft to take photos meant for sale or used in the marketing of a property are subject to FAA regulations.

I just thought it was interesting.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Jun 30, 2014)

I'm going to be honest, I only clicked this topic because I read "drone" and thought "Borg." But this is interesting indeed.


----------



## runnah (Jun 30, 2014)

What a shock, government agency regulating and restricting.


----------



## tecboy (Jun 30, 2014)

Amazon is using drones to deliver packages.
Drones are the future.
http://www.amazon.com/b?node=8037720011


----------



## Braineack (Jun 30, 2014)

runnah said:


> What a shock, government agency regulating and restricting.


amazon must have a bigger lobby...


----------



## snerd (Jun 30, 2014)

tecboy said:


> Amazon is using drones to deliver packages.
> Drones are the future.
> Amazon Prime Air



I thought they had scrapped that idea? This is new territory, and I'm sure we'll see plenty of corporate and government lawyers vying for their piece of the pie.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 30, 2014)

DGMPhotography said:


> I'm going to be honest, I only clicked this topic because I read "drone" and thought "Borg." But this is interesting indeed.



Oh, see I thought this was about taking pictures of drones - not taking pictures with drones.  Whacky.


----------



## DGMPhotography (Jun 30, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> DGMPhotography said:
> 
> 
> > I'm going to be honest, I only clicked this topic because I read "drone" and thought "Borg." But this is interesting indeed.
> ...



Exactly.. I'd love to get 7 of 9 in front of my camera.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jun 30, 2014)

I've been reading about this - they're designing and testing in my area.  

They are not toys, or like the model radio operated devices that hobbyists have used. They are UAVs, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, considered to be unmanned aircraft, and the FAA is developing regulations - it may require training and/or obtaining a license to operate.

They are currently permissible as a hobby but you must keep it in sight at all times. It is currently not legal to operate for commercial purposes (although it's been done and doesn't seem to have been pursued much yet). They are not allowed at one of the national parks because of the buzzing noise and disruption to wildlife. 

So far I've read about one over a marathon dropping and hitting a runner causing head injuries. There was one that almost landed in the middle of a busy interstate but luckily didn't - and since it's recording video and uses GPS it was tracked right to the guy's front door (a student who'd lost control of it). 

There was a story of one over the scene of an accident that hindered the airflight chopper from being able to land to be able to airlift someone injured at the scene. There was a report of one possibly (unconfirmed) alongside an airplane (so apparently they have the capability of getting to that height). 

Of course they've been used for example when the tsunami in Japan damaged a nuclear plant to fly over and inspect the damage. Seems like they need to be operated by people trained to know how to operate them properly.


----------



## runnah (Jun 30, 2014)

vintagesnaps said:


> I've been reading about this - they're designing and testing in my area.
> 
> They are not toys, or like the model radio operated devices that hobbyists have used. They are UAVs, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, considered to be unmanned aircraft, and the FAA is developing regulations - it may require training and/or obtaining a license to operate.
> 
> ...



Oh hush, of course a film user would fear new technology.


----------



## ChrisKostner (Jun 30, 2014)

snerd said:


> tecboy said:
> 
> 
> > Amazon is using drones to deliver packages.
> ...



That will never come true within the next couple of decades. The idea is just ridiculous. Amazon delivering packages via drones....


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 30, 2014)

Since current quad and orthocopters have a ceiling of  >1000 feet, the FAA wants to regulate how they can be flown to protect dangerous interaction with passenger and commercial managed flights because:

[h=2]FAA definition[/h] In the United States in particular, the Federal Aviation Administration calls this concept the *Minimum Safe Altitude* (MSA), and specifically defines it as follows in § 119 of Part 91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR):


_Anywhere_: an altitude allowing a safe emergency landing without undue hazard to person or property on the ground;
_Over Congested Areas_: an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of less than 2,000 feet;
_Over Populated Areas_: an altitude of 500 feet AGL;
_Over Open Water or Sparsely Populated Areas_: an altitude allowing for a linear distance greater than 500 feet from any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure;
_Helicopters_: If without hazard to persons or property on the  surface, an altitude lower than in definitions 2, 3, and 4 above,  provided in compliance with any routes or altitudes specifically  prescribed for helicopters by the FAA.


----------



## ronlane (Jun 30, 2014)

So Sparky better not be trying to sell those video's he's been taking with his new Toy.


----------



## DrewPR (Jul 2, 2014)

I can go either way on this issue. At first I was pretty annoyed with the Realtor example because they are clearly doing no harm to others. In that case they are really just extreme versions of tri-pods or ladders. However, the examples of the drones crashing into people, traffic, private property etc. changes things. As a pilot myself I can understand where the FAA is coming from with the Part 91 FAR regs that Lew pointed out earlier. 

I think it would be totally fine for realtors etc. to utilize for "commercial" use as long as they keep a safe distance from people.  If you want to use these things to film or shoot where they could cause harm in the case of an emergency, you should probably have some sort of training/certification. Not just from a safety perspective but from a liability/legal perspective. 

The problem I see is that these drones are much more difficult to track then a standard aircraft which will make the airspace rules laid out in Part 91 very difficult to enforce. Violations of these airspace rules would most likely only be discovered during an investigation following an accident. 

On the whole I think drones are pretty great and it's really only a matter of time before they are ubiquitous in society. Just like any new tech, it just takes some adjusting to.


----------



## bobandcar (Jul 2, 2014)

There are photogrammetry drones in the land survey world. There are a few companies making them and are very soffisticated. 1 problem, In the US they are illegal to own. Similar reasons. As soon as it's used for any business then it has huge regulations which make it not worth anyone trying to purchase


----------



## IzzieK (Jul 2, 2014)

My husband and I personally do not agree to the use of drones anywhere near my home. I bet our snooty neighbours will not like it either. They already object to us flying our taildragger above their property going to ours, now playing with a drone will be more problematic ... Glad the FAA have upped its game on this.

