Recreational... Commercial... I really hope the FAA addresses this soon... Or, am I off base?

[ChaseB]

Hello, All:

Hope all is well.

Let me add to the title of this thread that I hope the FAA addresses this based on the assumption I'm not completely off base here...

I’ll preface with I obtained my FAA sUAS Remote Pilot license on day two after Part 107 testing began but haven’t done much with it since... I have full-time job but obtained the license to: (a) have it as a legitimate added commercial service to my side LLC business; (b) become a responsible, knowledgeable, and safe remote pilot; (c), and, essentially, do it legitimately in an effort to contribute to help improve support for all of us that are wanting to do things the right way and gain respect in the aviation industry / community...

I’ve searched high and low throughout different forums and have made several contacts for answers to a few things I’m trying to clarify; however, the responses are ambiguous, and I understand from the evolving industry perspective… There’s not a lot of black-and-white with the FAA regulations… I know none of that is a revelation…

Anyway, I’ve never actually posted my burning questions / thoughts / concerns in regard to the following on a forum, so here goes… I appreciate your feedback and insight in advance…

PREFACE

Yes, the following is repetitive and verbose, but I’m genuinely trying to seek clarification and engage in dialogue… And, I'm confident these are burning questions / concerns for many who have their FAA sUAS Remote Pilot license... When it comes to being a licensed FAA sUAS Remote Pilot, a "use common sense" response to the items below isn't applicable...

It's important that I reiterate, as mentioned, “one” of the reasons I obtained my FAA sUAS Remote Pilot license was to simply have the OPTION to operate for commercial purposes for my SIDE LLC business in the event a commercial opportunity or need presented itself… From the beginning, I never intended to actively pursue (key words - "actively pursue") aerial business…

Ultimately, the “majority” of the time I just want to fly for fun, recreationally…

THE SCENARIO:

I am visiting family in the Denver, Colorado, metropolitan area and want to go to a large park / grass field at a nearby elementary or middle school (school is out; the school administration has no issues with it, etc; assume there’s no one there and I wouldn’t be flying over homes, people, etc. etc. etc.), and fly my newly acquired DJI Mavic Pro around the field "recreationally" for “fun” with an altitude no higher than a few feet above the tree-line (let’s say <=50 feet), and well within the visual line-of-sight (let's say a distance of 500-700 feet away)… And, while I’m here I may want to do this a few times "spontaneously"…

Again, key items: Fly for “fun”, altitude <= 50ft; open space; well within visual line-of-sight (500-700 feet away); I’m from out-of-state visiting family in the Denver, Colorado, metropolitan area.

The obvious: As you can imagine with any large metropolitan area, the sectional chart looks like a three-year-old got a hold of a box of crayons and scribbled and colored across every square inch.

Contained within the five-mile radius of where my family lives, and where I want to fly "recreationally," there is an Air Force base, several heliports, and a private airport... And, the area falls in Class D airspace...

I understand airspace classification, etc. but, on a side note, one can't argue the fact that a major metropolitan area on a sectional chart can be very overwhelming and confusing…

And, to address it early, yes, as a licensed sUAS Remote Pilot, I understand and support that I am held to a higher standard - even when flying recreationally... (Now, here come the "buts")...

However, ultimately, I want to open up dialogue and get clarity / feedback around my "recreational" scenario above and below.... Yes, it's obvious I’m beating a dead horse; but I'm doing so with legitimate cause... I think it becomes blatantly clear about what I’m struggling with and I absolutely cannot be the only one…

THE CONFUSION / ISSUES / CONCERNS:

• There are obviously HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of “recreational” drone owners throughout the world... Thousands across the United States.... In the Denver, Colorado, metropolitan area alone, I'm confident there are thousands of recreational drone owners…

• So, using the example, again where every square inch of a metropolitan area is covered with CONTROLLED airspace, based on the FAA “recreational” regulations, the operators of ALL of those “recreational” drones — who are simply flying "recreationally" in a park (make the assumption there are no local drone ordinances, etc.), below tree level or a few feet above tree level, and within visual line-of-sight where NO commercial / private aircraft / helicopter would be flying at that altitude, etc. — are required to contact / notify ALL of the control towers for EVERY airport and heliport within five miles… and, in advance???

