Cubdriver

Amazing what you'll do to enjoy the average average road trip. I found novel and ever more ingenious ways to cook complete meals in a microwave, tap the internet and connect TVs to a laptop, obtain free dinner passes, swim nude without getting caught, get 3am room service for crappy neighbors, make rental cars go faster than they were designed to go, and appear fresh for work on the next day. Good times I suppose- but I'll pass on the next round.

eric841

...but I could just avoid all this by only charging a pro-rata share?

NoyGonnaDoIt

You are correct. Photography is one of the specific exceptions in 119.1 (119.1(e)(4)) for commercial ops that do not require an operating certificate.

There are a couple of restrictions on it, including that you can't land anywhere other than at the place you departed from.

Like any new business endeavor in a regulated field, consultation with an aviation lawyer before there's a potential for trouble is a good idea.

NoyGonnaDoIt

No. Pro-rata share also required joint purpose for the flight under a long history of FAA interpretations and NTSB decisions. The photographer is in business and you are providing transportation services for him - not a joint purpose. And if you want to argue (unsuccessfully) that it really is a joint purpose, well, it's one that requires the exercise of commercial pilot privileges, although not an operating certificate.

lstorm2003

Sorry to revive this old thread. But I have a couple of questions. I want to know if it's kosher for a friend and myself who are business partners to rent an aircraft and fly it under part 91 for the purpose of aerial photography?

I understand the rules about taking off and landing at the same airport and no problem with that. But is it legal for us to take real estate photos for business purposes (no passengers)?

I hold a Commercial certificate btw.

And Q part 2:
I've also looked into other companies that are using UAVs for low level aerial photos and the FAA says this is not allowed if for commercial purposes but people seem to get around it by simply saying they don't charge for flying the drone or for the phots. They charge for the photo & video editting. But if I were the FAA I wouldn't buy this argument for a second.

I've even thought about acquiring a drone with a GoPro for low level stuff but given the FAAs current position on this I almost think I'd be better off doing that if I WASN'T a pilot. Could the FAA decide to take action against my certificate if they don't like what I'm doing? By the way the FAA says UAVs are fine for non-commercial purposes as long as you stay below 400' and don't operate within 2nm of an airport.

Please comment or add your two cents...