Sorry Snerd...


----------



## snerd (Jul 2, 2014)

IzzieK said:


> ......... Sorry Snerd...



What'd I say?! LOL!!


----------



## robbins.photo (Jul 2, 2014)

IzzieK said:


> My husband and I personally do not agree to the use of drones anywhere near my home. I bet our snooty neighbours will not like it either. They already object to us flying our taildragger above their property going to ours, now playing with a drone will be more problematic ... Glad the FAA have upped its game on this.
> 
> Sorry Snerd...



Personally I love the idea myself.  Back during the Y2K scare I bought a Ma Duece and built myself a nice little emplacement with sandbags on the roof.  I think it would just be awesome to be able to get in a little anti-aircraft practice.  Dang thing has just been there collecting dust since I installed it.  I mean seriously, not one darn looter showed up for Y2K.  So yup, bring on the drones I say!

Lol


----------



## snerd (Jul 2, 2014)

The discussion has more than once turned to target practice among my fellow shooters and me. It just takes practice distinguishing between the good ones and bad ones.  Just sayin'.  :mrgreen:


----------



## Derrel (Jul 2, 2014)

*I love to drone!* On,and on, and on, and onnnnn!


----------



## robbins.photo (Jul 2, 2014)

Derrel said:


> *I love to drone!* On,and on, and on, and onnnnn!




WAITER!  Check please!


Lol


----------



## spacefuzz (Jul 2, 2014)

Bring on the UAV's! They will be future due to cost, utility, safety, etc. Just maybe not the little quad copter ones, the big ones are more fun and have better cameras anyway.  I believe the FAA has to have it all worked out by 2015 or 2016, but it hit the news recently because it was found their initial regulations didnt follow legal protocall so were invalid. 

Plus lets face it....they are really photogenic!  (yes mods these are my pictures)


----------



## hamlet (Jul 3, 2014)

I wanted to buy one of these drones, but they only allow you to use it outside of town. And where i live you cannot make a move without being in another town, so i would be able to use it on very rare occasions.


----------



## tecboy (Jul 3, 2014)

Sparky, Watch Out!!!


----------



## bobandcar (Jul 3, 2014)

This is a surveying "drone"


----------



## IzzieK (Jul 4, 2014)

Impressive!


----------



## AlanKlein (Jul 4, 2014)

Would drug dealers making deliveries to homes be considered commercial use?

Just askin'?


----------



## sonicbuffalo (Jul 12, 2014)

What's the difference between a Remote Controlled Airplane and a Drone?  Just askin'!


----------



## bobandcar (Jul 13, 2014)

sonicbuffalo said:


> What's the difference between a Remote Controlled Airplane and a Drone?  Just askin'!


I think there are 2 separate answers but I don't know all the specifics.
1 a "drone" in my world is something that has gps and can fly a pattern on its own with no ther input. <~~ this is the main one

2 it isn't there just to fly. There is a purpose behind a "drone" photos, locations, elevations, surveillance


----------



## TammyCampbell (Jul 22, 2014)

Oooo Ooo..I came across one the other day.. Me taking a picture of it taking a picture of me.


----------



## sscarmack (Jul 22, 2014)

I'd fly that 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tailgunner (Jul 23, 2014)

I find this subject comical and entertaining. Drones is just a marketing ploy to help sell over priced toys and it's freaking the public out lol 

If you guys think a 1lb battery operated piece of plastic is scary than you haven't seen anything. I probably shouldn't talk about the 100+ lb jet powered civilian model aircraft scene. Now those will do some damage if they crash and you don't see them plastered all over the news. Mounting cameras on model aircraft isn't new either, heck, I saw a guy attach a firearm to a chopper once and remote discharged it. Nope, It wasn't until some manufacture started applying the term "Drone" to their products when people started taking notice. The FAA only took notice when some guy's video flying around Reunion Tower here in Dallas made the evening news. Reunion Tower is only 560ft, shorter than the surrounding downtown buildings. I'm pretty sure it's not even in the flight path of Southwest or any near by helio pads. I think the FAA is doing what the government does best, figuring out new ways to regulate people. Anyhow, I wouldn't think twice about using one of these Scary drones to photograph a home or large property. Just exercise causation, a lot of these so called drones are ultra light weight (some are made of Styrofoam...Oooo, scary) and would mostly likely not do a lot of damage in case of malfunction but you're still responsible for any damages either way. Anything larger than the evil drones featured on tonight's news should be flown at a park or model air field. 

<...sets back now waiting for people to label his Nitro RC trucks Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGV) and demand the government do something about it


----------



## TammyCampbell (Jul 26, 2014)

We know.. they find a way to tax everything.. and think that there is a security risk for a lot of things.
 What I find amazing is the Russians blew up a civillian airplane .. thinking it was a jet fighter.


----------



## SDB777 (Aug 9, 2014)

So it's okay to mount a camera to a model airplane or helicopter and use it for photo'ing things, but not a drone?  I don't get it....



Scott (so confusing) B


----------



## BananaRepublic (Aug 9, 2014)

Quad-copters are used extensively to cover rallying and some other types of motor sport here in Ireland.



TammyCampbell said:


> We know.. they find a way to tax everything.. and think that there is a security risk for a lot of things.
> What I find amazing is the Russians blew up a civillian airplane .. thinking it was a jet fighter.



FYI It was Ukrainian separatists that shot down the plane. The USA shot down an Iranian civilian airliner back in the 90's under the same pretext.
( Not bashing just pointing it out)


----------

