I wonder if the Argus got a permit from the FAA to fly their drone?

Let’s hope so;

” Regulation: The Federal Aviation Administration was instructed by Congress in 2012 to open up the nation’s airspace to routine commercial drone use and is in charge of issuing permits for drones that operate at 400 feet or higher. Since 2009, the number of permits has more than doubled, going from 146 to 345 in 2012.

While the agency is still working up the rules, it has issued a fact sheet with current guidelines.

The FAA says drones that operate below 400 feet are subject to the same rules that govern model aircraft. Those essentially say the drones cannot be flown near populated areas, must stay within eyesight of the user, and cannot be used for commercial purposes, at least until the rules are finalized.

With real estate agents and journalists using drones, it appears those rules are being put to the test. An FAA spokesman said the agency “has investigated operations that appear to be commercial in nature.”

Here is a CNN Money article that ran this morning.

Argusleader screenshot

11 comments ↓

#1 anominous on 01.09.13 at 4:42 pm

The only news here is that the Argus finally hired a drone that can fly. They still haven’t found one that can write.

#2 John on 01.09.13 at 8:41 pm

Assuming the drone flew over downtown Sioux Falls in daylight at his time of year then it’s controller likely violated FAAs Class D airspace procedural control over the FSD airport (extending from the surface out to 5 miles) – which is in effect from 05-2400. It is unlikely the drone’s controller posted a NOTAM (notice to airmen), had FAA permission, was in radio contact with the FSD tower, FSD approach control, or even Minneapolis Center. The summary is apparently the drone controller put the private and commercial aviation public in grave danger.

Hopefully the regional FAA representative will consider, and if warranted, taking administrative or criminal corrective action.

http://vfrmap.com/?type=vfrc&lat=43.582&lon=-96.742&zoom=10

#3 My Two Cents on 01.10.13 at 8:33 am

Reading the story, it states that the camera was tested from the roof – no mention of the UAV flying when it did so. Had it been flying, it would be very easily confirmed whether a NOTAM was issued by contacting the ATCT (control tower) or the AFSS (flight service).

#4 l3wis on 01.10.13 at 10:36 am

PL & AG, I deleted both of your comments.

PL, let’s stop talking about that shooting. It is over and done with. Okay?!

#5 l3wis on 01.10.13 at 10:37 am

Two Cents, The video linked about shows it flying.

#6 Angry Guy on 01.10.13 at 10:45 am

fair enough. some people need filters. And although I feel I was right in every flippin way…. thanks for being mine on occasion.

I’ll STFU for a little while now.

#7 My Two Cents on 01.10.13 at 11:31 am

13wis: the 40 second video shows the UAV hover-taxiing and apparently well below 400 AGL. Doubt the Argus is going to brag about their new techno-toy and risk an FAA enforcement action. If anybody is concerned about a potential threat to air safety, call the air traffic manager at the tower or call LM Flight Service and ask whether a NOTAM (Notice to Airmen) was issued. I guarantee they’ll tell you. That’s their job.

#8 Craig on 01.10.13 at 11:48 am

I love these drones because it gives the conspiracy theorist nutjobs something to freak out about. It was one thing to cry about satellites monitoring their every move, but now that they can see little hovering drones with cameras they will go ballistic.

Is there is a private mental health facility in the area? If so, I think I should invest now before the influx of new patients.

#9 l3wis on 01.10.13 at 11:52 am

No kidding Craig. I am not to concerned about the AL drone hovering over my house, in fact I find it quite hilarious.

2cents – I am just wondering what kind of regs they should be following with one of those contraptions. Instead of buying a drone, the AL should invest in some ‘real’ video equipment and a nice studio instead of their $7 Joann fabric backdrop and a card table, talk about Loafer Journalism.

#10 Joan on 01.10.13 at 5:30 pm

Or even lower their rates.

#11 Detroit Lewis on 01.11.13 at 1:52 am

I thought it was already free?

Leave a Comment