Finally! No more lip from know-it-alls

Archammer

Archammer

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
1,308
Location
Austin, Tx
Display Name
FlyingSchmidt
Home Airfield
KHYI
Finally! No more lip from know-it-alls...maybe

NOW, there might be "legal documentation" on GoPro's for all of you curious about mounting GoPro's and the propaganda spreaders out there! Most of us knew there was no ruling/law/documentation against it, but hopefully now there will be the documentation to prove it.

Plus, I love that the Avweb article says "The FAA made a written response to mounted GoPro's", really sticking it to all the people saying they knew that you couldn't, cause someone with a badge said so, and FAR's etc...
 
Last edited:
I always thought "cause squawkin shane said it was ok" was sufficient.
 
Yaaaaahh! more videos of C172s in straight and level flight over Kansas... Exhilarating.
 
Last edited:
That basically says that if the modification does not appreciably affect weight, balance, or handling characteristics, it's a minor modification. If it's a removable mount like a suction cup, it's not subject to 14 CFR 43, so essentially not a modification at all.

Of course, other FARs might apply (careless and reckless, anyone?)...
 
Nothing in the regulations changed. Action cam mounts that most of us use have never qualified as major alterations.
 
Stewartb said:
Nothing in the regulations changed. Action cam mounts that most of us use have never qualified as major alterations.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I thought this was all pretty clear years ago.:dunno: If there was a problem with it, it would have been brought to attention long ago.
 
now the FAA will have to answer the real question. Can you mount a gopro on a control surface of a drone in controlled airspace during a TFR without a flight plan?
 
Y'all need to read that document more carefully. All it says is that there is no Part 43 maintenance documentation issue with a camera which is impermanently stuck on with a suction device or the like. It does not say it's absolutely legal to fly with one stuck on the outside of your plane. Putting it somewhere that creates the possibility of a problem (e.g., sticking it on a balanced control surface or where it changes airflow over a control surface) would still violate other rules.
 
Ron Levy said:
Y'all need to read that document more carefully. All it says is that there is no Part 43 maintenance documentation issue with a camera which is impermanently stuck on with a suction device or the like. It does not say it's absolutely legal to fly with one stuck on the outside of your plane. Putting it somewhere that creates the possibility of a problem (e.g., sticking it on a balanced control surface or where it changes airflow over a control surface) would still violate other rules.
Click to expand...

Hence my statement regarding "careless and reckless".
 
Why are you so excited about finding something many have known about for months? Trying to be one of those know-it-alls?

:D :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top