Washington Post article on FAA approval of drones

Excellent article in general, but I'm still not clear on what regulations the FAA is relying on to require case-by-case approval of commercial drone operations. The article mentions that filmmakers requested exemption from fifteen FAA regulations, but doesn't say which ones.
 
By letter dated May 27, 2014, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of Pictorvision Inc. (Pictorvision) for an exemption from Part 21; §§ 45.23(b); 61.113(a) and (b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b)(2); 91.103; 91.109; 91.119; 91.121; 91.151(a); 91.203(a) and (b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a)(1); 91.409(a)(2); and 91.417(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow operation of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) for the purpose of scripted, closed-set filming for the motion picture and television industry.
Click to expand...

https://www.faa.gov/uas/legislative_programs/section_333/media/Pictorvision_Inc-11067.pdf
 
Interesting. Thanks for finding that.
 
Palmpilot said:
Interesting. Thanks for finding that.
Click to expand...

No problem...My Google-Fu was strong this morning...

Took this paragraph from the story:
The warning turned out to be prescient. On Wednesday, a camera-toting drone operated by one of the filmmakers, Pictorvision, flew off a set in California and disappeared, according to an FAA report. Tom Hallman, the president of Pictorvision, said crew members found the 20-pound drone the next day in “rugged terrain” on a private ranch about 100 yards from where they had been filming near Santa Clarita. He said no one was injured.
Click to expand...

Then I took the company name and did a quick search:http://lmgtfy.com/?q=faa.gov:Pictorvision

First result.

The "domain:" search modifier is incredibly helpful.
 
Your Google-fu is strong? Is that you Giggy-fly?

Sorry, just checked you profile....thought it was somebody else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top