• Again, in the scenario above where my family lives and where I want to fly “recreationally,” there is an Air Force base, three heliports, a private airport... Class D airspace... I, nor have any of my family, ever seen helicopters (medical or military) or any other aircraft flying above residential rooftops or open space less than 500ft.... The FAA would REALLY require that I contact / notify those FIVE different control towers even though, again, I would be flying “recreationally,” in a park / open space, <= 50ft in altitude, within visual line-of-sight, etc. etc. etc. etc.?

• Then, add to that, as a licensed FAA sUAS Remote Pilot and being held to a higher standard, having to "consider" (not required but again think of the key word "higher standard") completing a pre-flight checklist, document weather, etc. etc. etc., again, when just wanting to fly my DJI Mavic Pro at random "recreationally" for fun in a park/open space for 30 minutes, below 50ft in altitude, within visual line-of-sight, etc. etc… Again, I respect the rules... ... ... .... But, on the recreational side, specifically using my scenario above??? ... ... ... ... Well... ... That’s absurd…

• Lastly, to top it off, let me add the commercial operation perspective to that scenario into the mix… The SAME scenario except a commercial situation where a realtor wants me to shoot video of a house next to the same park where I want to fly recreationally… Make the assumption I’m approved to operate my business in the state… I would simply be capturing footage flying around and over the house no higher than 50 feet in altitude and well within visual line-of-sight… Based on the FAA commercial regulations, because I would want to operate commercially and the home is in “controlled” airspace, I would actually have to request / submit an FAA Airspace Waiver online, which suggests a 90-day (yes, NINETY) lead time… Again, think about the scenario… Again… And, again… Think about it one more time... Ok... No aircraft would be flying that low over a home… Less than 50ft altitude… Visual line-of-sight… Simply capturing footage of a home… You have to tell the realtor that you can absolutely get that footage for them and for the other 30 homes they have listed across the entire metropolitan area no problem and, based on where those 30 homes are located, you only have to submit 15 waivers with the FAA and “hopefully” none will get kicked back/rejected and they’ll all get approved between 30 - 90 days… But, yes, Mr./Mrs. Realtor, I understand you are a realtor and you need to add this to your listing now… Yes, I know we potentially won’t even be flying above the roof on any of those properties… But, don’t worry… Hang tight for 30-90 days… ... ... ... ... Absurd…
  
  
• Commercial scenarios related to flying in controlled airspace above 400 feet, flying at night, flying over people, etc? In those types of scenarios, yes, I support the FAA authorization / waiver requirement… And, those same scenarios being prohibited recreationally, yes, I support that... I logically get that… But for commercial scenarios relating to flying at VERY low altitude (<=50ft) to capture footage for a realtor or a car dealership, etc… ... .... Absurd…

Thoughts? Am I off base entirely? Did something in my Part 107 education slip in one ear and out of the other? PLEASE (no, really, please) tell me I’m missing something and wrote this all for nothing…

 

[andy_k]

The law is being slow to catch up all over the world.

!0 to 15 years ago if you wanted to fly commercially over a city in the UK it took at least 90 days to arrange. Permits from the city, permits from the police, traffic closures, air space clearance, insurance, models, cast, film and camera crews so a 90 day wait for any form of permit wasn't unreasonable. There was no just turning up, flying for 15 minutes and leaving.

We have come to expect everything to be instant because in many ways that's how life is. Web/mail/news etc but some things still take time - government departments don't work any quicker because they are still working the 'old' way.

Meantime, we have to abide by the rules, it may seem like the 'recreational flyers' are getting it easy at the moment but I'm pretty sure that the time will come when they have abide by the same if not stricter rules.

