Exemption for movies and film

Is it a light at the end of the tunnel?

Friday the FAA granted an exemption to six UAV/Drone production companies authorizing their use to movies and film. When you look at the FAA web-site and download the documents they only specify one system out of the six, listing the other five under fictitious names. Astraeus Aerial, Aerial MOB, LLC, HeliVideo Productions, LLC, Pictorvision Inc, RC Pro Productions Consulting, LLC dba Vortex Aerial, and Snaproll Media, LLC. There wasn’t any certification process for selection only the discretion of the FAA.  The Motion Picture association of America sought the consulting services of Chris Dodd the former Connecticut Senator to influence the FAA to allow these six production companies to utilize UAS/Drone technology commercially. The one caveat that had any semblance of logic was the requirement for the UAS/Drone operators must hold a private pilot’s license.

Reaction

The reaction that got my attention the most is from Patrick Egan the face of SSUASNews and RCAPA who until today has voiced his opinion that the fix is in for the military contract manufacturers. This exemption for these six UAS/Drone production companies did not include a single system from Lockheed Martin, Northrup Grumman, AeroVironment or Insitu. I talked with Gus Calderon of ISISCopter whose claim to fame was the flying dress used in the Lady Gaga music video and he liked the requirement for UAS/Drone operators to hold a private pilot’s license, since he holds a commercial pilot’s license. He wasn’t too keen just these six UAS/Drone production companies being authorized based solely on that appears to favoritism from the FAA. T.J. Diaz of XFlyFilms whose system was used in the production of the “Expendables III” movies stated that “It’s the wild west in the motion picture industry”! His reasoning is based upon the FAA not being specific on systems or air worthiness other than the producers asking for them in their requests. As Brendan Schulman would say “This is problematic”. I believe this is a good thing for the commercial UAS/Drone industry but it troubles me to think that the FAA makes decisions without thinking them through and considering the impact or legal liability. I think this action is a move in the right direction but consequences because their action were not well thought out is going to be decided by a judge.

Recommendation

I would like to promote David Copenhaver and his professional capacities with NexGenNow. For over a year and a half David has been hammering his company’s capabilities. His system is what Gene Robinson uses to stream imagery live for search and rescue operations but he has been part of a situational awareness solution that is all encompassing. Picture this “A UAS/Drone pilot with a private pilot’s license gets a work order for a survey job on a new housing development, specifying the scope of work, time and location for the job. He logs onto a web-site that has his license information as part of his membership registration. He types in the geographic area of the job, goes to a drop down window to select the UAS/Drone system he is certified on and the sensor or camera system that will be used, then he uploads the work order via PDF. After de-confliction of the time and airspace he is e-mailed a COA via PDF which he downloads and keeps in his pocket. While conducting the operation a satellite will have the parameters of the operation and he will get an online alert when the satellite detects an airplane or helicopter approaching the UAS/Drone operation area so he can be aware and take appropriate action, i.e. land the UAS/Drone or just be aware of where the plane and UAS/Drone are located.” This capability is available right now and not only would it solve the airspace concerns of airplane pilots. It would be a revenue generating system and regulatory tool for the FAA.

Disruptive technology

The perceived problem with this common sense solution is that it were adopted for the commercial airline industry to would have an impact of cost savings and man-hours for air traffic control. Sure it would add to safety and save money but that means less work for air traffic controllers. That is a common reaction to the discussion of the use of UAS/Drone commercialization. The ripple effect of the existing systems and applications but what needs to be weighed is the increase of jobs and revenues that can be realized for industries and workers that are not available now.