James T Marsh, Owner/Operator HeliTek NW, Beaverton, OR 

- Section 333 Exemption Petition 

January 7, 2015

U. S. Department of Transportation Docket Management 

System 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590 

Re: Exemption Request Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act of the 

Federal Aviation Regulations from 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. Part 21; 

14 C.F.R. 61.113(a)&(b); 91.7(a); 91.9(b) (2); 91.103(b); 91.109; 119.121; 

91.151(a); 91.203(a)&(b); 91.405(a); 91.407(a) (1); 91.409(a) (2); 

91.417(a)&(b) 

Dear Sir or Madam, 

I, James T Marsh, am writing pursuant to the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and the procedures 

contained within 14 C.F.R. 11, to request that I, James 

Marsh, owner and operator of HeliTek NW, a small 

unmanned aircraft, be exempted from the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (“FARs”) listed below so that I, James Marsh, 

may operate my small ultra light weight unmanned aircraft 

system (“UAS”) commercially in airspace regulated by the 

Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”). 

As described herein I, James Marsh, am a licensed and 

instrument rated pilot (certificate #3363580) with over 120 

hours of manned aircraft flight time and current 3rd class 

medical; experienced in flying hobby helicopters and fixed 

wind aircraft for recreational purposes. I have added a

commercially insured hobby grade quad-copter UAS to my 

inventory with intent for aerial videography/cinematography 

to enhance academic community awareness for those 

individuals and companies unfamiliar with the geographical 

layout of the metro Portland area, augmented real estate 

listing videos, construction tracking photos and TV 

commercial videos; following exemption and approval by the 
FAA. Thereby enhancing- their academic research 

experience for the metro Portland area, and assisting in 

tracking progress of construction projects.

I have flown small RC electric airplanes and helicopters for 

over twenty (20) years without incident. Committed to safety 

with each flight. My, James Marsh’s, exemption request 

would permit operation of ultra lightweight, unmanned 

(piloted by remote control) and comparatively inexpensive 

UAS(s) in tightly controlled and limited airspace.

Predetermined in areas away from general public, airports, 

heliports and vehicular traffic for community videos, and 

within property boundaries for individual homeowner real 

estate listing videos/photos, construction sites and other 

closed and controlled locations. Currently, similar 

lightweight, remote controlled UAS's are legally operated by 

unmonitored amateur hobbyists with no safety plan or 

controls in place to prevent catastrophe. I, James T Marsh, 

have personally instilled safetyPlease see:

Appendix A – DJI Inspire 1 quad-copter Operation/Owner Manual, Safety Guidelines, 

Intelligent Flight Battery Safety Guidelines (separately submitted)

Appendix B – Portland metro area 5-mile airport/no-fly-zone radius map 

Appendix C – Personal Protocol/Safety

Appendix D – Flight Operations/ Safety Manual

protocols and controls4 to avoid and prevent public hazard, 

as well as manned aircraft hazards/catastrophe. This will act 

to further safety protocols exclusive to lightweight UAS's 

specific to real estate/construction/TV commercial video and 

photography usage as I, James Marsh, record flight data and 

other information gained through permitted flight operations 

to share with the FAA through any required FAA reports to 
assist with future protocol and safety regulation. 

James T Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR - Section 

333 Exemption Petition 

Granting my, James Marsh’s, request comports with the 

Secretary of Transportation’s (FAA Administrator’s) 

responsibilities and authority to not only integrate UAS's into 

the national airspace system, but to “...establish 

requirements for the safe operation of such aircraft systems 

[UAS's] in the national airspace system” under Section 

333(c) of the Reform Act specific to the use of UAS's for real 

estate/construction purposes. Further I, James Marsh, will 

conduct my operations in compliance with the protocols 

described herein or as otherwise established by the FAA. 