 

[Meta4]

You are asking the same question that was asked in this thread: Gut check time - what would you do?
You'll find a range of opinions from common sense to extreme fundamentalist and even a few that are reckless.

 

[sar104]

Hello, All:

Hope all is well.

Let me add to the title of this thread that I hope the FAA addresses this based on the assumption I'm not completely off base here...

I’ll preface with I obtained my FAA sUAS Remote Pilot license on day two after Part 107 testing began but haven’t done much with it since... I have full-time job but obtained the license to: (a) have it as a legitimate added commercial service to my side LLC business; (b) become a responsible, knowledgeable, and safe remote pilot; (c), and, essentially, do it legitimately in an effort to contribute to help improve support for all of us that are wanting to do things the right way and gain respect in the aviation industry / community...

I’ve searched high and low throughout different forums and have made several contacts for answers to a few things I’m trying to clarify; however, the responses are ambiguous, and I understand from the evolving industry perspective… There’s not a lot of black-and-white with the FAA regulations… I know none of that is a revelation…

Anyway, I’ve never actually posted my burning questions / thoughts / concerns in regard to the following on a forum, so here goes… I appreciate your feedback and insight in advance…

PREFACE

Yes, the following is repetitive and verbose, but I’m genuinely trying to seek clarification and engage in dialogue… And, I'm confident these are burning questions / concerns for many who have their FAA sUAS Remote Pilot license... When it comes to being a licensed FAA sUAS Remote Pilot, a "use common sense" response to the items below isn't applicable...

It's important that I reiterate, as mentioned, “one” of the reasons I obtained my FAA sUAS Remote Pilot license was to simply have the OPTION to operate for commercial purposes for my SIDE LLC business in the event a commercial opportunity or need presented itself… From the beginning, I never intended to actively pursue (key words - "actively pursue") aerial business…

Ultimately, the “majority” of the time I just want to fly for fun, recreationally…

THE SCENARIO:

I am visiting family in the Denver, Colorado, metropolitan area and want to go to a large park / grass field at a nearby elementary or middle school (school is out; the school administration has no issues with it, etc; assume there’s no one there and I wouldn’t be flying over homes, people, etc. etc. etc.), and fly my newly acquired DJI Mavic Pro around the field "recreationally" for “fun” with an altitude no higher than a few feet above the tree-line (let’s say <=50 feet), and well within the visual line-of-sight (let's say a distance of 500-700 feet away)… And, while I’m here I may want to do this a few times "spontaneously"…

Again, key items: Fly for “fun”, altitude <= 50ft; open space; well within visual line-of-sight (500-700 feet away); I’m from out-of-state visiting family in the Denver, Colorado, metropolitan area.

The obvious: As you can imagine with any large metropolitan area, the sectional chart looks like a three-year-old got a hold of a box of crayons and scribbled and colored across every square inch.

Contained within the five-mile radius of where my family lives, and where I want to fly "recreationally," there is an Air Force base, several heliports, and a private airport... And, the area falls in Class D airspace...

I understand airspace classification, etc. but, on a side note, one can't argue the fact that a major metropolitan area on a sectional chart can be very overwhelming and confusing…

And, to address it early, yes, as a licensed sUAS Remote Pilot, I understand and support that I am held to a higher standard - even when flying recreationally... (Now, here come the "buts")...

However, ultimately, I want to open up dialogue and get clarity / feedback around my "recreational" scenario above and below.... Yes, it's obvious I’m beating a dead horse; but I'm doing so with legitimate cause... I think it becomes blatantly clear about what I’m struggling with and I absolutely cannot be the only one…

THE CONFUSION / ISSUES / CONCERNS:

• There are obviously HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of “recreational” drone owners throughout the world... Thousands across the United States.... In the Denver, Colorado, metropolitan area alone, I'm confident there are thousands of recreational drone owners…

• So, using the example, again where every square inch of a metropolitan area is covered with CONTROLLED airspace, based on the FAA “recreational” regulations, the operators of ALL of those “recreational” drones — who are simply flying "recreationally" in a park (make the assumption there are no local drone ordinances, etc.), below tree level or a few feet above tree level, and within visual line-of-sight where NO commercial / private aircraft / helicopter would be flying at that altitude, etc. — are required to contact / notify ALL of the control towers for EVERY airport and heliport within five miles… and, in advance???

