Great Trappy vs FAA attorney interview
- Thread starter sixshooterstang
- Start date
cbpagent72
Member
I think the defense counsel was very articulate in his argument. His argument was easy to follow and it makes sense. I hope they win.
Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 2
sixshooterstang
Bird's Eyes Aerial Media
In this case trappy was not pushing any limits but was hired by that university to do a video and the FAA is trying to charge him for commercial use (a non-existent regulation)
And this case will also determine the fate of "drone" pilots (including yourself) of all kinds FPV or line of sight as it will make the FAA go on a crazy rampage fining model pilots and businesses with their new found power. See even recreational fliers are at risk because the majority of us fly in places they would consider illegal (your own back yard could be claimed as a densely populated area or for FPVrs they do not allow flights with you not staring right at the craft)
The FAA are not charging him for "operating commercially" - they are charging him with "reckless flying" which they say is applicable to him because it was a commercial flight. The defence is arguing that the FAA failed to follow proper procedure to establish binding laws.
There is no suggestion (or reason) that this case will change anything for hobbyists. What it most likely will do is invalidate the FAA's "cease & desist" threats, allowing commercial operation to come out of the shadows.
Also don't forget that the two lawyers representing/helping Trappy are both US citizens and both keen RC-heads. Trappy's nationality is irrelevant.
Last edited by a moderator:
sixshooterstang
Bird's Eyes Aerial Media
Reckless flying and commercial use. Both.
DucktileMedia
Drone Enthusiast
This will be interesting. wish they could live stream the case. I cant see this ending well as there are only a few possible "realistic" outcomes.
1. He gets fined and this becomes the catalyst for an inevitable law (which is a great thing) making it possible for those that take the proper measures to do so.
2. He doesnt get fined because there is no solid law making this illegal. Then the FAA starts feeling defensive and temporarily gets a law passed making it legitimately illegal for any of this!
3. For some weird reason this whole thing get's lost in bureaucratic turbulent waters and we continue on with our dont ask dont tell methods.
Since it is impossible to get past all the people that dont want a camera in their face, the civil rights/privacy act will be an impenetrable barrier for the few that are on our side. I was at the airport a few weeks ago and I took my iphone out to take a pic of my wife on the walkway when the lady behind us had a tantrum and was completely paranoid her pic would end up on facebook. It's hard to believe for most of us that are of a recent generation and of course those of us who's livelihood thrive from cameras. I don't think the FAA or our government have the ability to override people's fears of being spied on by the same government that would ultimately pass the laws for us to fly these small UAV's. I'm personally on the fence as I dont really want to see anyone and everyone doing FPV over populated cities. If/when the FAA does come up with a way to regulate these, you can be sure that it aint gonna be cheap! It's highly probable that they will class drones/UAV's by weight and use. I just hope the amount they charge to get licensed or permitted to fly commercially doesnt force the few people that want to do this professionally to charge so much it scares clients away, ultimately leaving them to hire illegal contractors. If aerial business A and B both had the same equipment but one charged $7000/day to try and offset the overhead associated with maintaining a legal business and the other charged $1000, who do you think the client is going to choose? I know there is a great saying, I think it's Kopterworx, that says "You think it's expensive to hire a pro, wait until you hire an amateur." Well, those are indeed wise words but lets be real, most dont care. So if the FAA makes a legal venue for doing this AP thing legit, they will also have to put some hefty fines in place for the hiring parties as well. Next thing you know, these flight controllers will be so reliable and easy to learn that the realtors, film makers, power companies, bridge inspectors, producers, etc. will just have decide to buy their own heli and do it themselves to avoid all this legal commotion.
1. He gets fined and this becomes the catalyst for an inevitable law (which is a great thing) making it possible for those that take the proper measures to do so.
2. He doesnt get fined because there is no solid law making this illegal. Then the FAA starts feeling defensive and temporarily gets a law passed making it legitimately illegal for any of this!
3. For some weird reason this whole thing get's lost in bureaucratic turbulent waters and we continue on with our dont ask dont tell methods.
