Welcome, Commercial Drone Pilots!
Join our growing community today!
Sign up

Question for the experts...

A

aviscomi

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
9
Reaction score
1
Age
60
How does one interpret this:

As per the FAA website:

What is the definition of recreational or hobby use of a UAS?
Recreational or hobby UAS use is flying for enjoyment and not for work, business purposes, or for compensation or hire. In the FAA's Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, the FAA relied on the ordinary, dictionary definition of these terms. UAS use for hobby is a "pursuit outside one's regular occupation engaged in especially for relaxation." UAS use for recreation is "refreshment of strength and spirits after work; a means of refreshment or division."


If my regular occupation is a dog walker in which I get paid a salary and is my sole means of support. I interpret the above as I can perform video shoot for real estate and receive compensation on a "1 off" basis without need 107 cert.
 
Doesn't work that way. Five words is all you need to know - "In Furtherance Of A Business"

If you are directly compensated, you are accepting money and therefore are operating commercially

If you take pictures, that are to be used by a realtor to sell a house and accept no compensation - you are still operating commercially as those pictures furthered the realtors business.

Pretty simply, if you take aerial photos or video without a 107 or 333 and these photos are used in furtherance of a business, you are in violation, to the letter of the law.

Some people do it and get away, while some others don't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AH-1G
Hmm...first time I've seen those five words used in reference to UAS. It is used frequently when distinguishing Sport Pilots from Commercial Pilots.

Thanks for the update
 
You're welcome. I think the rules are written in a very confusing manner. We've seen other examples where a partner of the FAA (AMA) has a site and one of the FAQs gives an example of how ones picture could be used but not seen as commercial but back on the FAA site, a rule could be found that did not allow the example. In another thread on this forum, there is a conversation about a guy flying within 3.5 miles of a Class B Airport at 2600 plus feet and he may not be in violation if he is a hobbyist. :eek: I agree these rules are confusing.
 
aviscomi said:
How does one interpret this:

As per the FAA website:

What is the definition of recreational or hobby use of a UAS?
Recreational or hobby UAS use is flying for enjoyment and not for work, business purposes, or for compensation or hire. In the FAA's Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, the FAA relied on the ordinary, dictionary definition of these terms. UAS use for hobby is a "pursuit outside one's regular occupation engaged in especially for relaxation." UAS use for recreation is "refreshment of strength and spirits after work; a means of refreshment or division."


If my regular occupation is a dog walker in which I get paid a salary and is my sole means of support. I interpret the above as I can perform video shoot for real estate and receive compensation on a "1 off" basis without need 107 cert.
Click to expand...
NOT a chance! If you are being remunerated in ANY way 107 Certification is required.
 
While making money could be said to be - "refreshment of strength" I'll give you that :)

You must admit; your using a partial definition of a hobby to support a pretty flimsy argument by omitting the first part of the definition where it says; Recreational or hobby UAS use is flying for enjoyment and not for work, business purposes, or for compensation or hire

I'm pretty sure the FAA would look at a (your words from above) "video shoot for real estate and receive compensation on a "1 off" basis without need 107 cert"
as falling under "commercial" ;)
 
Oh, I understand completely and I'm not looking to "pull a fast one" on the system or lack of a system. I only want to point out that new drone owner might be directed to the FAA website in order to find out what he/she can and cannot do. They click on the 1st link for a definition and they read what I copied directly from the website in my original post.

"The FAA relied on the ordinary, dictionary definition of these terms. UAS use for hobby is a "pursuit outside one's regular occupation engaged in especially for relaxation." UAS use for recreation is "refreshment of strength and spirits after work; a means of refreshment or division."
 
I get you, I do - As I mentioned; the rules framework is very confusing, as in those two accounts I noted earlier. But also, as I pointed out; what you are referencing is only part of the Definition which; is a paragraph that begins with the following sentence;

"Recreational or hobby UAS use is flying for enjoyment and not for work, business purposes, or for compensation or hire."

