Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FAA Clears Movie and TV Drones For Takeoff

Posted by timothy on from the rules-rules-rules dept.

alphadogg (971356) writes "The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration is taking its first major step toward opening up the skies for commercial drone use, allowing six TV and movie production companies to use drones to shoot video. Commercial flight of drones has been effectively banned by the FAA as it grapples with how to integrate drone traffic into controlled airspace while not compromising the safety of existing air traffic. But as the months have passed, it has come under increasing pressure from U.S. companies to make a ruling."

50 comments

  1. I get it by slashmydots · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh, I get it. They finally made a centralized policy for drone use.
    Individual - OH HELL NO!
    Commercial - How much lobbying money do you have?

    1. Re:I get it by bobbied · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Keep it under about 200', and away from airports and you are free to move about the country. RC models have been operating under these conditions for a long time. So individuals CAN operate drones NOW as a hobby. What is being limited in COMMERCIAL use of drones, and drones that impact existing air traffic.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:I get it by aaron4801 · · Score: 1

      Bingo. Innovation X is banned for everybody but Hollywood. Didn't see that coming! /s

    3. Re:I get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, that's the arguably the biggest problem here. The FAA was directed to develop a policy for commercial drones, and it's initial reaction was to determine, without any sort of rule making process, that drones that followed the model rules were not in fact models, and attempt to prohibit any sort of autonomous flight whatsoever. A couple months back they were even saying that first person view direct remote control under model rules was unacceptable, and still claiming that no rule making was required.

    4. Re:I get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So what you are saying is, screw small business...

    5. Re:I get it by bobbied · · Score: 2

      Actually, that's the arguably the biggest problem here. The FAA was directed to develop a policy for commercial drones, and it's initial reaction was to determine, without any sort of rule making process, that drones that followed the model rules were not in fact models, and attempt to prohibit any sort of autonomous flight whatsoever. A couple months back they were even saying that first person view direct remote control under model rules was unacceptable, and still claiming that no rule making was required.

      For Commercial operations yes, the FAA has totally banned drones for commercial use (until now)... Hobby use, not so much. Where the FAA technically governs anything from the ground up outside a building, they've never really handed out regulations for individual private hobby flying toys and I doubt they care about them as long as they don't interfere with manned flight operations.

      It's the same sort of thing they do for ultralights. Keep the aircraft under a specified weight and out of controlled airspace and you don't need to register the craft, have a pilot's license to fly it or have a license to maintain it. Just stay out of controlled space and they don't say anything. Try to sell rides in your ultralight and voila a whole host of regulations hit you because it's now a commercial operation. Same with Drones. Keep it small, low and for personal use, they won't bat an eye, but start doing commercial things with it and they are going to inspect you every which way and twice on Sunday.

      You see, the FAA really only cares about the commercial use of the airspace, which is really their mandate. Yea they govern private aviation too, but only because they use the same facilities as commercial and unless everybody follows the same rules when mixed up, bad things will happen. But you get a private plane outside of controlled airspace and they won't care much about you anymore. Just don't endanger the commercial operations..

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    6. Re:I get it by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      I have repeated this here so many times now I've lost count.

      A Federal judge ruled a few months ago that the FAA has no authority EXCEPT in controlled airspace. And "controlled" airspace isn't most or even much of the air around us.

      The FAA's authority is derived from INTERSTATE TRAVEL AND COMMERCE. Anything else is none of its business.

      If you aren't sending your drone commercially across State lines, or invading controlled airspace, they have no legal basis for "regulating" you.

      The FAA has appealed the decision, but pending appeal they have seemed to want to put as many regulations in place as they can before the November election. I wonder why.

    7. Re:I get it by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      I believe that they must also have a line of sight to the pilot. That's a big problem.

    8. Re:I get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chris Dodd, a former Democratic senator from Connecticut and now chairman of the MPAA, called the FAA’s decision “a great victory” for both the industry and audiences.

        The drones will be flown by licensed pilots and won’t fly at night, and details of any accidents will have to be filed with the FAA.

  2. Dang by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well hopefully Canada's head start on reasonable drone legislation will allow us to keep our lead in this industry.

  3. No special privleges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a company can do it, I can. Its just a person after all.

    If a reporter has some right, so do I.

    Given tax breaks to movies and the NFL, there is so much free content out there. Govt sponsored = crown copyright = no copyright.

    1. Re:No special privleges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love your logic!

      Good luck in court.

    2. Re:No special privleges by v1 · · Score: 1

      But as the months have passed, it has come under increasing pressure from U.S. companies to make a ruling.

      So nice to see the government only getting off their butts when a company demands they get back to work....

