Denied for night flying and over people, they want me to do crash tests and submit data

[UAV_Mapper]

I doubt CNN is willing to share it.

I attended a talk that CNN gave regarding their waiver approval and he showed a picture of the waiver application stack and it was over 3 feet tall. They were the first to get a waiver for flights over people and there have been several more issued since then, but they're all large companies, not small operations.

 

[dronecyclops]

I attended a talk that CNN gave regarding their waiver approval and he showed a picture of the waiver application stack and it was over 3 feet tall. They were the first to get a waiver for flights over people and there have been several more issued since then, but they're all large companies, not small operations.

A 3 ft. tall stack of papers Only a big company could do that for sure

 

[Meta4]

Basically they denied it because they want me to conduct scientific drop tests, crash tests, etc and submit the data to them showing how my DJI spark will hurt or damage people from different altitudes. WTF?

To put things in perspective, of 1845 waivers granted so far, only 12 are for 107.39.
It's not surprising yours wasn't approved.

 

[Stephen Mann]

So do you think i am screwed now and tagged by the FAA as a risk should something happen because i applied and then was denied?

No, they don't track pilots that closely, especially since you didn't violate any rules just by asking. Chances are your next application, even if reviewed by the same person at the FAA, would just be another anonymous application. Don't assume the FAA personnel looking at applications really know much about what they are reviewing. The probably have a checklist, and if your application mentions "over people" then their response is automatic.

 

[BigAl07]

A thought, but RE: the stipulation of not being able to fly above someone unless they are a part of the crew, what would be stopping someone in theory from having the clients being flown over from signing an agreement that they are visual observers in the operation?

You're required to give each "Crew Member" proper training and then you're going to ask them to basically lie to a Federal organization? I'm pretty sure if an "incident" happens no one on site is going to be willing to stick their neck out to save yours. That's not how it works. . .

I understand, of course. No one likes more rules and regulations. But we do have a choice. We elect people that make these laws. We have voting power and need to exercise it. I am good friends with a member of Congress and will see what she says could be done about trying to pass legislation that would ease the restrictions. Just gotta get the other 534 members of Congress to agree which may take some effort

Believe it or not, our industry of sUAS operators is still a huge minority in society. Our numbers appear great when we are congregated together but fact of the matter our numbers are dismal when compared to the number of people (also voters I might add) who are adamantly against less sUAS regulations.

Your "Congressional friend" is going to look after her own interests when John Q. Public starts complaining because she's attempting to reduce sUAS rules & regulations.

 

[Graham Degg]

The FAA makes the Waiver itself public. The Application that has all the details which the FAA approved is NOT available publicly and I doubt CNN is willing to share it. Perhaps being 3000 miles away you have a plan...or a way to hack the FAA's (or CNN's) servers?

Or I suppose yes, you could just give up. The CNN’s airframe gives a huge clue as to the shape o& their application I would have thought. Hey, perhaps the manufacturer might want to sell more of its model into the market and to do so may be able to assist with construction, failure mode, physics data etc. Seriously, I was told 18 months ago that I would never get UK CAA to issue me with our equivalent of a waiver on a quad (or because I had only held a permit for 4 months. Well....the waiver came and we are about to conclude on another groundbreaking list of Exemptions which can be used by a range of third party organisations. I am still being told that this is impossible but a recent meeting with CAA says otherwise.

Come on guys. This is a brand new industry wide open to those prepared to make the effort to push the regulatory envelope while remaining safe.

 

[Christophs Drone Services]

As a PIC you have to make that call, now if your 100 feet over some one and your drone is flying at 30 MPH and your 50 feet away and it loses power, you have to assess weather it poses a threat to people on the ground. DroneU covered this on their podcast, they claimed that that regulation applied to being DIRECTLY over someone/ if your drone fell like a rock would it harm that person?

One thing I haven't heard anyone talk about is the use of automatic parachutes? as long as you have adiquite altitude, I beleive the drone poses no risk to others.

with the VO work around, if you had direct communication with them through a Bluetooth phone call and they directed your drone to by over and to the side but not directly over them I think its a Grey area.