Since it is impossible to get past all the people that dont want a camera in their face, the civil rights/privacy act will be an impenetrable barrier for the few that are on our side. I was at the airport a few weeks ago and I took my iphone out to take a pic of my wife on the walkway when the lady behind us had a tantrum and was completely paranoid her pic would end up on facebook. It's hard to believe for most of us that are of a recent generation and of course those of us who's livelihood thrive from cameras. I don't think the FAA or our government have the ability to override people's fears of being spied on by the same government that would ultimately pass the laws for us to fly these small UAV's. I'm personally on the fence as I dont really want to see anyone and everyone doing FPV over populated cities. If/when the FAA does come up with a way to regulate these, you can be sure that it aint gonna be cheap! It's highly probable that they will class drones/UAV's by weight and use. I just hope the amount they charge to get licensed or permitted to fly commercially doesnt force the few people that want to do this professionally to charge so much it scares clients away, ultimately leaving them to hire illegal contractors. If aerial business A and B both had the same equipment but one charged $7000/day to try and offset the overhead associated with maintaining a legal business and the other charged $1000, who do you think the client is going to choose? I know there is a great saying, I think it's Kopterworx, that says "You think it's expensive to hire a pro, wait until you hire an amateur." Well, those are indeed wise words but lets be real, most dont care. So if the FAA makes a legal venue for doing this AP thing legit, they will also have to put some hefty fines in place for the hiring parties as well. Next thing you know, these flight controllers will be so reliable and easy to learn that the realtors, film makers, power companies, bridge inspectors, producers, etc. will just have decide to buy their own heli and do it themselves to avoid all this legal commotion.
Any government is aware that passing unenforceable laws is worse than passing none. When Trappy wins his case (and I believe he will, based on having read the Motion to Dismiss) you will be free to operate commercially until the FAA can regroup. They've already delayed and dragged their feet and basically done nothing since being tasked, so it would safe to assume that it will take them a considerable time to get their act together, by which time there will be thousands of commercial users of this technology - a significant "collective voice" whose opinions will be heard. Issuing "cease & desist" letters to a few companies was one thing - but shutting down thousands of businesses just wouldn't wash. Of course you will get licencing requirements, mandatory insurance, etc - we already have all that here in UK and business is thriving. The cost of "compliance" is only a few thousand - trivial for any serious business.
So as soon as Trappy wins his case take out a half page ad in your local paper and go for it!
P.S. Training and certification is going to be a big new business opportunity - those that are in a position to grab some of that pie will be laughing all the way to the bank
So as soon as Trappy wins his case take out a half page ad in your local paper and go for it!
P.S. Training and certification is going to be a big new business opportunity - those that are in a position to grab some of that pie will be laughing all the way to the bank
I live in VA and I know exactly what he did, and push the limits or not I think you all missed my point. The point is why is a NoN-US citizen the one to take this to court? So if he loses he can just go back home and who cares? The oint here is I have no issue with a person from here actually the one challenging the rules, not a person that doesn't live here... truly sad
DucktileMedia
Drone Enthusiast
I see your point it just so happened that trappy is the guy at the forefront of FPVing. So perhaps it's not a bad thing as he does have our interest at heart.
sixshooterstang
Bird's Eyes Aerial Media
If he loses and leaves the country it's likely the results for us will be the same whether he posts up or not.
Bartman
Welcome to MultiRotorForums.com!!
if I had to guess, trappy made an easy target of himself because he chose to fly FPV in places where it wasn't very smart to do so. Didn't he chase a police car in one video? For trappy it was likely a matter of when and not if he would be fined or charged.
funny that a lot of people are very busy working for hire and doing it responsibly. we don't see the FAA chasing after them.
When you break free of the ground and choose to fly freely through the air you join a community of pilots that participate with full knowledge of the regulations and full knowledge of how each other operates. when you go flying you are required to learn of restrictions, hazards, other operations that might affect the safety of your flight or the flights of others......generally speaking you don't just fire up your engine and take off over the trees. Of course there are exceptions but most don't.
There are a lot of examples of FPV pilots flying at high altitudes where they can be a hazard to other operators (If you are flying FPV you are an operator in the nations's airspace) and we've even seen FPV pilots flying into clouds where every other operator that might be in that cloud bank is under positive control in real time by some air traffic controller, except the FPV guy.
This really isn't about freedom, it's about being involved in a system where there is a lot of control because there needs to be. Keep in mind, there wasn't a nationwide airspace system until there was an accident, an Ozarks DC-9 flew into the back of a Cessna 150 near St. Louis killing the pilots in the Cessna and nearly killing everyone on the DC-9. FPV is a use of our airspace and some people don't have any regard for that. There are ways to do it safely as many of us have demonstrated but there are still those among us that will do whatever they want because they either aren't mature enough to understand that they might be a risk to someone else or they just don't care.
Trappy isn't my hero and he doesn't represent the values we try to promote here at multirotorforums.com.
funny that a lot of people are very busy working for hire and doing it responsibly. we don't see the FAA chasing after them.