For the reasons stated below I, James Marsh, respectfully 

request the grant of an exemption allowing me to operate 

ultra light weight, remote controlled UAS’s for academic 

community awareness to benefit/stimulate attraction to the 

metro Portland area and to enhance real estate listing videos 

for homeowners who cannot afford expensive manned 

aircraft for the same purpose, and for land developers that 

would require expensive and noisy manned aircraft to 

document construction progress, and finally small local 

businesses with limited budgets for marketing media. All of 

which will promote local economic growth through increased 

employment and increased tax base. Both with public safety 

in mind by keeping heavier manned aircraft containing 

combustible fuel that that poses potential public hazard. 

I. Contact Information: 

James T Marsh, Owner/Operator, HeliTek NW

3812 SW 195th Ter, Beaverton, OR 97078
Mobile: (503) 593-4990 Email: heliteknw@gmail.com

II. The Specific Sections of Title 14 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations From Which HeliTek NW Requests 

Exemption are: 

14 CFR 21; 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 CFR 61.113 (a) & (b); 14 

C.F.R. 91, et seq.; 14 CFR 407 (a) (1); 14 CFR 409 (a) (2); and, 

14 CFR 417 (a) & (b). 

Appendix C - Personal Protocols and Controls 

III. The Extent of relief James Marsh seeks and the 

Reason He Seeks Such Relief: 

I, James Marsh, submit this application in accordance with 

the Reform Act, 112 P.L. 95 §§ 331-334, seeking relief from 

any currently applicable FARs operating to prevent me, 

James Marsh, contemplated commercial cinematic, 

academic and other flight operations within the national 

airspace system. The Reform Act in Section 332 provides for 

such integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into our 

national airspace system as it is in the public’s interest to do 

so. My, James Marsh’s, ultra light weight UAS meets the 

definition of “small unmanned aircraft” as defined in Section 

331 and therefore the integration of my ultra light weight 

UAS is expressly contemplated by the Reform Act. I would 

like to operate my ultra lightweight UAS prior to the time 

period by which the Reform Act requires the FAA to 

promulgate rules governing such craft. Thereby, providing 

direct experience and valuable information for formal 

regulation that can be administered uniformly to all real 

estate and construction related UAS aerial video and 

photography. The Reform Act guides the Secretary in 

determining the types of UAS's that may operate safely in 

our national airspace system. Considerations include: The 
weight, size, speed and overall capabilities of the UAS's; 

Whether the UAS will be operated near airports or heavily 

populated areas; and, Whether the UAS will be operated by 

line of sight. 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (a). Each of these items

reflects in favor of an exemption for me, James Marsh. My 

UAS utilizes four (4) counter-rotating propellers for balance, 

control and stability. My UAS is equipped with GPS and auto 

return safety technology. Weighing less than seven (7) 

pounds (far below the maximum 55-pound limit); including 

camera with gimbal. 

I, James Marsh, consider safety as foremost with each flight. 

My small-unmanned aircraft is designed to hover in place via 

GPS and operate in less than a 24-knot (15 mph) wind. For 

safety, stability and fear of financial loss I will not fly in winds 

exceeding 16 kph (10 mph). Built in safety systems include a 

GPS mode that allows my UAS to hover in place when radio 

controls are released. With three modes to choose from, I 

utilize the Smart Mode5 for aerial videography/photography. 

This is the safest, most reliable and stable mode to prevent 

accident and hazard. When pilot communication is lost UAS 

is designed slowly descend to point of take off, or near the 

control transmitter when utilizing Dynamic Mode. I do not 

operate my UAS near airports, Hospitals nor Police heliports, 

and do not operate near areas where general public is within 

fifty to one hundred (50-100) yards depending on location, 

conditions and weather. I am constantly on alert for any 

manned aircraft (Police/Medical helicopters, etc.) and 

prepared to land/abort immediately to the nearest and safest 

ground point should a manned aircraft approach my location 

or I suspect manned aircraft may approach near my location. 

I study aeronautical charts prior to each flight so that I may 

be fully aware of the airspace in which I will be operating. My 

UAS is capable of vertical and horizontal operations, and are 

flown only within my line of sight of me, as the remote control 
pilot. Utilizing battery power rather than combustible fuels, 

flights generally last between eight (8) to twelve (12) 

minutes, with an altitude under four hundred (400) feet. 