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    3. Re:No special privleges by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      If a company can do it, I can. Its just a person after all.

      True and not true: anyone can become an LLC. However, not just everyone has their own time slot to lobby the government. THAT's what lets them do it.

      If a reporter has some right, so do I.

      Reporter's rights these days come down to two things: 1) press card and 2) demonstration after you're already in court that you were acting as a journalist at the time. These days, that's not even standing up as a defense for some journalists with a press card, so you're right -- reporters have the same rights you do, and they'll be ignored in the same ways.

      Given tax breaks to movies and the NFL, there is so much free content out there. Govt sponsored = crown copyright = no copyright.

      You just leaked your commonwealthness there -- the US doesn't have crown copyright, as they rejected the crown for a republic.

    4. Re:No special privleges by bobbied · · Score: 1

      If a company can do it, I can. Its just a person after all.

      If a reporter has some right, so do I.

      Given tax breaks to movies and the NFL, there is so much free content out there. Govt sponsored = crown copyright = no copyright.

      You ALREADY have permission to operate a drone as an individual. RC hobbyists have been doing this for decades. There are places you cannot fly them of course, but flying a drone for hobby use is allowed now and has been allowed for the whole of the FAA's existence.

      What's being restricted is COMMERCIAL use, and flying in controlled airspace. We don't have rules and procedures in place to allow us to deal with this safely, which is why commercial use has been prohibited until now. The FAA is actually relaxing the rules for commercial use under conditions similar to private hobby use of drones.

      So, actually, being a private individual over a company gives you more rights to fly drones, or it used to before now.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    5. Re:No special privleges by cdwiegand · · Score: 1

      Oh, look, I have an LLC here. So this drone isn't flown by me, the individual, it's by my company....... Gotta Name This Company Someday LLC. Yes, FAA officer! So it's legit!

      --
      . Define sqrt(x) as something really evil like (x / rand()), and bury it deep. Watch your coworkers go nuts.
    6. Re:No special privleges by russotto · · Score: 1

      Last person the FAA tried to fine for commercial use of a drone for aerial photography won in the FAAs own court.

  4. Brilliant. Got to prioritize... by mellon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    After all, TV shows are way more important than structural evaluations, aerial photography for site planning, roof inspections, and the myriad other commercial applications that are actually useful and safer than the way we currently do it. Sigh.

  5. #Bias by Libertarian_Geek · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, the left leaning (Hollywood production) companies get a benefit from the executive branch that other companies do not.

    --

    www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights

    www.fairtax.org
    1. Re:#Bias by MondoGordo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      no ... the money gets the honey, bunny! It has nothing to do with political ideology and everything to do with what politicians you own.

    2. Re:#Bias by Libertarian_Geek · · Score: 1

      no ... the money gets the honey, bunny! It has nothing to do with political ideology and everything to do with what politicians you own.

      In the long-run, yes. You're absolutely right. In the short-run, it's the ones currently in office returning the favor to those that got them there.
      Money and political ideology are inseparable in modern politics. Big oil feeds one. Big media feeds the other.

      --

      www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights

      www.fairtax.org
  6. Major unanswered questions by LordFolken · · Score: 2

    Disclaimer: I'm a Glider Pilot in Europe. I haven't yet seen a drone that actually operates autnonmously. What I mean by that, is active collision avoidance according to sensory input. Judging by the amount of noise complaints we get at every airfield in europe.. i doubt people will be very happy to have 100s of drones flying over their heads in the cities. Certification will not make halt in front of these drones. All equipment in aircraft must be certified. This requirement will still be there if you want to fly the drone in the vicinity of people. There is the question of miniaturization? How will they fit GPS/Transponder/anti icing technology and the additional power onto such a small platform?

    1. Re:Major unanswered questions by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

      Anti-icing technology? I don't know what you guys are doing with your drones in Europe, but over here we don't put frosting on ours.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    2. Re:Major unanswered questions by LordFolken · · Score: 1

      thought i made a spelling mistake, but at least Wikipedia agrees with me. Winter does bad things to aircraft. ;-) ice accumulates at the leading edge of wings and props, until the profile is no longer generating lift. That is why most aircraft have heating in the wings leading edge and mechanical deformation to break of the ice.

    3. Re:Major unanswered questions by bobbied · · Score: 2

      thought i made a spelling mistake, but at least Wikipedia agrees with me. Winter does bad things to aircraft. ;-) ice accumulates at the leading edge of wings and props, until the profile is no longer generating lift. That is why most aircraft have heating in the wings leading edge and mechanical deformation to break of the ice.

      Actually, usually only larger aircraft have deicing capacity. Most private airplanes have none beyond heat for the airspeed probe.

