Search results

sold

A few days or weeks before 911 a couple of middle eastern fellas came by the airport where I was hanging out (Norwood, MA) asking about chartering a Citation.. could they pay cash?, could they go to NY?, etc. Turned out to be 2 of the hijackers that flew out of Logan.

Correct. Day only.

I think the 333 requirements, as obtuse as they can be, would have prevented a similar occurrence and no surprise reaction from the skier, who would have been made aware of the risks during the safety brief. Interesting about the risk vs reward. The HotShot crash comes to mind.

http://www.verticalmag.com/news/article/Pro-Cam-Rentals-launches-new-aerial-division-for-broadcast-and-motion-pictures-?utm_source=vertical-daily-news&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=vertical-daily-news-12-23-15-opted

Exactly, and the reason the 333 exemptions are so restrictive is because there are no established standards for airworthiness and pilot skills as in with full size. Had this been in the U.S., this flight would have required a 333 exemption with closed-set approval... meaning an essentially empty...

Probably unlikely that any sort of investigation takes place that would look at say, the remaining battery voltage. They can say whatever they want.

So much for my reasonably priced liability policy. Oh wait, these things really can hurt you? http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more-sports/ski-federation-bans-drones-hits-skier-article-1.2474745

Yep. Nothing like the pressure of getting the shot, especially if you are part of a live production with the director yelling in your ear.

Create a document estimating your total flight time based on whatever evidence you have, have it notarized. End of story.

Just ask Hoover.

The 'fix is in' alright..

And it took the Vic Morrow accident to draw the FAA's attention to the use of aircraft on movie sets, and the creation of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual requirement (http://fsims.faa.gov/PICDetail.aspx?docId=8900.1,Vol.3,Ch8,Sec1) which by the way also applies to UAS...

There are voluminous examples of people flying irresponsibly. I would put this flight in that category. There are also plenty of examples of pilots of full size aircraft flying irresponsibly. A lot of them are dead. The difference is, the full size folks have passed knowledge and practical exams...

The FAR's prohibit the dropping of objects from aircraft unless they do not cause undue harm to persons or property on the ground.. or something like that. Since a UAS is an 'aircraft', the FAR applies, IMO.

Ha. I'm thinking 10 bucks times a million under the Christmas tree. Which I'm all for if I can get someone to issue a COA in less than 60 business days.

I didn't see the newser but was there any mention of user/registration fees? Since we know the FAA is broke, it occurs to me that this may be their way of funding the UAS office, riding on the notion of air safety.

Or just crash in the ocean.

That sounds uncomfortable. :)

I wouldn't want to be this guy... http://sagharboronline.com/drone-crashes-on-sag-harbor-main-street