5 Smart Mode includes safe circle for operation, position hold, self-leveling, altitude 

command, GPS, return home and dynamic return to home feature, and safety control to 

return home or land in the event of communication interruption between RC transmitter 

and UAS. See Appendix A - Operator Manual. 

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR - Section 333 Exemption Petition 

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR - Section 333 

Exemption Petition 

I, James Marsh, utilize a fresh fully charged battery with 

each flight as a safety precaution; full flight time limit for each 

battery is fifteen (15) to twenty (20) minutes as tested. I do 

not operate my UAS at or below manufacture recommend 

minimum charge levels for operation; preferring to remain 

well within a safe operating range to insure adequate 

communication between radio control and UAS to eliminate 

potential for crash, loss of control or hazard. Our standard 

reserve levels are 25% and monitored through digital onscreen data-link display. Reserve batteries are at hand with 

each exercise to insure replacement for sufficient safe level 

of operation. I do not believe in taking risk that may cause a 

crash that could create hazard to the public/property/manned 

aircraft, and have no desire to lose an investment. I have 

clocked numerous practice flights in remote areas as a 

hobbyist simulating flights for future commercial use to gain 

familiarization with the characteristics of this specific UAS's 

performance under different temperature and weather 

conditions. I also practice computerized simulated flights to 

maintain adequate skills and response reflex time. All for the 

sake of safety. 

I, James Marsh, am extremely cautious when operating of 

my UAS/ultra light weight unmanned aircraft and will not 
“create a hazard to users of the national airspace system or 

the public.” 112 P.L. 95 § 333 (b). Given the small size and 

weight of my UAS it falls well within Congress’s 

contemplated safety zone when it promulgated the Reform 

Act and the corresponding directive to integrate UAS's intothe national airspace system. James Marsh’s UAS, used in 

hobby flight, has a demonstrable safety record and does not 

pose any threat to the general public or national security. 

IV. How James Marsh’s Request Will Benefit the Public 

As A Whole: 

Aerial videography for geographical awareness and for real 

estate marketing has been around for a long time through 

manned fixed wing aircraft and helicopters. For small budget 

real estate companies and average homeowners the 

expense of such aerial videography is cost prohibitive. Only 

large companies and high end Realtors or luxury 

homeowners can afford to absorb such expense. Depriving 

non-luxury homeowners and lower budget Realtors from a 

valuable marketing tool. Manned aircraft pose a threat to the 

public through potential catastrophic crash. Many of them 

resulting in loss of life to both flight crew and public on the 

ground. Each with combustible fuel that exploded and 

burned on impact. Police helicopters have made emergency 

hard landings within city limits. My, James Marsh’s, UAS 

pose no such threat since size and lack of combustible fuel 

alleviates any potential threat to the public. 

Congress has already proclaimed that it is in the public’s 

interest to integrate commercially flown UAS's into the 

national airspace system, hence the passing of the Reform 

Act. Granting my, James Marsh’s, exemption request 

furthers the public interest through academic/visual 

awareness of the geographical benefits in and around the 

metro Portland area. My ultra lightweight UAS is battery 
powered and creates no emissions that can harm the 

environment. The consequence of my ultra lightweight UAS 

crashing is far less than a full size helicopter or fixed wing 

aircraft; which are heavy, contain combustible fuel and cancause catastrophic devastation to the public. 

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR - Section 333 Exemption Petition 

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR - Section 333 

Exemption Petition 

The public’s interest is furthered by minimizing ecological 

and crash threat by permitting aerial video/photo capture 

through my battery operated ultra light weight UAS's. 

Permitting me, James Marsh, to immediately fly within 

national air space furthers economic growth. Granting my 

exemption request substantially furthers the economic 

impact for the metro Portland community for companies 

looking to relocate or build in the Portland metro area as well 

as individuals looking to relocate for career advancement 

through academic and geographical awareness. Both of 

which serve as a stimulus to the community. 

