Photographer fined after drone crashes in Yellowstone

[Warren Faidley]

Interesting story in the BBC about a Dutch tourist who crashed his drone in Yellowstone and was fined $3,000. This was because drones are not allowed in National Parks, but raises some interesting questions.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29420039

A number of chasers (including myself) have used or may be considering the use of drones for chasing video and related projects like damage / rescue surveys.

Not sure if any chasers have had any issues?

The FAA has a very clear set of rules and regulations:

http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=76240

Warren

 

[rdale]

A number of chasers (including myself) have used or may be considering the use of drones for chasing video and related projects like damage / rescue surveys.

Well, first issue would be to make sure you don't fly where it's illegal, like in a National Park

But otherwise as long as you aren't making money in any way from it, even if that's YouTube clicks, then you're fine. If you get a penny from that drone video, it's illegal. If you are at all affiliated with the government, it's illegal even if you aren't getting that penny.

 

[Dan Robinson]

Right now drone video is a nice toy for chasers who have a spare $3000 (and up) to burn. There's no chance to pay for the cost of the purchase with video sales, which is how I've always financed my gear - so I've held off on getting one. By the time the FAA gets around to crafting the rules, there will be so many chasers with them that the novelty and worth of having one will be nil. They are easy to crash and break, so you'll also need to put away funds to replace parts. I think there will be registration and insurance requirements for commercial use that will run mid-four figures per year, if Australia's regs are any indication.

Up to this point, the chasers who have pushed the envelope in the realm of commercial use have had a TV station or some other deep pocket group to help back their legal efforts if they draw the ire of the FAA. The rest of us would be on our own if we tried to "fly under the radar" and found ourselves facing the Feds.

 

[rdale]

Good drones with live streaming video are in the $1000 range... If you're okay with recording it's about $400 (although a new one coming next month is only $59!)

 

[Dan Robinson]

The additional expense is when you add a good gimbal and FPV system, which you really need to do any serious video (otherwise you're flying blind as to what the camera is framing).

I have a little Hubsan quad that carries a 720p keychain camera. I spent about $80 on the quad and another $50 on the camera. It's pretty unstable and hard to fly (it doesn't have GPS assisted flight like most of the bigger ones) and difficult to get anything more than a web-quality still image. The video's throwaway-grade. It is fun to fly though.

I think costs will keep coming down, especially once the FAA gets their ducks in a row.

 

[Stan Rose]

Interesting...and confusing as hell. There are hundreds if not thousands of people who are making money (indirectly) from Youtube videos that use drone footage. Are they all in violation of federal law? Not long ago I saw a video that won a contest that payed off $10K to the winner--and it had drone footage in it. Was that person in violation of the rules? Im surprised the FAA hasn't come knocking on their door if it was.

 

[Stan Rose]

A bit dated but pertinent;

http://rt.com/usa/155756-faa-journalist-drone-tornado-investigation/

And of course, Hollyweird is exempt but we're not:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregory...ood-faa-will-announce-approval-this-thursday/

 

[Dan Robinson]

Everyone doing it has a chance of getting caught, though the risk is small. Maybe not though if it ends up on national TV like tornado damage shots have been.

 

[Rob H]

1. Chaser spends $1000 of chase money on a drone
2. Chaser crashes drone
3. One less chaser on several setups.

I like this new drone thing a lot.

 

[rdale]

Interesting...and confusing as hell. There are hundreds if not thousands of people who are making money (indirectly) from Youtube videos that use drone footage.

There are THAT many making money off it? I figured you'd need a LOT of clicks to make money. but...

Are they all in violation of federal law?

Yes.

Not long ago I saw a video that won a contest that payed off $10K to the winner--and it had drone footage in it. Was that person in violation of the rules?

I'd guess not - that's not using the drone for commercial purposes. As a government official, you can give me drone footage, and I can even look over your shoulder for the livestream, but I cannot touch the controls.

 

[Todd Rector]

I am liking Rob's theory quite a bit...

I saw my first "chaser drone" on a June 29th chase in NW Iowa. His drone was about 50 feet above his car, but he wasn't even close to where the action was. We were hauling a** eastward to catch up with a cell, and quickly left him miles behind.

I know very little about R/C flying, but I can't help but wonder what happens to one of those things when they are hit with an 80mph RFD gust. GPS stabilization seems pretty cool when you are flying in normal weather, but we don't chase in "normal" weather. Having it programmed to come back to the origin of flight seems like a risky move if you are close enough to the action that you are likely to bail from your location after launch.

 

[Jeff Duda]

1. Chaser spends $1000 of chase money on a drone
2. Chaser crashes drone
3. One less chaser on several setups.

I like this new drone thing a lot.

I would think that as technology improves and people are able to operate larger, more powerful drones from a greater distance that chasing by vehicle would become less popular. Those who can afford to drop a few grand every year for the latest and greatest drone (much like new car models) can chase from their hotel 100 miles away using a drone, leaving the road clear for us poor folk.

 

[Brian Barnes]

Is there any law that states you can't be paid for "editing" video shot from drones? Even in terms of youtube clicks. I suspect that with all the drone video that is on youtube, somebody is making money from those videos, including Google/Youtube.

 

[rdale]

As long as you aren't the one that flew the drone.

 

[Mark Blue]

Myth number #3 found under the FAA link Warren provided states that approval is not needed for hobby or recreational use.

Flying model aircraft solely for hobby or recreational reasons does not require FAA approval. However, hobbyists are advised to operate their aircraft in accordance with the agency's model aircraft guidelines (see Advisory Circular 91-57). In the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-95, Sec 336), Congress exempted model aircraft from new rules or regulations provided the aircraft are operated "in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization."

I don't see a problem here as putting the video on YT and making little, if any money from it hardly qualifies as commercial use. Perhaps I missed the memo and didn't read every single public law they mentioned in the various myth explanations. In addition, what sane pilot in a manned aircraft would fly within close proximity to a supercell thunderstorm at 500 feet or less of altitude? I'm not saying anyone is wrong (maybe I am), I just wonder if we aren't making a mountain out of a molehill.