      Commercial aircraft carry it only for convenience because the flying rules state that you cannot fly into known icing conditions without it. They take it along so they can more easily make their schedule and not have to fly around stuff.

      Finally, I'd like to point out that there are multiple kinds of deicing setups and what you describe is pretty much how the low end stuff works. Most commercial jets just heat the leading edges using high temperature bleed air from the turbines. The rubber boot thing doesn't work so well at high mach numbers...

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  7. Democrat priority: Hollywood First by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Forget you amateur scum that are not with movie studios, how many votes can you bring? How many weeping melodramas showing how evil "The Others" are can you produce?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Democrat priority: Hollywood First by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like "battleship", where the USS Missouri comes to save the world from a group of totally inept but yet technically superior aliens?

  8. compromising the safety of existing air traffic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So drones are flying at 38,000 feet or circling over international airports now?

    Surely there is a minimum allowable altitude for any manned aircraft so simply mandate all drone stay below that. There you go FAA, i just saved you millions in lost man hours and other random crap associated with this kind of nonsense. I'll be expecting my cheque any day now.

  9. There are serious issues around drone use by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 0

    Using them during active filming on closed sets is a reasonable response.

    Using them for fighting fires is a reasonable response.

    Commercial everyday use is an unreasonable response and risk.

    Private use to peep on people is an unreasonable response and risk. Just ask people in Vancouver BC. There they have rights of Privacy. Or in Washington State - we have rights of privacy too, in our state constitution.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:There are serious issues around drone use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using them for lighting fires is also surely reasonable.

      After all, if there were no fires, firefighters would be out of a job!

  10. Special Permit Only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And let people use drones not in controlled airspaces as they see fit. Really complicated.

    1. Re:Special Permit Only by bobbied · · Score: 1

      And let people use drones not in controlled airspaces as they see fit. Really complicated.

      Which is what we actually have now with one more restriction. COMMERCIAL use is banned outright. Private Individual Hobby use is already allowed outside of controlled airspace below about 200' AGL as I understand it.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  11. Re:Brilliant. Got to prioritize... by Nyder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After all, TV shows are way more important than structural evaluations, aerial photography for site planning, roof inspections, and the myriad other commercial applications that are actually useful and safer than the way we currently do it. Sigh.

    Not to mention they grounded search & rescue drones. http://arstechnica.com/tech-po...

    It's obvious it's all about the money, not about anything else.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  12. iT'S FINE UNTIL.... by whizbang77045 · · Score: 1

    All this drone stuff will be fine until one manages to crash into an airliner, bringing it down. Then the FAA will be swamped with people demanding to know why the drones were allowed in the first place.

    1. Re:iT'S FINE UNTIL.... by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All this drone stuff will be fine until one manages to crash into an airliner, bringing it down. Then the FAA will be swamped with people demanding to know why the drones were allowed in the first place.

      Which is also true of traditional RC aircraft, which have been flown for decades - with plenty of opportunities to get up into the path of full-scale aircraft. The carnage has been incredible, one plane after the next falling out of the sky.

      The problem isn't going to be people shooting crop health, checking their gutters, doing an aerial during a TV shoot, or getting real estate photos. The problem is going to be malicious users. Just like wrong-headed people who choose to be malicious with lead pipes, shotguns, or kitchen knives.

      A bunch of laws telling law abiding people not to fly their camera robot over 400' will mean exactly nothing to someone who doesn't care about laws.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    2. Re:iT'S FINE UNTIL.... by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Typical RC planes can only be flown within a short distance of the field, otherwise you can't see what direction you're flying and you lose the plane.

    3. Re:iT'S FINE UNTIL.... by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Typical RC planes can only be flown within a short distance of the field

      People have been playing with long-range RC for many years.

      And there have been various autopilots, orientation tools, and FPV-style links for a long time. Greatly predating the kids-with-multirotors era.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  13. A major step? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean they are getting closer to correcting an error that they caused themselves.

  14. Re:compromising the safety of existing air traffic by bobbied · · Score: 2

    So drones are flying at 38,000 feet or circling over international airports now?

    Not by individuals or companies. I'm guessing we have government doing this already, if for no other reason than to allow testing.

    Surely there is a minimum allowable altitude for any manned aircraft so simply mandate all drone stay below that. There you go FAA, i just saved you millions in lost man hours and other random crap associated with this kind of nonsense. I'll be expecting my cheque any day now.

    There are *recommended* limits, how high you should fly over obstructions, how far away you should stay from people etc, but if you are flying VFR over farmland it's pretty much pilot discretion outside of controlled airspace. You will get blamed if you ball it up by hitting a tree and you might even get cited for being reckless, but if you are PIC and you think it's safe, knock yourself out all the way down to the ground.