• Again, in the scenario above where my family lives and where I want to fly “recreationally,” there is an Air Force base, three heliports, a private airport... Class D airspace... I, nor have any of my family, ever seen helicopters (medical or military) or any other aircraft flying above residential rooftops or open space less than 500ft.... The FAA would REALLY require that I contact / notify those FIVE different control towers even though, again, I would be flying “recreationally,” in a park / open space, <= 50ft in altitude, within visual line-of-sight, etc. etc. etc. etc.?

• Then, add to that, as a licensed FAA sUAS Remote Pilot and being held to a higher standard, having to "consider" (not required but again think of the key word "higher standard") completing a pre-flight checklist, document weather, etc. etc. etc., again, when just wanting to fly my DJI Mavic Pro at random "recreationally" for fun in a park/open space for 30 minutes, below 50ft in altitude, within visual line-of-sight, etc. etc… Again, I respect the rules... ... ... .... But, on the recreational side, specifically using my scenario above??? ... ... ... ... Well... ... That’s absurd…

• Lastly, to top it off, let me add the commercial operation perspective to that scenario into the mix… The SAME scenario except a commercial situation where a realtor wants me to shoot video of a house next to the same park where I want to fly recreationally… Make the assumption I’m approved to operate my business in the state… I would simply be capturing footage flying around and over the house no higher than 50 feet in altitude and well within visual line-of-sight… Based on the FAA commercial regulations, because I would want to operate commercially and the home is in “controlled” airspace, I would actually have to request / submit an FAA Airspace Waiver online, which suggests a 90-day (yes, NINETY) lead time… Again, think about the scenario… Again… And, again… Think about it one more time... Ok... No aircraft would be flying that low over a home… Less than 50ft altitude… Visual line-of-sight… Simply capturing footage of a home… You have to tell the realtor that you can absolutely get that footage for them and for the other 30 homes they have listed across the entire metropolitan area no problem and, based on where those 30 homes are located, you only have to submit 15 waivers with the FAA and “hopefully” none will get kicked back/rejected and they’ll all get approved between 30 - 90 days… But, yes, Mr./Mrs. Realtor, I understand you are a realtor and you need to add this to your listing now… Yes, I know we potentially won’t even be flying above the roof on any of those properties… But, don’t worry… Hang tight for 30-90 days… ... ... ... ... Absurd…
  
  
• Commercial scenarios related to flying in controlled airspace above 400 feet, flying at night, flying over people, etc? In those types of scenarios, yes, I support the FAA authorization / waiver requirement… And, those same scenarios being prohibited recreationally, yes, I support that... I logically get that… But for commercial scenarios relating to flying at VERY low altitude (<=50ft) to capture footage for a realtor or a car dealership, etc… ... .... Absurd…

Thoughts? Am I off base entirely? Did something in my Part 107 education slip in one ear and out of the other? PLEASE (no, really, please) tell me I’m missing something and wrote this all for nothing…

It looks like you understand the rules fine, but just don't like them.

Yes - you can fly recreationally at that location but you are required to notify all airports/heliports within 5 miles. You would need a waiver to do commercial work in the Class D airspace.

 

[Walt Rush]

I haven't enjoyed a read like that since "War and Peace". Given the plethora of nuances in the scenario(s) you posed, you would have been in violation of FAA Part 107.

 

[BigAl07]

First off WELCOME to PhantomPilots.

That's quite a first post.

A) It doesn't matter how high you fly off the ground (this isn't about 400' AGL rule) the rules/laws/guidelines start at 1" and go up.