V. Reasons Why James Marsh’s Exemption Will Not 

Adversely Affect Safety Or How The Exemption Will 

Provide a Level of Safety At Least Equal To Existing 

Rule: 

My, James Marsh’s, exemption will not adversely affect 

safety. Quite the contrary, for the reasons stated permitting 

me, James Marsh, to log more flight time in FAA controlled 

airspace, with communication with the FAA, will allow me to 

contribute to the innovation and implementation of new and 

novel, as of yet undiscovered safety protocols for Realtors 

that can be embraced by the NAR, AAR, and TAR for 

development in cooperation with the FAA. In addition I, 

James Marsh, submit the following representations of 
enhancements to current aerial videography and 

photography for real estate and construction: 

My UAS weighs less than 7 pounds complete with a small 

ultra light weight high quality camera; I only operate my UAS 

below 400 feet (within the 400 foot permissible ceiling set by 

the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012); 

My UAS only operate for 8-12 minutes per flight; I land my 

UAS prior to manufacturer recommended minimum level of 

battery power; I pilot my UAS through remote control only by 

line of sight; My UAS has GPS a flight safety feature 

whereby it hovers and then slowly lands if communication 

with the remote control pilot is lost; I actively analyze flight 

data and other sources of information to constantly update 

and enhance safety protocols; I only operate in reasonably 

safe environment that are strictly controlled, are away from 

power lines, elevated lights, airports and actively populated 

areas; I conduct extensive pre-flight inspections and 

protocol, during which safety carries primary importance; I 

always obtains all necessary permissions prior to operation; 

and, I have procedures in place to abort flights in the event 

of safety breaches or potential danger. 

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR - Section 333 

Exemption Petition 

My, James Marsh’s, safety protocols provide a level of safety 

equal to or exceeding existing rules. It is important to note 

that absent the integration of commercial UAS into our 

national airspace system, helicopters are the primary means 

of aerial video and photography for community awareness,

real estate, construction and TV commercials. While the 

safety record of such helicopters is remarkably astounding, 

there has been local incident involving loss of life as well as 
extensive property damage; it is far safer to operate a 

battery powered ultra light weight UAS. 

First, the potential loss of life is diminished because UAS's 

carry no people on board and I only operate my UAS in 

specific areas away from mass populations. Second, there is 

no fuel on board a UAS and thus the potential for fire or 

explosions is greatly diminished. 

Third, the small size and extreme maneuverability of my 

UAS allow me to remotely pilot away from and avoid hazards 

quickly and safely. Lastly, given its small size and weight, 

even when close enough to capture amazing images, my 

UAS need not be so close to the objects they are focused on 

through the technology and use of post editing software 

allowing pan and zoom. 

Accordingly, my UAS has been experimentally operated for 

familiarization/competency and will continue to operate at 

and above current safety levels. 

VI. A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal 

Register: 

A. 14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 91: Airworthiness Certificates, 

Manuals and The Like. 

14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled Airworthiness Certificates, 

sets forth requirements for procurement of necessary 

airworthiness certificates in relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). 

The size, weight and enclosed operational area of my, 

Douglas Trudeau’s, UAS permits exemption from Part 21 

because my UAS meets (and exceeds) an equivalent level 

of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the Reform Act. The 

FAA is authorized to exempt aircraft from the airworthiness 

certificate requirement under both the Act (49 U.S.C. § 

44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. Both pieces of 
legislation permit the FAA to exempt UAS's from the 

airworthiness certificate requirement in consideration of the 

weight, size, speed, maneuverability and proximity to areas 

such as airports and dense populations. My, James Marsh’s, 

current and projected UAS's meet or exceed each of the 

elements. 

