Originally Posted by
Sport_Pilot
We don't need any stinking exemption. There is not yet a regulation to get exemption for. we need to fight the regulation first here, then in court.
Very good point however. Since the FAA cannot require licence or certification they cannot require testing that those testing or exibiting models for payment be tested for higher skills. Thus there is no safety benifit.
I vigorously disagree with you. The FAA is the rule-making body tasked with designing a safety scheme for our nation's airspace. Waiting for a court case to resolve the issue is naive and impractical when you can get the rule-making body, itself, to carve the necessary exemption up front with no fight. There is PLENTY of fighting that lies ahead with respect to FPV and commercial use of UAS for everything from real estate to package delivery. If you read my response, you'll see I made no mention of FPV because the issue is more cloudy. If the FAA makes a weight and usage rule for FPV, it's far more likely to remain a safety issue than a manufacturer demonstrating a plane at an event. My exemption suggestion is very difficult to argue against because there is literally NO DIFFERENCE between a sponsored pilot and a non-sponsored pilot flying the same plane at an event. You take the easy stuff when and where you can get it and fight about the more complex stuff down the road.
I like FPV, but the restrictions on demos and testing will place a significant burden on most every event and will affect more members of the hobby right now. It's also really easy to dismiss the FAA as having no authority in a discussion forum. I believe we should take them seriously and address and resolve what we can BEFORE they finalize their interpretation -- not after.
MK