The Verdict Is In at DVinfo.net

Wayne Mann · March 6th, 2014, 10:02 PM

Check this out: Drone Pilot?s Fine Dropped by Judge Finding Against FAA - Bloomberg

Wayne Mann
HeliCam Aerial Media Services, Aerial Video, Aerial Photography

Robert Benda · March 7th, 2014, 07:53 AM

Gah, what a bad article. No good explanation of WHY it was dismissed. Here is what I pieced together:

"While flying a model aircraft “solely for hobby or recreational reasons” doesn’t require approval, hobbyists must operate according to 1981 guidelines, such as staying away from populated areas," (which he didn't)

"Geraghty (the judge" found the guidelines can’t be enforced, at least for people piloting a “model” plane."

"(made )with a plane made with a foam wing and weighing less than 5 pounds,"

Robert Turchick · March 7th, 2014, 01:24 PM

Several other articles list reasons for the dismissal. The interesting thing that has been pointed out is the suit was specifically for his "reckless operation". Which points to there actually being no enforceable ban on commercial use in the first place. The FAA set guidelines and threatened several entities but there is no law to support their wishes…yet. I suspect the first agenda item for the FAA will be defining the different aircraft used as camera platforms. There is a broad sweeping category right now in the aircraft registration process but part of the issue is the crossover into RC aircraft which the FAA doesn't govern. This is not over by a long shot but for now, fly safe and don't give the government a reason to create a law!

March 6th, 2014, 10:02 PM	#1
Wayne Mann New Boot Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Randleman NC Posts: 21	The Verdict Is In Check this out: Drone Pilot?s Fine Dropped by Judge Finding Against FAA - Bloomberg Wayne Mann HeliCam Aerial Media Services, Aerial Video, Aerial Photography

March 7th, 2014, 07:53 AM	#2
Robert Benda Trustee Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Crookston, MN Posts: 1,353	Re: The Verdict Is In Gah, what a bad article. No good explanation of WHY it was dismissed. Here is what I pieced together: "While flying a model aircraft “solely for hobby or recreational reasons” doesn’t require approval, hobbyists must operate according to 1981 guidelines, such as staying away from populated areas," (which he didn't) "Geraghty (the judge" found the guidelines can’t be enforced, at least for people piloting a “model” plane." "(made )with a plane made with a foam wing and weighing less than 5 pounds,"

March 7th, 2014, 01:24 PM	#3
Robert Turchick Trustee Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Mesa, AZ Posts: 1,389	Re: The Verdict Is In Several other articles list reasons for the dismissal. The interesting thing that has been pointed out is the suit was specifically for his "reckless operation". Which points to there actually being no enforceable ban on commercial use in the first place. The FAA set guidelines and threatened several entities but there is no law to support their wishes…yet. I suspect the first agenda item for the FAA will be defining the different aircraft used as camera platforms. There is a broad sweeping category right now in the aircraft registration process but part of the issue is the crossover into RC aircraft which the FAA doesn't govern. This is not over by a long shot but for now, fly safe and don't give the government a reason to create a law! __________________ The older I get, the better I was!