14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an aircraft 

without an airworthiness certificate. As no such certificate 

will be applicable in the form contemplated by the FARs, this 

Regulation is inapplicable. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) (2) requires an aircraft flight manual in 

the aircraft. As there are no on board pilots or passengers, 

and given the size of the UAS's, this Regulation is 

inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety will be achieved by 

maintaining a safety/flight manual delineating areas of where 

safety can be defined.10 The FAA has previously issued 

exemptions to this regulation in Exemption Nos. 8607, 8737, 

8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 10167A, 10602, 

10700 and 32827. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.121 regarding altimeter settings is inapplicable 

insofar as my UAS utilizes electronic global positioning systems 

with a barometric sensor. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.203 (a) and (b) provides for the carrying of civil 

aircraft certifications and registrations. They are inapplicable for 

the same reasons described above. The equivalent level of 

safety will be achieved by maintaining any such required 

certifications and registrations by me, James Marsh. 

14 C.F.R. § 45.23: Marking of The Aircraft. 

Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require aircraft to be 

marked according to certain specifications. My UAS are, by 

definition, unmanned. They therefore do not have a cabin, 
cockpit or pilot station on which to mark certain words or 

phrases. Further, two-inch lettering is difficult to place on such 

small aircraft with dimensions smaller that minimal lettering 

requirement. Regardless, I will mark its UASs in the largest 

possible lettering by placing the word “EXPERIMENTAL” on its 

fuselage as required by 14 C.F.R. §45.29 (f) so that I the pilot, or 

anyone assisting me as a spotter with the UAV will see the 

markings. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to this 

regulation through Exemptions Nos. 8738, 10167, 10167A and 

10700. 

14 C.F.R. § 61.113: Private Pilot Privileges and Limitations: PIC. 

Pursuant to 14 C.F.R. §§ 61.113 (a) & (b), private pilots are 

limited to non-commercial operations. I, James Marsh, can 

achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current 

Regulations because my UAS does not carry any pilots or 

passengers. Further, while helpful, a pilot license will not ensure 

remote control piloting skills. The risks attended to the operation 

of my UAS is far less than the risk levels inherent in the 

commercial activities outlined in 14 C.F.R. § 61, et seq. Thus, 

allowing me, James Marsh, to operate my UAS meet and exceed 

current safety levels in relation to 14 C.F.R. §61.113 (a) & (b). 

14 C.F.R. 91.119: Minimum Safe Altitudes. 

14 C.F.R. § 91.119 prescribes safe altitudes for the operation of 

civil aircraft. It allows helicopters to be operated at lower altitudes 

in certain conditions. My UAS will never operate at an altitude 

greater than 400 AGL; safely below the standard of 400 AGL. I, 

James Marsh, will however operate my UAS in safe areas away 

from public and traffic, providing a level of safety at least 

equivalent to or below those in relation to minimum safe 

altitudes. Given the size, weight, maneuverability and speed of -

my UAS, an equivalent or higher level of safety will be achieved. 

14 C.F.R. 91.405 (a); 407 (a) (1); 409 (a) (2); 417(a) & (b): 

Maintenance Inspections. 
C. 

D. 

E. 

Appendix C - Safety/Flight Manual 

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR - Section 333 Exemption Petition 

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR - Section 333 

Exemption Petition 

The above-cited Regulations require, amongst other things, 

aircraft owners and operators to “have [the] aircraft inspected as 

prescribed in subpart E of this part and shall between required 

inspections, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, 

have discrepancies repaired as prescribed in part 43 of this 

chapter. . . .” 

These Regulations only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness 

certificate. They will not, therefore, apply to my, James Marsh’s, 

UAS. However, as a safety precaution I inspect my UAS before 

and after each flight. 

A Summary The FAA May Publish in the Federal Register: 

A. 14 C.F.R. 21 and 14 C.F.R. 91: Airworthiness Certificates, 

Manuals and The Like. 14 C.F.R. 21, Subpart H, entitled 

Airworthiness Certificates, sets forth requirements for 

procurement of necessary airworthiness certificates in 

relation to FAR § 91.203(a)(1). The size, weight and 

enclosed operational area of my UAS permits exemption 

from Part 21 because my, James Marsh’s, UAS meets an 

equivalent level of safety pursuant to Section 333 of the 

Reform Act. The FAA is authorized to exempt aircraft fromthe airworthiness certificate requirement under both the Act 

(49 U.S.C. § 44701 (f)) and Section 333 of the Reform Act. 