That is it in a nutshell. :DThey (the FAA) probably should have stopped right there instead of waxing philosophic about what a hobby is. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stuart Covey, Tim Jones and aviscomi
The FAA is a federal beauracracy that will interpret its rules and regulations as it seems fit.

Personally I think if you get paid for drone video work, you fall under commercial rules. You are free to "split hairs" as much as you wish but the FAA likely won't care.
 
Keep in mind that Part 107 is much bigger than "Commercial" operations. Granted "Commercial Operations" do fall under Part 107 but anything that is not hobby (excluding a Public Safety COA) falls under Part 107.

Basically this means that regardless if money changes hands or not, if the flight is not 100% hobby you must operate with a Part 107. That's why Search & rescue, News Gathering, and many other nonhobby operations still require Part 107.

Look at it like this... Part 107 is the BIG circle encompassing everyone flying a sUAS (not operating under a Public Use COA). Hobby (part 101) is a Carve Out from P107. This means that we have a smaller circle within the larger circle of which no new rules can be created (unless it increases NAS safety). We have a small circle inside a larger one. If any portion of your flight does not fit perfectly within Hobby/Part 101 your flight defaults to Part 107 rules. It's like coloring from our youth. If at any time your crayon goes outside the line of the small inner circle (Hobby/P101) you fail the litmus test and you're operating P107.

For the record, you can not "fly for someone else" in any capacity and it still be hobby/recreational. The moment you are not flying for your OWN personal enjoyment you've removed yourself from the small circle and are now subject to the full Part 107 regulations which are codified into law and enforceable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sar104, Dave Pitman and FLYBOYJ
Dave Pitman said:
Pat, do you have example of anyone "not getting away with it" without some sort of incident cause I can't find any. Thx.
Click to expand...

If you're asking if I have an example of someone doing as the OP states and getting a call from the FAA, No. But there are several cases on YouTube where posters have been contacted. One in particular is a 107 Operator, that makes a ton of videos that to a non 107 look as if he is breaking a lot of rules, has been investigated twice. His name is Ken Heron, he is a prolific poster and has been growing very quickly over the last year.

It is clear that the FAA are cherry picking prominent and/or high profile targets possibly to have the maximum effect, but as you know its not having enough of an effect.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Maddog said:
Personally I think if you get paid for drone video work, you fall under commercial rules. You are free to "split hairs" as much as you wish but the FAA likely won't care.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.
I don't think that the CAA (UK) would care either: "commercial gain" Is their term.

I was beginning to think that this was a law student's forum, not a commercial drone pilots refuge!
 
Ken's incident was brought to the FAA by a member of the public with a history of animus toward drones or, at least, Ken flying his drone. However, there have been some YouTube channel providers who have been targeted by the FAA because of the the footage they have posted. That means there is someone, like Ken's enemy, who reports stuff they don't like or, perhaps, worse...the FAA *may* review drone videos posted online (though that seems unlikely). In one such case, the footage was taken over a national park (IIRC) and the drone scared-off wildlife. And (again IIRC), while you can fly OVER a national park, in most cases you cannot takeoff or land, or disturb the wildlife in one. The pilot was fined.

I, personally, see no reason to do anything under Parts 101, 107 or 61 that might cause the black SUVs to roll up to my house! Just my $0.02!
 
It's been well known (at least in some of our sister forums) that the FAA does (or at least has) visited the forums and "made contact" from actions that were noted on the forums. I don't know how common that is these days but it has been well documented at least 1x on PhantomPilots forum. I don't see why they wouldn't occasionally "patrol" all the forums once in a while.
 
It would be great to see more activity in this area by the FAA. I think there was more news about them checking things out when we were under 333s than I see now.
 

New Posts

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 13 (members: 0, guests: 13)

Forum statistics

Threads
4,372
Messages
38,026
Members
6,161
Latest member
Nimbus