Dronecast, the Pinnacle of Stupidity

[dragonash]

wow, im surprised this came up here now.

About a month or 2 ago, Fox 5 (here in NYC), had an interview with the kid.
I heard the same "he charges 50k for concerts", he has like 15 people working for him with one of them being a former executive from a well known financial institution.

But when i looked at his website, he has no videos, no info... nothing. So something wasnt adding up and I didnt give a rats ***

 

[HarryT]

I think it's unrealistic to expect a hobbyist to not fly their quad because they live in an urban environment. Much has been discussed about risk mitigation, and it's a good discussion to have, but it doesn't address the tipping point. I think the tipping point for urban flight has to be in areas where there are known groups of people.

I don't know what the rules are in the US, but in the UK it's very clear: you don't fly within 50m (150') of buildings or people. That's 50m horizontally AND vertically. Even if you have public liability insurance (which you'd be nuts to fly without, IMHO), it won't pay out if you break the rules.

 

[tedw123]

wow, im surprised this came up here now.

About a month or 2 ago, Fox 5 (here in NYC), had an interview with the kid.
I heard the same "he charges 50k for concerts", he has like 15 people working for him with one of them being a former executive from a well known financial institution.

But when i looked at his website, he has no videos, no info... nothing. So something wasnt adding up and I didnt give a rats ***

It's so stupid, he is flying a Phantom Vision or plus in video and he says he can charge 50k? For $1,000 anyone putting on a concert can buy there own Phantom Vision and get all the free footage they want! Or better yet if someone wants to spend 50k they can by 50 Phantoms!

 

[ianwood]

Some of his more egregious claims:

• Is approved by the FAA to fly in class B airspace and had FSDO reps with him on the strip.
• Has $15k of proprietary safety modifications to his S1000 that he cannot disclose.
• His lawyer says he's legally approved to fly commercial ops. His lawyer is probably his dog.
• His Phantom flies for 30 minutes on one battery. Mmmm... Possible but very unlikely when you're towing a bed sheet!
• Claims he owns the exclusive rights to flying advertising above crowds. Oh nos, Goodyear blimp, what will you do?

In one of the articles, they mentioned he was frustrated because he couldn't get his Phantom to fly on the Vegas strip, only the S1000 was working. Sounds like the no fly zones did their job. His S1000 will need idiot proofing as well.

It is worth our time to set straight any unscrupulous shysters who make outrageous claims and endanger people. They are casting a very negative light on what is already already a controversial topic.

 

[Acill]

I'll give him credit for attempting to do something new, but not at the expense of safety and making our hobby look bad. People are scared to death of drones as it is. This will just make things even worse the first time he nails someone with that S1000. Those things are big and heavy. I can only imagine what it could do.

 

[dragonash]

I'll give him credit for attempting to do something new, but not at the expense of safety and making our hobby look bad. People are scared to deth of drones as it is. This will just make things even worse the first time he nails someone with that S1000. Those things are big and heavy. I can only imagine what it could do.

I'm with Acill.

Aside from the stupidity of his claims, if some dumb corporate company is willing to pay for that amount (and sign a contract saying that the pilot isnt responsible for any mess ups), then by all means, make some easy money...
until one of us markets to the same people for a fraction of the price lol

 

[ProfessorStein]

It's so stupid, he is flying a Phantom Vision or plus in video and he says he can charge 50k? For $1,000 anyone putting on a concert can buy there own Phantom
Vision and get all the free footage they want! Or better yet if someone wants to spend 50k they can by 50 Phantoms!

But that always happens. $50K is an extreme case, granted, but the market economy is built so that people can capitalize by offering services that customers can easily do themselves. I recently paid a couple thousand dollars for a plumber to come into my house and rebuild a drain in my bathroom. For that money, I could've easily gone out and bought all of pipe that I needed, and all the other tools I needed, at least 10 times over... but paying the plumber was still worth it so that I didn't have to worry about actually doing the work. Like I said, $50k is a little nuts for this guys supposed service... but you can't look at it like any customer who pays that (and I doubt anyone will) could just go out and "buy 50 Phantoms".

Also... most of his other promo materials show him not using a Phantom, but using... I guess... something more akin to a Spreading Wings model, which is more like $3,500 - 4,000. Not that that makes the $50k number any more realistic, but...

 

[ianwood]

No one is paying even a fraction of 50k. Single banner, top tier event, top tier brand, maybe $1-2k and that's for permanent placement, not half an hour here and there. And legality and liability being what it is, every top tier brand I've ever worked with is too smart and too cautious to touch this.