Both pieces of legislation permit the FAA to exempt UAS's 

from the airworthiness certificate requirement in 
consideration of the weight, size, speed, maneuverability 

and proximity to areas such as airports and dense 

populations. My UAS meets or exceeds each of the 

elements. 14 C.F.R. 91.7(a) prohibits the operation of an 

aircraft without an airworthiness certificate. As no such 

certificate will be applicable in the form contemplated by the 

FARs, this Regulation is inapplicable. 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 (b) 

(2) requires an aircraft flight manual in the aircraft. As there 

are no pilots or passengers, and given the size of the UAS's, 

this Regulation is inapplicable. An equivalent level of safety 

will be achieved by maintaining a manual. The FAA has 

previously issued exemptions to this regulation in Exemption 

Nos. 8607, 8737, 8738, 9299, 9299A, 9565, 9565B, 10167, 

maintenance program that involves regular software updates 

and curative measures for any damaged hardware. 

Therefore, an equivalent level of safety will be achieved. 

In summary, James Marsh seeks an exemption from the 

following Regulations: 

14 C.F.R. 21, subpart H; 14 C.F.R. 45.23(b); 14 C.F.R. §§ 

61.113 (a) & (b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.7 (a); 14 C.F.R. § 91.9 

(b)(2); 14 C.F.R. § 91.103(b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.109; 14 C.F.R. 

§ 91.119; 14 C.F.R. § 91.121; 14 C.F.R. § 91.151(a); 14 

C.F.R. §§ 91.203(a) and (b); 14 C.F.R. § 91.405 (a); 14 

C.F.R. § 91.407 (a)(1); 14 C.F.R. § 91.409 (a)(2); 14 C.F.R. 

§ 91.409 (a) (2); and, 14 C.F.R. §§ 91.417 (a) & (b) to 

commercially operate my, James Marsh’s, small unmanned 

vehicle/lightweight unmanned aircraft vehicle in community 

awareness and real estate operations, and to develop 

economic platforms for real estate to enhance theexperience of those seeking to relocate to the metro 

Portland area. Currently, area awareness and real estate 

aerial videography/photography relies primarily on the use of 

larger aircraft running on combustible fuel. Posing potential 
risk to the public. Granting my, James Marsh’s, request for 

exemption will reduce current risk levels and thereby 

enhance safety. My UAS craft do not contain potentially 

explosive fuel, is smaller, lighter and more maneuverable 

than conventional real estate video and photographic aircraft 

with much less flight time. Further, I operate at lower 

altitudes and in controlled airspace eliminating potential 

public risk flying to and from established airfields. I, James 

Marsh, have been informally analyzing flight information and 

will compile safety protocols and the implementation of a 

flight operations manual for real estate usage that exceeds 

currently accepted means and methods for safe flight. 

Formal collection of information shared with the FAA will 

enhance the FAA's internal efforts to establish protocols for 

complying with the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 

2012. There are no personnel on board my, James Marsh’s, 

UAS and therefore the likelihood of death or serious bodily 

injury is significantly diminished. My, James Marsh, 

operation of my UAS, weighing less than 7 pounds and 

travelling at lower speeds within limited areas will provide an 

equivalent level of safety as that achieved under current 

FARs. Accordingly I, James Marsh, respectfully request that 

the FAA grant my exemption request and am willing to 

cooperate in sharing information to benefit the FAA, safety of 

manned aircraft, and the general public at large. 