B) You follow the rules for your intended flight regardless of your wishes/wants. It's not an option

You have to take into account "what if" situations like:
1) What if you get disoriented and in the process of trying to regain your composure you fly up to 300' (ascending for safety sake).
2) What if you have your RTH settings are incorrect and you have a loss-of-signal event and your aircraft initiates RTH at a higher altitude than you intend to fly???

 

[Crack The Sky]

sar104 is spot on, (as always).
" It looks like you understand the rules fine, but just don't like them.
Yes - you can fly recreationally at that location but you are required to notify all airports/heliports within 5 miles. You would need a waiver to do commercial work in the Class D airspace."

It's very simple; follow the rules that are in place. I've followed every FAA rule for over 40 years. It's really not hard, if you love it and enjoy doing your very best at everything you take on.
If it's a hassle for you, and you have to put that much brain power into hashing it out every time you want to fly, and I mean no disrespect; I suggest you just sell the drone. Turn you're Part 107 Cert in to the FAA, and be done with it. You'll be happier.

Frankly, after a lifetime of flying airplanes, for me flying drones is boring.
I would not think of taking it out to fly recreationally.
And truthfully, virtually every second of footage shot from a drone I have ever seen posted is boring.
Reading the comments that are then posted, raving about the footage, are even worse then watching the footage itself.
"Great work Dude", Epic",.....
And then there is the posting Titles:
"Look how I hit the tree"
"Check out the rippin moves as I smash into rock wall I thought I could clear, in some National Park".
"Crashed my drone today",
And the sincere and caring comments:
"I'm really sorry dude, that's a bummer, but at least you got some bitcXXin footage"
Boring.
The drone is the Brownie camera for this generation. Every swinging thinks they are a cinematographer now, and even worse, they believe their poorly executed work has such importance that it needs to be shared with the world.
Boring.
The FAA's lax approach to allowing people into the airspace who know nothing, and have nothing but contempt for the Regulations, after generations of knowledgeable, respectful pilots paved the way, is nothing short of a travesty. A large percentage of those who are flying drones flaunt their contempt for the law by having the audacity to post their latest criminal exploit for the world to see.
In a remarkably short time the entire wonder of semi-autonomous flight has turned into a junk show.
Some narrow fields where the drone is invaluable, will emerge and strengthen, as they should.
Recreational use? Very bad idea and it should be banned quickly, and completely.
Get out ahead of the curve and sell your drone. It was a nice idea, that did not work.

 

[sar104]

sar104 is spot on, (as always). " It looks like you understand the rules fine, but just don't like them.
Yes - you can fly recreationally at that location but you are required to notify all airports/heliports within 5 miles. You would need a waiver to do commercial work in the Class D airspace."
It's very simple; follow the rules that are in place. I've followed every FAA rule for over 40 years. It's a breeze.
If you really have to put that much brain power into hashing it out every time you want to fly, and I mean no disrespect; I suggest you just sell the drone. Turn you're Part 107 Cert in to the FAA, and be done with it. You'll be happier.

Frankly, for me flying drones is boring. I would not think of taking it out to fly recreationally.
And truthfully, virtually every second of footage shot from a drone I have ever seen posted is boring.
Reading the comments that are then posted, raving about the footage, are even worse then watching the footage itself.
"Great work Dude", Epic",.....
And then ther is the posting Titles:
"Look how I hit the tree"
"Check out the rippin moves as I smash into rock wall I thought I could clear, in some National Park".
"Crashed my drone today",
And the sincere and caring comments:
"I'm really sorry dude, that's a bummer, but at least you got some bitcXXin footage"
Boring.
The drone is the Brownie camera for this generation. Every swinging d thinks they are a cinematographer now.
Boring.
The FAA's lax approach to allowing people into the airspace who know nothing, and have nothing but contempt for the Regulations, is nothing short of a travesty. A large percentage of those who are flying, flaunt their contempt for the law by having the audacity to post their latest criminal exploit for the world to see.
In a remarkably short time the entire wonder of semi-autonomous flight has turned into a junk show.
Some narrow fields where the drone is invaluable, will emerge and strengthen, as they should.
Recreational use? Very bad idea and it should be banned, period.
Get out ahead of the curve and sell your drone. It was a nice idea, that did not work.