 

[WessexWyvern]

If this guy has been round for a few months now and has even been interviewed on A TV news channel, perhaps he has been authorised by the FAA, money buys you a lot of influence. He's not exactly trying to operate under the radar, surely he'd have been shut down by now thanks to the sort of exposure he's getting if he were operating illegally?

(Although legal or not, IMHO what he's doing is I'll advise at the very least).

 

[EMCSQUAR]

If this guy has been round for a few months now and has even been interviewed on A TV news channel, perhaps he has been authorised by the FAA, money buys you a lot of influence. He's not exactly trying to operate under the radar, surely he'd have been shut down by now thanks to the sort of exposure he's getting if he were operating illegally?

FAA is just building their case. They've been burned in court a couple of times. Between all the publicity evidence this clown is providing, one injury or stray flight and he's going to be the poster child for why drones shouldn't be used for commercial use. I agree w/Ian - this guy is blowing smoke. His 15 minutes of fame is going to land him a large $$$ fine

 

[dragonash]

the FAA cant do anything.
They have no rules in place and just have "suggestions"

It literally is free reign right now for us to do almost anything we want in terms of business.
There are so many commercial drone businesses out there. But if the FAA passes down real rules in the future, they cant go back and say what we were doing was illegal since there were no rules at that time.

 

[HarryT]

There are so many commercial drone businesses out there. But if the FAA passes down real rules in the future, they cant go back and say what we were doing was illegal since there were no rules at that time.

At the end of the day that's for the courts to decide. If the law says that the FAA has the authority to regulate the use of US airspace, then the FAA can issue whatever airspace usage restrictions they wish. Courts will decide whether or not they are legally enforcible.

 

[N017RW]

There are so many commercial drone businesses out there. But if the FAA passes down real rules in the future, they cant go back and say what we were doing was illegal since there were no rules at that time.

At the end of the day that's for the courts to decide. If the law says that the FAA has the authority to regulate the use of US airspace, then the FAA can issue whatever airspace usage restrictions they wish. Courts will decide whether or not they are legally enforcible.

It seems d-nash is addressing retro-activity of future regs., etc..

 

[dragonash]

There are so many commercial drone businesses out there. But if the FAA passes down real rules in the future, they cant go back and say what we were doing was illegal since there were no rules at that time.

At the end of the day that's for the courts to decide. If the law says that the FAA has the authority to regulate the use of US airspace, then the FAA can issue whatever airspace usage restrictions they wish. Courts will decide whether or not they are legally enforcible.

It seems d-nash is addressing retro-activity of future regs., etc..

correct.
Whatever rules are made "now" must be followed. However, for the FAA to say that they should sue someone 6 months ago for a rule they just made "today", would be insane.

 

[HarryT]

It seems d-nash is addressing retro-activity of future regs., etc..

Yes, I know that's what he means, but I don't think it's that cut and dried. The fact that a couple of cases have been thrown out of court doesn't mean that it's wise to assume that a "do whatever you want until specific rules are in place" situation is in force. I honestly think that anyone operating commercially at the moment does face the potential of being landed with a stiff fine. Time will tell. I wouldn't personally risk it.

 

[ianwood]

The FAA does not have much to stand on yet but the guy flew in class B airspace. That's pretty cut and dry. The FAA modernization act gives them jurisdiction and the rules for restricted airspace exist now. That alone should be enough to end his shenanigans.

 

[dragonash]

The FAA does not have much to stand on yet but the guy flew in class B airspace. That's pretty cut and dry. The FAA modernization act gives them jurisdiction and the rules for restricted airspace exist now. That alone should be enough to end his shenanigans.

That is true too.

Hey Ian, I know its been posted somewhere before, but do you have a link to where one can check on specific areas?
And if you do, maybe we can get it stickied.

 

[ianwood]

Hey Ian, I know its been posted somewhere before, but do you have a link to where one can check on specific areas?
And if you do, maybe we can get it stickied.

www.skyvector.com

 

[thongbong]

wow, im surprised this came up here now.

About a month or 2 ago, Fox 5 (here in NYC), had an interview with the kid.
I heard the same "he charges 50k for concerts", he has like 15 people working for him with one of them being a former executive from a well known financial institution.

But when i looked at his website, he has no videos, no info... nothing. So something wasnt adding up and I didnt give a rats ***

I believe it, his daddy has the big bucks and is forking out to make his kids dream come true. Besides for his asinine remarks on being the first to ever do this, the kids got spunk...(of course i'd probably have spunk too if my daddy was a multi-millionaire)

 

[thongbong]

On the same note, I just came up with a fail safe for drones that will make flying in public completely safe... who wants to fund me?