Respectfully submitted, 

James T Marsh, Owner Operator, HeliTek NW

3812 SW 195th Ter, Beaverton, OR 97078
Appendix A

DJI Inspire 1 Manuals-Submitted Separately

Appendix B

Five Mile Radius 

Restricted Flight Areas 

Portland, Oregon Metro 

Area 
No FLY Zones List

CCaatteeggoorryy ZZoonnee CCiittyy AAiirrppoorrtt

Category A Australia Adelaide Airport Adelaide Airport

Category A Australia Aeroglen Cairns International Airport

Category A Australia Bilinga Gold Coast Airport

Category A Australia Brisbane Airport Brisbane Airport

Category A Australia Darwin International Airport Darwin International Airport

Category A Australia Garbutt Townsville Airport

Support (

Home (http://www.dji.com/) / Fly Safe (

No FLY Zones

All unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) operators should abide by all regulations from such organizations as the ICAO (International

Civil Aviation Organization) and their own national airspace regulations. In order to increase flight safety and prevent accidental

flights in restricted areas, the Phantom 2 series includes a No Fly Zones feature to help users use this product safely and legally.

These zones include airports worldwide and have been divided into two types, A and B. For a full explanation of the difference

between the categories, see the following video. You can also view a full list of places included in each category in the list below.

! WATCH THE INTRODUCTION VIDEO (//www.youtube.com

/embed/YoXAMRQoIAA)

(//www.youtube.com/embed/YoXAMRQoIAA)

(http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=45.553213,-122.59162&z=11&t=m&hl=en-US&gl=US&mapclient=apiv3) Report a map error (https://www.google.com/maps/@45.5532135,-122.5916204,11z/data=!10m1!1e1!12b1?source=apiv3 Map data ©2015 Google)

 Category A Category B

Search:

 United States (English) (/select-country)

 (Http://www.dji.com/) " Store (Https://store.dji.com/) Products ∠ (Http://www.dji.com/products)

Http://www.dji.com/support) Community ∠

$

/fly-safe)

Search dji.com... %

No FLY Zones | DJI http://www.dji.com/fly-safe/category-mc

1 of 2 1/7/15, 11:00 AM
James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR - Section 333 Exemption Petition 

Appendix D 

James Marsh Personal 

Protocols and Controls 

Protocols and Controls 

Aerial	Construction and	Real	Estate	Videos/Photos

Safety	for	public	on	the	ground	as	well	as	manned	aircraft	above	is	an	

essential	and	utmost	consideration	for	aerial	videos	and	photography.	

As	such,	safety	protocols	and	controls	must	be	implemented	through	

pre-flight	preparation	and	during	flight.	

Pre-Flight	Protocol:	

Check	batteries	with	voltage	meter	to	insure	fully	charged	and	ready	

for	use.		Inspect	batteries	for	damage	or	leakage	that	may	affect	

proper	operation.	Inspect	propellers	for	cracks,	chips	or	damage	that	

may	cause	sudden	loss	of	propulsion	or	unmanageable/uncontrolled	

flight.	Check	weather	forecasts	for	wind	advisory	or	other	conditions	

that	my	impact	flight.	Consult	five	(5)	mile	radius	map	for	airport	

vicinity.	Consult	aeronautical	charts	for	airspace	identification	and	

other	flight	considerations.

o Contact	respective	airport	to	advise	of	estimated	flight	time,	

estimated	flight duration,	estimated	elevation	of	flight,	and	any	other	

pertinent	information.	

Inspect	flight	area	for	o vicinity	of	public	safety	helipads/heliports	o 

vicinity	of	medical	helipads/heliports	o vicinity	of	light	poles	
o vicinity	or	utility	wires	o vicinity	of	trees	o flocks	of	birds	that	may	

cause	interference	and	potential	flight	impact	o vicinity	of	any	

elevated	obstructions	that	may	pose	potential	flight	hazard	o vicinity	

of	roadways	with	moderate	to	heavy	traffic	that	can	be	distracted	o 

public	gatherings	that	may	attract	viewers	o optional	point	of	control	

for	best	visual	site	of	UAS	while	in	flight	

Takeoff	and	landing	o inspect	area	for	best	and	safest	point	of	takeoff	

and	landing	o if	in	a	subdivision	or	area	that	is	within	150	feet	of	a	

residential street,	post	warning	sign(s)/stand(s)	"Attention	Aerial	

Photography	In	Progress	- Remain	Back	150	Feet	"	

UAS	SYSTEMS	CHECK:

o VERIFY	AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS STATUS	CHECKLIST	PRIOR	TO	