    I suppose you could just declare that Drones under 500' AGL (maybe 200'?) outside of controlled airspace that maintains minimum distances from humans and property are allowed for any reason that's not commercial. Just issue a NOTAM and tell pilots that they are only protected above 500' AGL, problem solved. I think I'd put size and weight limits on these unlicensed drones, but apart from the size and weight limits and commercial operation that's what we have/had until now.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  15. Re:Brilliant. Got to prioritize... by dbc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Indeed. Crop inspection drones are my favorite poster child for this. If a corn farmer in Iowa wants to fly a drone at 50 feet above his own farm consisting of 1200 contiguous acres of crops, I don't see how that in any way could be dangerous to anyone or anything. But the movie companies have lots of money to spend on lobbying and political donations.

  16. Makes sense to me ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 1

    ... these guys are professionals at stunts and stuff. Let the pros experience, and absorb the consequences and work the bugs out for the rest of us.

    Appreciate that these things aren't really, "drones," they are "model airplanes."

    It's going to be a boon to FAA bureaucracy and a great venture to tax.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  17. Time for the "terrorists" to get a "movie studio"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They can do all the surveillance they need, and get tax credits as well?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...

  18. Re:Brilliant. Got to prioritize... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because we know how that the drone isn't going to climb up and kill me as I fly above Iowa? Yes, I fly above Iowa. These things need to be built to the same safety standards as all other digital fly by wire airplanes.

  19. Application by jklovanc · · Score: 1

    Maybe they made a reasonable application to the FAA and were given authorization to use drones. Filming a movie or TV show has a few aspects that is very different than a general approval;
    - The drone will operate close to the ground so It can film actors so no interaction with other aircraft.
    - All people being filmed will be associated with the filming so no privacy issues.
    - The area being filmed will be under the control of the company so no privacy issues
    - There will be no other drone permits in the area so no interaction with other company's drones.

    This is very different that permitting a company to fly a drone over wide areas that they do not control. I wonder if any Search and Rescue organizations have applied and been turned down.

    I find it interesting that on this list there are many people who want more drones to be used for more things but there were also many people who were against the FAA permitting 15,000 drones to fly over the US by making permitting easier.

    1. Re:Application by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

      There will be no other drone permits in the area so no interaction with other company's drones.

      I am not sure I read anything that prevents a leasure user from flying his or her drones into the airspace being used by a movie or TV production. In fact, somebody playing around with a drone they got off eBay or Amazon has less regulation to worry about and/or probably doesn't know what the rules are anyway. And what better place to play with it than the set of Batman 8 or Transformers 891?

      Productions are going to probably notice rogue private drones but even if they don't LIKE it, I am not sure they have any standing to do anything about it any more than if somebody was in an office or apartment overlooking a movie set below.

      --
      Sig for hire.
  20. Re:Brilliant. Got to prioritize... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These things need to be built to the same safety standards as all other digital fly by wire airplanes.

    Will never happen

  21. Collision avoidance standards? by StripedCow · · Score: 1

    There should first be good standards for collision avoidance.

    For example:
    If every drone observes a minimum distance from any other drone (measured e.g. using radio waves) then each drone behaves like a giant "beach ball", that bounces off other drones.

    If a commonly respected system like this is not mandatory, then we'll end up with potentially hazardous situation.

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
  22. The drone has already left the building by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

    Can hardly turn on a "reality" TV show these days without some shots clearly from some kind of drone. This camera work has been going on for years, quietly.

    Goofball shows like Gold Rush even worked the camera drone into an epsiode -they used a blimp drone but it was still a drone and still used for filming, albeit to wimpy effect. I saw a show the other day, clearly shot IN the US which used a drone for a nice swooping panorama -I wish I could remember which one it was. And I remember thinking, this shot is hella illegal. But it still got filmed. I am not sure reality TV can film now without these tricks. They've forgotten how to get the shot other ways.

    All Hollywood is trying to do here is say I'm sorry after the fact, instead of please may I beforehand. And the FAA is going along with it, as they should frankly. It can't be stopped at this point so they might as well regulate it.

    --
    Sig for hire.
  23. Re:Brilliant. Got to prioritize... by mellon · · Score: 1

    You're seriously worried that a drone is going to somehow fly up to 30k feet and hit a jet? Do you know how hard it is to get a non-jet-powered airplane up that high? How hard it would be to get that airplane with a maximum speed of 100mph to collide with a jet moving at ~500mph? When did we Americans turn into such lily-livered cowards? You are jumping at shadows.