TeamSkyOpsUK

[MarkLincs]

theres the difference your doing it as a hobby take no money so no issue

I got confused see I thought we were talking as if was a commercial thing

my bad

[Zeeflyboy]

Matty I think he would do what anyone who has invested time and money into doing things the "right way" would... He would report the offending party to the CAA. Why would anyone sit idly by and watch someone steal their business by operating illegally?

As said, doing it as a hobby and for no financial reward is a completely different story... If the same rules apply as per real aviation ( i dont know if thats the case?) then you can receive some compensation for costs. the example would be where you rent a plane and fly with 3 other friends, they are allowed to pay you 3/4 of the cost of renting the plane/fuel etc iirc. Anyway, when operating for no reward there is no need for a qualification and I believe the FPVUK/RCHA/BMFA insurance would cover you provided you had permission and were flying in accordance with their policies.

[mattydred]

thanks for all the info guys i learned abit today which was my aim when starting the thread.
i did make it clear on the youtube and facebook page that i am non commercial, non profiting and do not charge any money whatsoever.

i agree with you guys that it is unfair that people that arnt certified are making money from selling footage and should be reported to the relevant authorities.

it cost me money when i want to go out and film and im currentley out of work and i still dont charge for footage  - its not good enough anyway yet - hope its gunna get better lol - as i said i still got loads to learn and still waiting for tbs disco and gopro3.

i would love to do this as a career and get paid for it. bnuc-s or whatever in the future maybe.

any info on the bnuc-s would be great. how much, how long does it take to achieve cert, where are the places that train and do the exams/test etc?

cheers
matty

[FPVSteve]

You do if you want to charge people for the work, CAA class you as a commercial operator which is subject to different rules and bollocks unfortunately. Doesn't necessarily have to be BNUC-S though.

Think you will find that BNUC-S as organised by EuroUSC is the only CAA recognized commercial licence in the Uk and in quite a few other countries for that matter.

EuroUSC is the only current recognised provider, but there's nothing stopping anyone from setting up their own and petitioning the CAA for approved status. So, like I said, you don't HAVE to use EuroUSC - you could put your own operation procedures etc etc in place to suit your own business.

The only other thing EuroUSC BNUC-S has going for it is that it is becoming a "recognised" standard by industry which in effect gives it a monopoly on the whole situation - not great in terms of the future.

[FPVSteve]

Mark you should declare all earnings to HMRC -  Essentially if you earn over the threshold then start selling stuff for profit you're obliged to report your income so your tax code can reflect it... of course if it's cash in hand...........

[FPVSteve]

I do personally see the BNUC-S as a waste of time though the more research I've done into it.

It seems to me that the CAA have no business in regulating what is essentially photography/videography using an aerial platform, in much the way that they'd get the finger if I had to write an ops manual for having a camera on the end of a 100foot pole (which could snap, and cause injury to anyone below - standard liability insurance would cover that, and should extend to any other means of photography too IMO).


Then again that doesn't raise money for the private company that EuroUSC is....................................................

[Zeeflyboy]

It seems to me that the CAA have no business in regulating what is essentially photography/videography using an aerial platform, in much the way that they'd get the finger if I had to write an ops manual for having a camera on the end of a 100foot pole

Unfortunately they do, and while you can moan about the fact, there's nothing you can do.

The difference with your pole example (or perhaps more professionally, a cherry picker ;) ) is that it's ultimately a ground based piece of equipment.


I wonder what a tethered balloon counts as.... Not looked into it myself.

[FPVSteve]

Yea but the dangers are the same (something falling on your head).

[FPVSteve]

Amen to that.

[Zeeflyboy]

So does that mean we can report people on here who make fpv parts and charge for them but do not declare the money to the tax as as the end of the day they are stealing money from the people who invested and sell things legally?

As said earlier its a dog eat dog world weather you like it or not people will crap on you. Myself I don't like this way of living but the cost of living is going up due to our corrupt government so man has to do anything he can to make a few bob so he can slightly enjoy life.

If you wanted to and felt your business was suffering as a result I guess you could...

It's a bit harder to know what anyone is doing as regards declaring money to the tax man though, and its doubtful they would care given the small nature of such transactions... If you feel particularly aggrieved though there's nothing to stop you trying.

If someone who is legally sorted sees someone who is operating "illegally" taking away his/her business, why wouldn't he report them... It's exactly as you say - dog eat dog. He has a stick with which to beat his "competition" round the head, you can be sure he'll use it. If you operate such a business without the required qualifications then you have to accept its a possibility you will get caught - risk vs reward I guess!

Steve - I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you lol, I'm saying its a simple fact that they do. I'd be quite happy if the CAA had nothing to do with airspace below 400ft outside of say 4-5km of an airport, it's not the case unfortunately.

[FPVSteve]

Out of interest have there been any prosecutions against non-commercial operators operating commercially?

Just asking, not meaning to cause a meltdown...

[Zeeflyboy]

No idea Steve... I guess it's still all quite new.

I know in America many companies received cease and desist orders from the FAA. Don't know if any ended up in court.... Haven't heard of any cases in the UK yet personally.

Andy - just to be clear I have no stake in this. I don't operate any business involving drones and don't have a BNUS-C... While I may do so in future it certainly wouldn't be aerial photography. So I'm just calling it as I see it - if someone who has jumped through all the hoops comes across someone operating on the sly, you can be sure they'll do what they need to in order to protect their investment. That was in answer to the question asked earlier in the thread.

I would be careful about your assumption though, as its not comparing apples to apples. In this case it is more akin to reporting someone driving without a license to the DVLA - do you still think nothing would happen? As far as I'm aware the CAA are duty bound to investigate if they receive a report whether they particularly want to or not. The amount of money changing hands is also of no relevance to them as that is not their concern... whether its £100 or £100,000 the rule that has been broken is the same one - operating commercially without a license.

Personally I would guess they'd usually just issue a warning first.... But that is just a guess, and doesn't constitute legal advice ;)

[MarkLincs]

On the course I was on this came up

Companies and people have had chats shall we say

There either bnucs now or not doing aerial work...

They ask nicely 1st....

Not sure about the 2nd time for some reason.

[FPVSteve]

Who told you that though - the EuroUSC people? Can't see any motive there :P

[FPVSteve]

The problem with that though Andy is that it's all groovy until the shit hits the fan and you cause an "issue" involving insurance.

99.999% of the time you'll be lucky, but that tiny percentage could be the difference between you owning your own house and losing it in a bankruptcy court...

Pretty much like FPV then, cos none of us are insured without a spotter...

I still think insurance should cover commercial operations without the CAA meddling under a certain weight but I don't make the rules - if I did, there'd be lapdancing every Thursday.