Dave Pitman

Members
  • Posts

    490
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

Dave Pitman last won the day on March 31

Dave Pitman had the most liked content!

3 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Dave Pitman's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  • Week One Done Rare
  • One Month Later Rare
  • One Year In Rare

Recent Badges

93

Reputation

  1. True. In the N. Carolina case, we don't know the backstory of why the board went after this operator. Yes. One of the problems is that the law rarely keeps up with technology. Ten years ago, it wasn't so easy (or cheap) to get photogrammetry derived products so the issue was moot. Now, we have survey boards seeing their potential customers using less expensive (and un-certified) products and they don't like it. Which is totally understandable. The point though is if the customer is being harmed. Not that the surveyor may be loosing revenue. The market and the courts will have to figure it out. I do notice that state survey boards don't seem to have the appetite to take on the likes of Google over these issues. And as mentioned in the lawsuit, Google, and others, provide topographic data without being licensed. Well, surveyors are people. Some are approachable and some are not. I've encountered both.
  2. I have provided topographical data derived by means of photogrammetry to licensed surveyors. I am not a licensed surveyor myself and I was not under the surveyor's direct supervision. However, the photogrammetry was referenced to ground control placed by the surveyor and they used means of checkpoints to proof the data that I provided in order to use it in their work. I'm curious what you think of this scenario?
  3. Hey Ryan. The regs are not that extensive nor difficult to look up. For the answer, just look it up. https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?node=pt14.2.107&rgn=div5#se14.2.107_137 So, that's it. Don't interfere or cause a situation. We react to manned aircraft basically as @Av8Chuck explained.
  4. This person is posting as "Simon de Boer" on Inspire Pilots. https://inspirepilots.com/threads/what-can-be-the-reasons-if-my-drone-doesnt-land-properly.25263/ Suspected as spam over there too.
  5. I mostly agree with Chuck's assessment. With a 1.5 kg payload, you would need at least a M200 series if going with DJI. You could easily do it with an M600 pro or M300. A custom built unit should also be on the list. The total distance needed to travel while carrying that payload will also be a factor. Can it be multiple short hops or does it need to be a longer out and back.
  6. Most likely a human. But if you read their posts it seems evident they are vague and most likely exist simply to spread the link to their site as far as possible. Either that or they are a commercial op in the Nederlands that operate (at least) an i2 with Z7 camera and yet don't know how to look up how much a dji FPV drone costs and haven't learned to land a drone yet. Among other things. As you know, I am skeptical and cynical by nature so maybe I'm completely wrong.
  7. A tethered drone seems like a good solution for a quick hotspot, Or, for one that needs to move to different locations during the day. For a multi-day (weeks/months) solution, a pole in open terrain or a tree mount if in the woods is far more simple, practical and affordable. It the earlier days of commercial uas operations, sometimes guys were trying to use drones to provide a solution for which there was really no practical need. This case seems just like that. But, hey, some folks get to play with drones and get paid for it with a grant. And, they get some nice press during the pandemic. As a business model, it just doesn't work, IMO.
  8. Umm.. I'm hoping that your UAS skills are better than your internet search skills? Maybe you are just trying to get you link posted? There has been a lot of that lately. If so, Google is not so naive these days. Get good at your job and people in your area will find you.
  9. Interesting. How do you know? Nope. This family must be something special. Any reason you posted this in the FPV racing section? Are they government racing drones? I've never seen "plane shaped" racing drones. Since the harassment is so common, can we see some pictures?
  10. It's kind of like Auto insurance here in Washington. Auto insurance is required by law. But no one checks unless there is an injury accident. Otherwise, there is really no ramification to not having any other than if you are a legit person, you have financial risk if involved in an accident. If you're a flake, you just disappear. Much cheaper. I once got side-swiped by a kid traveling too fast around a corner. He had no insurance. Again, it is required by law. He was not even cited for the poor driving or no insurance. It makes you feel a little foolish when you purchase it yourself.
  11. If you haven't already, start learning about the rules of the road. No drone required. https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_fliers/ Here is one way to reach out to some folks near you. It is simple a network of Part 107 certificated operators. Perhaps someone there can help you out. https://dronepilotscentral.com/ Cheers, Dave
  12. The airspace does have a LAANC grid overlay, but it is not accessible through the automated system. You will need to go through faadronezone to apply (indicated by the red color). https://faa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=9c2e4406710048e19806ebf6a06754ad If the area you want to fly is within a grid ceiling that you can live with I would suggest that you apply for a wide area waiver which will give you access to all of the grid . Typically military installations will want you to call in before each operation but that is no big deal. Ask for a year time frame and state that you want the waiver in order to provide commercial uas services. You don't need to get fancy. Let me know if you have more questions.
  13. What is the class of airspace? If it is Restricted airspace, then it is unlikely you will be granted a waiver unless you are working for the Fed.