I have to admit that I have conflicting feelings on the issue. Advances in technology often lead to both positives and negatives. For example, the huge strides made in digital imaging and the impact those have had on consumer camera technology has been almost entirely positive unless, perhaps, you are struggling to make a living from stock photography.

The ramifications of the development of inexpensive, long-range, easy-to-fly sUAS are not so clear cut. It's obvious, I think, that the commercial and public service opportunities are virtually limitless. And from a creative perspective it opens up all kinds of possibilities, even if the bulk of the amateur material currently being produced is not that great in terms of quality. In addition, it is undeniably fun to be able to view the world in a way that was previously impossible without an aircraft. On the other hand, it is enabling all kinds of behavior that presents new and significant hazards both to airspace and to people on the ground. The prior existence of a legislatively-protected model aircraft community has inhibited the regulation of these hazards that I'm sure would otherwise have occurred.

From a public perception perspective, there are the unfortunate connotations evoked by the word "drone", with the tenuous connection to the armed, military version, and also privacy concerns. So far we tend to dismiss those with the observation that the cameras, being wide-angle, are unable to invade privacy except at very close range. However, having had the opportunity to check out the Z30, with its 30x optical zoom, on the M200 platform, I think that it is clear that similar technology will soon be available on consumer UAVs. At that point, if not sooner, there will be intense pressure to introduce regulation that goes well beyond the current recreational rules. I'm not at all sure how this is going to play out.

 

[Crack The Sky]

Hopefully, it will play out by the implementation of a complete ban on recreational use. The maturity and intelligence level required to operate in the airspace is not being shown in a large enough percentage of flights, to allow it. In addition to the controlled airspace incursions, (with willful contempt or utter ignorance), huge expectation of privacy and trespassing issues are looming. This is going to get ugly.

 

[N017RW]

Rec/hobby flying is supposed to be based on CBO guidelines (like AMA) so they should never be flown in many of the locations we hear of 'accidents'.

 

[Crack The Sky]

The only way I would come off of my position on a total ban of recreational flying is if undefeatable 3D geo fencing and violation pinging were able to be installed. As far as the drones out there now, they are being crashed so fast that the natural attrition will eliminate them eventually, (unfortunately not fast enough for my liking).

 

[sar104]

Hopefully, it will play out by the implementation of a complete ban on recreational use. The maturity and intelligence level required to operate in the airspace is not being shown in a large enough percentage of flights, to allow it. In addition to the controlled airspace incursions, (with willful contempt or utter ignorance), huge expectation of privacy and trespassing issues are looming. This is going to get ugly.

A compromise might be to require some form of certification. I can't think of any other form of public activity that potentially poses such broad risks to others and yet does not require certification. Driving and piloting (manned aircraft) are obvious examples, requiring both certification and insurance. I think you mentioned previously that Part 107 should have been the requirement for recreational use, and something like that would certainly weed out a lot of unsafe flying.

 

[Crack The Sky]

A compromise might be to require some form of certification. I can't think of any other form of public activity that potentially poses such broad risks to others and yet does not require certification. Driving and piloting (manned aircraft) are obvious examples, requiring both certification and insurance. I think you mentioned previously that Part 107 should have been the requirement for recreational use, and something like that would certainly weed out a lot of unsafe flying.

Agreed. But as we have seen posted here, the Part 107 testing obviously falls far short of ensuring even the most basic understanding of the regulations and airspace requirements.
And I paraphrase:
"I have my Part 107 and am going to be flying on a commercial shoot in LAX area. Do I need to notify the police, or it's not that big a deal because I won't be going too high?".
Huh?

