RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
Aviation - Related Videos or Other Electronic Media on the Internet
- Thread starter RotorAndWing
- Start date
Hank S
En-Route
So be careful posting videos of / about / from your drone. Seems about 75%. Of this AC is about UAS rather than model aircraft or manned aircraft videos.
General exception: blatant, dangerous violations of FARs.
Note: like the pilot buzzing a Texas beach at 20' agl, making people dive for cover, the pilot doesn't have to post or even know it was posted. This genius received a thoroughly deserved Emergency Revocation.
General exception: blatant, dangerous violations of FARs.
Note: like the pilot buzzing a Texas beach at 20' agl, making people dive for cover, the pilot doesn't have to post or even know it was posted. This genius received a thoroughly deserved Emergency Revocation.
RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
I seem to remember someone saying if a video is posted they were a "commercial" operation.
RotorDude
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2014
- Messages
- 2,321
- Display Name
Display name:
GliderDude
I seem to remember someone saying if a video is posted they were a "commercial" operation.
The interesting thing is that they don't actually say that royalty payments are acceptable, just that the act of posting in itself is. Which leaves the door open both ways. However, since we already know that posting without payments is legal, it sounds like a subtle signal that "minor" payments may be acceptable (on a PPL or non 135).
Jay Honeck
Touchdown! Greaser!
There was quite a discussion of this on Facebook. The conclusion: It's all just a cover so the feds can spend all day watching YouTube videos without fear of retribution. 
But seriously, I wonder where this will lead?
But seriously, I wonder where this will lead?
write-stuff
En-Route
There was quite a discussion of this on Facebook. The conclusion: It's all just a cover so the feds can spend all day watching YouTube videos without fear of retribution.
But seriously, I wonder where this will lead?
I'm guessing this is almost exclusively aimed at sUAS operators. They think it is perfectly safe to fly thousands of feet into the sky as long as they're five miles from an airport. With the explosion in quadcopter sales, this is becoming a very serious issue.
Jay Honeck
Touchdown! Greaser!
Agree. I've seen video of our beach taken from a drone that could only have been flying off the departure end of Rwy 12 -- the most commonly used runway at our island airport. I routinely do approaches into and out of that airport, and it scares the bejeezus out of me to think that one of those rich condo guys is hovering his quad copter out there, whilst sipping a mai tai on his balcony.
I don't want to outlaw them, but, damn, how else are we going to prevent a major accident?
write-stuff
En-Route
Education, and as much as I resent increased government oversight, regulation. It would be fine if all UAV guys would fly below 300 feet and stay in Class G, but that'll never happen.
I seem to remember someone saying if a video is posted they were a "commercial" operation.
Yeah, that was always a goofy claim that a monetized YouTube video makes it a commercial operation.
write-stuff
En-Route
The FAA has also said if you fly to an air show and they give you a free hamburger, that's commercial, too.
BigBadLou
Final Approach
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2014
- Messages
- 5,166
- Location
- TX - the friendliest state
- Display Name
Display name:
Lou
Good luck with that!!
Let me know how it turns out.
Look at what happened with the metric system. Let's face it, the general populace is simply too stupid to be taught anything useful.
Oh, it's far worse than that, the general public does not feel they should have to learn anything at all.