107 rules

Rg155 · Nov 9, 2017

Hi,
So one I know owns a photography business in Illinois and says that you don’t need to have the part 107 license because the Supreme Court ruled it was unjust. Isn’t this just for the registration and not the part 107?

sar104 · Nov 9, 2017

Correct. The ruling was about registration of aircraft flown recreationally. Part 107 and aircraft registration is still required for all non-recreational sUAS operations.

Rg155 · Nov 9, 2017

sar104 said:
Correct. The ruling was about registration of aircraft flown recreationally. Part 107 and aircraft registration is still required for all non-recreational sUAS operations.

So if I’m using it for business I have to have the part 107?

doktorinjh · Nov 9, 2017

Rg155 said:
I have to have the part 107

Yes, if you engage in any of the following, then you need to have a Part 107: "Flying for commercial use (e.g. providing aerial surveying or photography services) Flying incidental to a business (e.g. doing roof inspections or real estate photography)" See this page.

sar104 · Nov 9, 2017

doktorinjh said:
Yes, if you engage in any of the following, then you need to have a Part 107: "Flying for commercial use (e.g. providing aerial surveying or photography services) Flying incidental to a business (e.g. doing roof inspections or real estate photography)" See this page.

It's more general than that as can be seen from the applicable law which is actually written more clearly than the FAA attempt to explain on their webpage, and makes it clear that Part 107 always applies unless you are protected by Section 336:

PUBLIC LAW 112-95 SEC. 336. SPECIAL RULE FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law relating to the incorporation of unmanned aircraft systems into Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, including this subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if—

(1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;

(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community- based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;

(3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered by a community-based organization;

(4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and (5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport) with prior notice of the operation (model aircraft operators flying from a permanent location within 5 miles of an airport should establish a mutually-agreed upon operating procedure with the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport)).

(b) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the Administrator to pursue enforcement action against persons operating model aircraft who endanger the safety of the national airspace system.

(c) MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘model aircraft’’ means an unmanned aircraft that is—

(1) capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;

(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and

(3) flown for hobby or recreational purposes.

BigAl07 · Nov 9, 2017

It's really this simple:

Flying for hobby/fun/recreation for yourself and only yourself no Part 107 required.
Flying for ANY other reason is going to require some type of Certification/Authorization from the FAA.

If your flight doesn't fit 100% in the Hobby/Recreation box it defaults to Part 107 (or something similar for Public Safety Use) and you are held accountable to those Laws & Regulations.

Texas Gonzo · Nov 12, 2017

There is one loophole i stumbled upon when surfing the faa site a couple of weeks back. You can technically sell footage as a hobbyist at a later date should someone find it useful. As long as you originally had no commercial intent, its supposed to be cool on occasion. I wouldn't push my luck with this however. Wish I'd bookmarked that now...

BigAl07 · Nov 12, 2017

Texas Gonzo said:
There is one loophole i stumbled upon when surfing the faa site a couple of weeks back. You can technically sell footage as a hobbyist at a later date should someone find it useful. As long as you originally had no commercial intent, its supposed to be cool on occasion. I wouldn't push my luck with this however. Wish I'd bookmarked that now...

That's been well known but it's basically a one-off situation. One time no problem but repetitive times you're working without a license.

barefootbeachcombing · Nov 12, 2017

Texas Gonzo said:
There is one loophole i stumbled upon when surfing the faa site a couple of weeks back. You can technically sell footage as a hobbyist at a later date should someone find it useful. As long as you originally had no commercial intent, its supposed to be cool on occasion. I wouldn't push my luck with this however. Wish I'd bookmarked that now...

Perhaps this is what you are remembering.

FAA Says Media Can Use Drone Photos From Citizen Journalists, Not Professionals

Texas Gonzo · Nov 16, 2017

Yep Barefoot, that looks familiar.

A quick thought on being certified under part 107... at present, I fly purely as a hobbyist. Suffering with chronic insomnia, I fly at night a LOT on my 52 acres 'out in the sticks' 10 or so miles from the nearest small town. For the record, I keep it at or below 200 ft altitude before someone slams me (Usually more like 100 ft).
Anyway, I get no >commercial< ops between dusk and dawn... but what about flying solely for kicks at night once certified under 107 ?

Anyone ran into this situation, or even given it any thought before? I'm not seeing this addressed at all on the FAA site. If becoming certified will totally bar me from night flights, I'll just remain a hobbyist.

sar104 · Nov 16, 2017

Texas Gonzo said:
Yep Barefoot, that looks familiar.

A quick thought on being certified under part 107... at present, I fly purely as a hobbyist. Suffering with chronic insomnia, I fly at night a LOT on my 52 acres 'out in the sticks' 10 or so miles from the nearest small town. For the record, I keep it at or below 200 ft altitude before someone slams me (Usually more like 100 ft).
Anyway, I get no >commercial< ops between dusk and dawn... but what about flying solely for kicks at night once certified under 107 ?

Anyone ran into this situation, or even given it any thought before? I'm not seeing this addressed at all on the FAA site. If becoming certified will totally bar me from night flights, I'll just remain a hobbyist.

You can fly recreationally even if you are Part 107 certified.

Texas Gonzo · Nov 16, 2017

I had mixed emotions even asking, but, sometimes having a license or certification like this can cause issues where it wouldn't otherwise. Thanky thanky for the input Sar!

sar104 · Nov 16, 2017

Texas Gonzo said:
I had mixed emotions even asking, but, sometimes having a license or certification like this can cause issues where it wouldn't otherwise. Thanky thanky for the input Sar!

It's worth adding that the FAA has made it clear that the consequences of recreationally flying unsafely or irresponsibly would adversely impact a Part 107 license, so to that extent you could regard it as being held to a higher standard. In the circumstances that you describe a better choice might be simply to get a waiver for the Part 107 daylight requirement.

RocUAV · Nov 16, 2017

barefootbeachcombing said:
Perhaps this is what you are remembering.

FAA Says Media Can Use Drone Photos From Citizen Journalists, Not Professionals

The article is from May 2015, long before Part 107 came into effect and as only highly restrictive 333 rules governed the professionals.

sar104 · Nov 16, 2017

RocUAV said:
The article is from May 2015, long before Part 107 came into effect and as only highly restrictive 333 rules governed the professionals.

However, it specifically addresses the restrictions of Part 336, which is still the existing Public Law on recreational sUAS operations and which were not changed in any way by the implementation of 14 CFR Parts 101 or 107. It still holds.