 

[sar104]

Agreed. But as we have seen posted here, the Part 107 testing obviously falls far short of ensuring even the most basic understanding of the regulations and airspace requirements.
And I paraphrase:
"I have my Part 107 and am going to be flying on a commercial shoot in LAX area. Do I need to notify the police, or it's not that big a deal because I won't be going too high?".
Huh?

True, but if you saw the OP's latest post this morning in that thread I think it's clear that it was not a genuine question from a Part 107 certified pilot. He is studiously ignoring all the followup questions. That said, I have no idea what his motivation was for posting in the first place.

 

[Crack The Sky]

I admire your lean towards a positive outcome to this nightmare. I, on the other hand, have settled into a funk over the implications of it all.

 

[ChaseB]

I haven't enjoyed a read like that since "War and Peace". Given the plethora of nuances in the scenario(s) you posed, you would have been in violation of FAA Part 107.

@walt... LOL! I know... I know... It's a manifesto...

 

[Indiana_pyro]

sar104 is spot on, (as always).
" It looks like you understand the rules fine, but just don't like them.
Yes - you can fly recreationally at that location but you are required to notify all airports/heliports within 5 miles. You would need a waiver to do commercial work in the Class D airspace."

It's very simple; follow the rules that are in place. I've followed every FAA rule for over 40 years. It's really not hard, if you love it and enjoy doing your very best at everything you take on.
If it's a hassle for you, and you have to put that much brain power into hashing it out every time you want to fly, and I mean no disrespect; I suggest you just sell the drone. Turn you're Part 107 Cert in to the FAA, and be done with it. You'll be happier.

Frankly, after a lifetime of flying airplanes, for me flying drones is boring.
I would not think of taking it out to fly recreationally.
And truthfully, virtually every second of footage shot from a drone I have ever seen posted is boring.
Reading the comments that are then posted, raving about the footage, are even worse then watching the footage itself.
"Great work Dude", Epic",.....
And then there is the posting Titles:
"Look how I hit the tree"
"Check out the rippin moves as I smash into rock wall I thought I could clear, in some National Park".
"Crashed my drone today",
And the sincere and caring comments:
"I'm really sorry dude, that's a bummer, but at least you got some bitcXXin footage"
Boring.
The drone is the Brownie camera for this generation. Every swinging thinks they are a cinematographer now, and even worse, they believe their poorly executed work has such importance that it needs to be shared with the world.
Boring.
The FAA's lax approach to allowing people into the airspace who know nothing, and have nothing but contempt for the Regulations, after generations of knowledgeable, respectful pilots paved the way, is nothing short of a travesty. A large percentage of those who are flying drones flaunt their contempt for the law by having the audacity to post their latest criminal exploit for the world to see.
In a remarkably short time the entire wonder of semi-autonomous flight has turned into a junk show.
Some narrow fields where the drone is invaluable, will emerge and strengthen, as they should.
Recreational use? Very bad idea and it should be banned quickly, and completely.
Get out ahead of the curve and sell your drone. It was a nice idea, that did not work.

It's funny how the negative guy just will keep posting and posting and eventually ruin a conversation.

 

[Meta4]

And truthfully, virtually every second of footage shot from a drone I have ever seen posted is boring.
Reading the comments that are then posted, raving about the footage, are even worse then watching the footage itself.
...
The drone is the Brownie camera for this generation. Every swinging thinks they are a cinematographer now, and even worse, they believe their poorly executed work has such importance that it needs to be shared with the world.
Boring.

How is that any different from ground based people with cameras?

 

[andy_k]

How is that any different from ground based people with cameras?

they tend to be a lot quieter, other than that, much the same

 

[Crack The Sky]

How is that any different from ground based people with cameras?

Simple. Because they are flying in the NAS without a clue or care about regulations. The posts here, boasting of their latest illegal exploits are disgusting.