TAKEOFF

o VERIFY	IMU	AND	COMPASS	CALIBRATION	STATUS	PRIOR	TO	

TAKEOFF.	RECALIBRATE	IF	NEEDED

Flight	Protocol:	

Takeoff and	land	from	same	location	remain	alert	to	birds,	sound	or	

aircraft,	curious	public,	and	approaching	vehicles	do	not	allow	anyone	

to	engage	in	conversation	or	distract	the	remote	control	pilot	restrict	

flight	to	minimal	elevation	sufficient	to	acquire	desired	

results	remained	prepared	for	emergency	landing	at	all	times	pay	

attention	to	flight	time	and	25%	battery	reserve

o if	possible	set	a	timer	as	a	safety	alert	land	UAS	and	shut	down	

propulsion	immediately	following	landing	
James Marsh, Owner/Operator, HeliTek NW, Beaverton Oregon

Page 1 

Protocols and Controls 

Aerial	Construction and	Real	Estate	Videos/Photos

Post	flight:	

Emergency	or	Suspected	Hazard:	

Immediate	land	UAS	at	safest	and	closet	ground	location	in	the	

event	o manned	aircraft	is	heard	or	seen	in	vicinity	of	flight	o there	

is	a	public	gathering	within	established	safety	boundary	wanting	to	

observe	flight	o pilot	is	being	distracted	from	focusing	on	flight	and	

safety	o sudden	change	in	weather	(wind	bursts)	o sudden	increase	

in	vehicular	traffic	in	vicinity	of	flight	o birds	enter	into	proximity	of	

flight	o any	sudden	unsafe	event	that	can	cause	collision,	distraction	

or	interruption	of	control	

a. Disconnect	battery	to	prevent	accidental	activation	of	

propulsion	system		

b. Secure	UAS	in	a	safe	location		

c. Remove	all	warning	signs	from	public	access	areas		

d. Complete	flight	log	items	as	needed.	Document	any	squawks	
James Marsh, Owner/Operator HeliTek NW Page 2 

James Marsh, Owner/Operator, Beaverton, OR - Section 333 Exemption Petition 

Appendix D

James Marsh/HeliTek NW

Safety/Flight Manual 

Safety Flight Manual 

Aerial	Construction and	Real	Estate	Videos/Photos

Safety	for	public	on	the	ground	as	well	as	manned	aircraft	above	is	an	essential	and	utmost	

consideration	for	aerial	videos	and	photography.	Maintaining	a	record	of	safe	flight	for	FAA	

request	and	for	determining	future	UAS	safety	protocols	is	imperative.	

Date:____________________	

Location:	

___________________________________________________	

Pre-flight	Inspection and	Systems	Check:	 Yes	 No	Comment:	

_________________________________________________	

Elements	 (circle)	 (circle)	 Comment	

Weather	 Good	 Fair	
Visibility	 Good	 Fair	

Wind	Speed	|	Direction Low	 Medium	

Proximity	to	airport:	_________________	(see	attached	map	

pinpointing	approximate	location	of	flight)	Airport	notified	 Yes	 No	

Date:_______________	Time:	______________	

Phone	Number:	_______________________	

Contact	Name:	___________________________________	

Nearest	major	intersection:	

_________________________________________________________

Proximity	to	medium	traffic	road:	

_________________________________________________________	

Proximity	to	heavily	traveled	roadway	road:	

_________________________________________________	

Proximity	to	congested	population:	

________________________________________________________	

Approx.	Takeoff	Time	

Approx.	Landing	

Time	

Estimated	Elevation	

Safety	Concerns:	
Additional	Comments:	

Post	Flight	Maintenance	Items	or	Squawks:

Aircraft	Status	After	Flight:	(circle)						Safe	For	Flight 				Grounded

Pilot’s	Initials	and	Signature__________________________________________

Unedited	flight	video/photos	available	for	FAA	upon	written	request	within	180	

days	of	flight:	 Yes	 No	

James Marsh, Owner/Operator HeliTek NW, Beaverton, OR