When you break free of the ground and choose to fly freely through the air you join a community of pilots that participate with full knowledge of the regulations and full knowledge of how each other operates. when you go flying you are required to learn of restrictions, hazards, other operations that might affect the safety of your flight or the flights of others......generally speaking you don't just fire up your engine and take off over the trees. Of course there are exceptions but most don't.
There are a lot of examples of FPV pilots flying at high altitudes where they can be a hazard to other operators (If you are flying FPV you are an operator in the nations's airspace) and we've even seen FPV pilots flying into clouds where every other operator that might be in that cloud bank is under positive control in real time by some air traffic controller, except the FPV guy.
This really isn't about freedom, it's about being involved in a system where there is a lot of control because there needs to be. Keep in mind, there wasn't a nationwide airspace system until there was an accident, an Ozarks DC-9 flew into the back of a Cessna 150 near St. Louis killing the pilots in the Cessna and nearly killing everyone on the DC-9. FPV is a use of our airspace and some people don't have any regard for that. There are ways to do it safely as many of us have demonstrated but there are still those among us that will do whatever they want because they either aren't mature enough to understand that they might be a risk to someone else or they just don't care.
Trappy isn't my hero and he doesn't represent the values we try to promote here at multirotorforums.com.
Well said, sir!
I think it's fairly obvious that the FAA singled him out as a high-profile "offender". His non-US citizenship may also have been a factor in their selection - who knows? Fact is he didn't choose to do battle with the FAA, even if he did make himself an easy target. Luckily two good US lawyers (both RC-fanatics) stepped up to help him fight the case - if he wins (and therefore others reap the advantage that will be creates) then thanks will be owed by all to them - it is the lawyers that saw the opportunity to castrate the FAA. Saving Trappy $10K is just incidental.
Bartman
Welcome to MultiRotorForums.com!!
we'll see what happens before we go assigning praise to anyone.
PeteDee
Mr take no prisoners!
The FAA is pretty much doing a gutless thing though, I don't see them chasing after the Mythbuster guys or the Hollywood heavies or any other American users that have broken their policy.
Glad I live in the land of the free, CASA at least is taking a good attitude towards lightweight models used for aerial video/photos, mind you sorting out the spectrum is a whole other thing here in Australia.
Cheers
Pete
Glad I live in the land of the free, CASA at least is taking a good attitude towards lightweight models used for aerial video/photos, mind you sorting out the spectrum is a whole other thing here in Australia.
Cheers
Pete
Jareth_Atian
Member
It is my understanding the the FAA has only granted COA's to Universities and government agencies (all COA's that have been issued are available online).To the best of my knowledge, there is no other legal means for the FAA to grant permission for commercial operation to, well, anyone.
Even if the Mythbusters or other Hollywood heavies DID call the FAA, the best that the FAA could do is promise to be selective about enforcing their own rules.
Even if the Mythbusters or other Hollywood heavies DID call the FAA, the best that the FAA could do is promise to be selective about enforcing their own rules.
dazzab
Member
Unfortunately this is not true. CASA is only in the process of examining possible new policies. At the moment, if you want to do aerial photography commercially you will be looking at a long list of requirements that are much more applicable to becoming a private pilot than to flying UAVs. Your business will spend thousands of dollars and a great deal of time which isn't necessary simply to meet outdated policies. To make matters worse, even though CASA is working with the industry, they simply don't have the funding to do the work required. So it's going to take years to get a sensible system in place. Good intentions are a good start but I'd much rather see significant progress and sooner than later.
CrashMaster
Member
Bartman, again the voice of reason and reality.
It is about time Trappy and his 'Team Black Sheep' were prosecuted. They flout safety and endanger the public, yet I see people here standing up for them? They are damaging our sport by their stupidity and reckless flying yet some here, obviously, can't see the damage they do. They have helped to load the gun, which is then used to fire at both the sport and commercial use of UASs in every country they go to.
No one objects to people pushing the boundaries of technology and flight, but when they do it and endanger the public and the sport we should never defend them!
Look at some of their stuff on YouTube. Almost all of it involves overflying the public or flying close to buildings.
It is about time Trappy and his 'Team Black Sheep' were prosecuted. They flout safety and endanger the public, yet I see people here standing up for them? They are damaging our sport by their stupidity and reckless flying yet some here, obviously, can't see the damage they do. They have helped to load the gun, which is then used to fire at both the sport and commercial use of UASs in every country they go to.
No one objects to people pushing the boundaries of technology and flight, but when they do it and endanger the public and the sport we should never defend them!
Look at some of their stuff on YouTube. Almost all of it involves overflying the public or flying close to buildings.
Last edited by a moderator: