1 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Regulatory Docket No. Section 333 

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR EXEMPTION OF:

Robert Thomas Brayton

FOR AN EXEMPTION SEEKING RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF 

TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

SECTIONS 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 

91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), AND 91.417(a) & (b) CONCERNING COMMERCIAL 

OPERATION OF 3D ROBOTICS SOLOUNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS

PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF

THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012 (PUBLIC LAW 112-95) 

Submitted on March 11, 2016 

Robert Thomas Brayton 

P.O. Box 894 

Comanche, Texas 76442 

 (210) 244-3970 
2 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page 

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS..........................................................................................3 

SUMMARY..................................................................................................................................4 

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF PETITIONER..........................................................4 

BACKGROUND..........................................................................................................................5 

BASIS FOR PETITION...............................................................................................................5 

NAME AND ADDRESS OF PETITIONER...................................................................8 

THE SPECIFIC SECTIONS OF 14 C.F.R. FROM WHICH ROBERT THOMAS 

BRAYTON SEEKS 

EXEMPTION.....................................................................................................8 

THE EXTENT OF RELIEF ROBERT THOMAS BRAYTON SEEKS AND THE 

REASON ROBERT THOMAS BRAYTON SEEKS THE 

RELIEF.....................................................11 

THE REASONS WHY GRANTING ROBERT THOMAS BRAYTON’S REQUEST 

WOULD BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST ..............................................................15 

THE REASONS WHY GRANTING THE EXEMPTION WOULD NOT 

ADVERSELY AFFECT SAFETY...............................................................................19 

SUMMARY THAT CAN BE PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER...........32 

ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, VIEWS, OR ARGUMENTS 

AVAILABLE TO SUPPORT ROBERT THOMAS BRAYTON’S 

REQUEST...................34 

CONCLUSION..........................................................................................................................35 

APPENDICES.............................................................................................37 

 
3 

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

AGL Above Ground Level 

AOI Area of Interest 

ATC Air Traffic Control 

ATO Air Traffic Organization 

AV Aerial Vehicle 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

COA Certificate of Authorization 

FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

FAR Federal Aviation Regulation 

GCS Ground Control Station 

GPS Global Positioning System 

LOL Loss of Link 

NAS National Airspace System 

NOTAM Notice to Airman 

PIC Pilot In Command 

Section 333 FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333

SO Safety Observer 

SOP Standard Operating Procedures 

UA Unmanned Aircraft 

UAS Unmanned Aircraft System 

VFR Visual Flight Rules 

VLOS Visual Line of Sight 

VMC Visual Meteorological Conditions 

VTOL Vertical Takeoff and Landing 
4 

SUMMARY 

Robert Thomas Brayton seeks exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & 

(b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 

91.417(a) & (b), to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System pursuant to Section 333 of the 

FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA). This exemption will permit Robert 

Thomas Brayton to operate an Unmanned Aircraft System (UA) for the commercial purpose of 

conducting aerial video and photography of construction sites, real estate, and landscape over 

certain areas of the United States. 

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONER 

Robert Thomas Brayton provides clients with expertise and knowledge in advanced 

technologies and solutions to increase efficiency, productivity and effectiveness. Robert Thomas 

Brayton has over 30 years of professional experience in business and commercial aviation 

operations. He has over 2 years recreational/hobby experience in all aspects of aerial video and 

photography. Robert Thomas Brayton holds a FAA ATP certificate issued June 1987. 

The objective of Robert Thomas Brayton aerial video and photography operations is to 

provide high quality imaging for a variety of commercial, public, and residential uses, 

specifically targeting: 

• Construction sites before and after 

• Appraisals 

• Real-estate marketing 

• Motion Picture Filming 

• Aerial acquisitions used for inspections of public and private structures. 

• Search and Rescue operations 
5 

BACKGROUND 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems: 3D Robotics Solo UA 

Robert Thomas Brayton seeks an exemption to operate 3DR systems for compensation or 

hire within the NAS. The 3D Robotics Solo is a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) Unmanned 

Aircraft (UA) with a Ground Control Station (GCS) utilizing electronic tablet or smart phone 

systems. . The 3D Robotics Solo has a maximum gross weight of approximately 3 pounds 9 

ounces, while having a length of 18 inches, width of 18 inches and height of 10 inches, and a 

maximum speed of approximately 47.8 knots. The 3D Robotics Solo is equipped with four main 

rotors; driven by a Lithium Polymer battery powered electric motors. The 3D Robotics Solo that 

will be operated by Robert Thomas Brayton will be registered in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 

44103, Registration of Aircraft, as well as 14 C.F.R. Part 47, Aircraft Registration, and marked 

in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 45, Identification and Registration Marking. 

BASIS FOR PETITION 

Petitioner, Robert Thomas Brayton, pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations (14 C.F.R. § 11.61) and the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), 

Section 333, Special Rules for Certain Unmanned Aircraft Systems, hereby petitions the 

Administrator to commercially operate the 3D Robotics Solo UA in the National Airspace 

System (NAS), and for an exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & (b), 

91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 

91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). 

In consideration of the speed, weight, size, and limited operating area associated with the 

unmanned aircraft and its operation, Robert Thomas Brayton operation of 3D Robotics Solo UA 
6 

meets the conditions of FMRA Section 333 and therefore, will not require an airworthiness 

certificate in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. 

Accordingly, Robert Thomas Brayton requests relief from Sections 91.405(a), 

91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), as these sections set forth requirements 

for maintenance that only apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. 

Robert Thomas Brayton submits that the requested relief is proper since an equivalent 

level of safety will be ensured. Robert Thomas Brayton will use experienced personnel or 

technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UA using the 

methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the operating documents (i.e., Monthly 

Maintenance Log, and 3D Robotics Solo Instruction Manual). Furthermore, Robert Thomas 

Brayton will document and maintain all maintenance records for the 3D Robotics Solo UA. 

Relief from certain requirements of Section 61.113(a) and (b), entitled Private pilot 

privileges and limitations: Pilot in command, is requested by Robert Thomas Brayton to the 

extent necessary to allow a Pilot in Command (PIC) holding a private pilot or higher level 

certificate, as well as an airman medical certificate, and who has demonstrated, by meeting 

minimum flight- hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the 

3D Robotics Solo UA in a manner consistent with this exemption, including evasive and 

emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and 

structures. 

Robert Thomas Brayton seeks relief from Section 91.7(a), entitled Civil aircraft 

airworthiness, because the 3D Robotics Solo UA do not require an airworthiness certificate in 

accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. As such, Robert Thomas Brayton submits that he 

will ensure that the 3D Robotics Solo UA Is in an airworthy condition, prior to every flight, by 
7 

determining that the UA Is in compliance with the operating documents (i.e., Monthly 

Maintenance Log, and 3D Robotics Solo Instruction Manual), and that the aircraft are in a 

condition for safe flight. 

Robert Thomas Brayton also seeks an exemption from the requirements of Section 

91.121, entitled Altimeter Settings, as the 3D Robotics Solo UA will not have a typical 

barometric altimeter onboard. However, altitude information of the 3D Robotics Solo UA will be 

provided to the PIC via Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment and radio communications 

telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UA to the GCS for active monitoring of the flight 

path. This altitude information, combined with Robert Thomas Brayton’s operation of the 3D 

Robotics Solo UA within visual line of sight, at or below 200 feet AGL, will ensure a level of 

safety equivalent to Section 91.121. 

Additionally, Robert Thomas Brayton seeks an exemption from the requirements 

of 

Section 91.151(b), entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions. Robert Thomas 

Brayton submits that safety will not be affected by operation of the 3D Robotics Solo UA during 

daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC) under visual flight rules (VFR), with 

enough battery power to fly for a total duration of approximately 20 minutes to the first point of 

intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 3.5 minutes. 

In accordance with 14 C.F.R. § 11.81, Robert Thomas Brayton provides the 

following information in support of its petition for exemption: 

A. Name And Address Of The Petitioner.

The name and address of the Petitioner and point of contact is: 

Robert Thomas Brayton 

P.O. Box 894 

Forest City, NCs 28043 
8 

(210) 244-3970 

Email: rtbpaints@aol.com 

B. The Specific Sections Of 14 C.F.R. From Which Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks 

Exemption. 

1. Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 

61.113(a) And (b). 

Section 61.113, entitled Private pilot privileges and limitations: Pilot in command, 

subsections (a) and (b) prescribe the following, in relevant part: 

(a) No person who holds a private pilot certificate may act as a pilot in command (PIC) 

of an aircraft that is carrying passengers or property for compensation or hire; nor 

may that person, for compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft. 

(b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft in connection 

with any business or employment if— 

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and 

(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire. 

2. Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 

91.7(a).

Section 91.7, entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, subsection (a), states the following: 

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition. 

3. Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 

91.121. 

Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings, subsection (a), states the following, in part: 

(a) Each person operating an aircraft shall maintain the cruising altitude or flight level of 

that aircraft, as the case may be, by reference to an altimeter that is set, when 

operating-- 

(1) Below 18,000 feet MSL, to-- 

(i) The current reported altimeter setting of a station along the route and within 

100 nautical miles of the aircraft; 
9 

(ii) If there is no station within the area prescribed in paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this 

section, the current reported altimeter setting of an appropriate available 

station; or 

(iii) In the case of an aircraft not equipped with a radio, the elevation of the 

departure airport or an appropriate altimeter setting available before 

departure. 

4. Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 

91.151(b).

Section 91.151, entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions, subsection 

(b), states the following: 

(b) No person may begin a flight in a rotorcraft under VFR conditions unless 

(considering wind and forecast weather conditions) there is enough fuel to fly to the 

first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that 

for at least 20 minutes. 

5. Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks Exemption From The Requirement Of Section 

91.405(a).

Section 91.405, entitled Maintenance required, subsection (a), states the following: 

Each owner or operator of an aircraft— 

(a) Shall have that 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[.] 

6. Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 

91.407(a)(1) 

Section 91.407, entitled Operation after maintenance, preventive maintenance, 

rebuilding, or alteration, subsection (a)(1), states the following: 

(a) No person may operate any aircraft that has undergone maintenance, preventive 

maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration unless-- 

(1) It has been approved for return to service by a person authorized under § 

43.7 of this chapter[.] 

7. Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections 
10 

91.409(a)(1) And 91.409(a)(2). 

Section 91.409, entitled Inspections, subsection (a), states the following: 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, no person may operate an aircraft 

unless, within the preceding 12 calendar months, it has had -- 

(1) An annual inspection in accordance with part 43 of this chapter and has been 

approved for return to service by a person authorized by § 43.7 of this chapter; or 

(2) An inspection for the issuance of an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 

part 21 of this chapter. 

8. Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections 

91.417(a) And 91.417(b). 

Section 91.417, entitled Maintenance records, subsections (a) and (b), state the 

following: 

(a) Except for work performed in accordance with §§ 91.411 and 91.413, each registered 

owner or operator shall keep the following records for the periods specified in 

paragraph (b) of this section: 

(1) Records of the maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration and records 

of the 100-hour, annual, progressive, and other required or approved inspections, 

as appropriate, for each aircraft (including the airframe) and each engine, 

propeller, rotor, and appliance of an aircraft. The records must include-- 

(i) A description (or reference to data acceptable to the Administrator) of the 

work performed; and 

(ii) The date of completion of the work performed; and 

(iii) The signature, and certificate number of the person approving the aircraft for 

return to service. 

(2) Records containing the following information: 

(i) The total time in service of the airframe, each engine, each propeller, and 

each rotor. 

(ii) The current status of life-limited parts of each airframe, engine, propeller, 

rotor, and appliance. 
11 

(iii) The time since last overhaul of all items installed on the aircraft which are 

required to be overhauled on a specified time basis. 

(iv) The current inspection status of the aircraft, including the time since the last 

inspection required by the inspection program under which the aircraft and its 

appliances are maintained. 

(v) The current status of applicable airworthiness directives (AD) and safety 

directives including, for each, the method of compliance, the AD or safety 

directive number and revision date. If the AD or safety directive involves 

recurring action, the time and date when the next action is required. 

(vi) Copies of the forms prescribed by § 43.9(d) of this chapter for each major 

alteration to the airframe and currently installed engines, rotors, propellers, 

and appliances. 

(b) The owner or operator shall retain the following records for the periods prescribed: 

(1) The records specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be retained until the 

work is repeated or superseded by other work or for 1 year after the work is 

performed. 

(2) The records specified in paragraph (a)(2) of this section shall be retained and 

transferred with the aircraft at the time the aircraft is sold. 

(3) A list of defects furnished to a registered owner or operator under § 43.11 of this 

chapter shall be retained until the defects are repaired and the aircraft is approved 

for return to service. 

C. The Extent Of Relief Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks And The Reason Robert Thomas 

Brayton Seeks The Relief. 

1. Extent Of Relief Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks And The Reason Robert Thomas 

Brayton Seeks Relief From Section 61.113(a) And (b). 

Relief from Section 61.113(a) and (b) entitled Private pilot privileges and limitations: 

Pilot in command, is requested to the extent necessary to allow a PIC holding a private pilot or 

higher level certificate, as well as a current and valid airman medical certificate, and who has met 

certain flight-hour and currency requirements, to conduct the proposed UA flight operations for 

compensation or hire. 
12 

This relief is requested since the limitations set forth in Section 61.113(a) and (b) state 

that a private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as PIC of an aircraft in connection with any 

business or employment if: (1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment; and 

(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for compensation or hire. 

As set forth more fully below, Robert Thomas Brayton submits that an equivalent level of 

safety will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the 3D Robotics Solo UA 

unless that PIC has met certain flight-hour and currency requirements, demonstrating that the 

PIC is able to safely operate either the 3D Robotics Solo UA in a manner consistent with the 

operations specifications as described in this exemption, including evasive and emergency 

maneuvers, as well as maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and 

structures. Further, Robert Thomas Brayton submits that all flights of the 3D Robotics Solo UA, 

conducted by the PIC pursuant to the grant of this Petition: (1) will be incidental to Robert 

Thomas Brayton’s business; and (2) will not carry passengers or property for compensation or 

hire. 

2. Extent Of Relief Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks And The Reason Robert Thomas 

Brayton Seeks Relief From Section 91.7(a). 

Relief from Section 91.7(a) entitled Civil aircraft airworthiness, is requested to the extent 

required to allow Robert Thomas Brayton to determine that the 3D Robotics Solo is in airworthy 

condition prior to every flight by ensuring that the 

UA is in compliance with the operating documents (i.e., the Robert Thomas Brayton Aerial 

Operations Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and 3D Robotics Solo UA Instruction Manual). 

Robert Thomas Brayton seeks the requested relief because the 3D Robotics Solo 

UA do not require an airworthiness certificate in accordance with 14 
13 

C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. Therefore, Robert Thomas Brayton will ensure that the 3D Robotics 

Solo UA Is in airworthy condition based upon its compliance with the operating documents (i.e., 

Monthly Maintenance Log, and 3D Robotics Solo Instruction Manual) prior to every flight, and 

further, determine that the aircraft are in condition for safe flight, as stated in the conditions and 

limitations below. 

3. Extent Of Relief Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks And The Reason Robert Thomas 

Brayton Seeks Relief From Section 91.121. 

Relief from Section 91.121, entitled Altimeter settings, may be required to allow flight 

operations of the 3D Robotics Solo UA, which utilize a barometric pressure sensor, GPS 

equipment, and a radio communications telemetry data link to downlink altitude information 

from the UA to the PIC at the ground control station (GCS). Since the FAA requires that any 

altitude information concerning UA operations be reported to air traffic control (ATC) in feet 

above ground level (AGL), Robert Thomas Brayton seeks the requested relief because the 3D 

Robotics Solo UA’s altimeter may be set on the ground to zero feet AGL, rather than the local 

barometric pressure or field altitude, before each flight. 

Considering the limited altitude of the proposed operations, relief from 14 CFR 91.121 is 

sought to the extent necessary to comply with the applicable conditions and limitations stated 

below. As more fully set forth herein, an equivalent level of safety will be maintained since the 

3D Robotics Solo UA Is equipped with a barometric pressure sensor and GPS equipment, which 

automatically ensures that a ground level pressure setting will be established prior to each flight, 

and provides the PIC with altitude information of the UA on the heads-up display of the GCS. 

4. Extent Of Relief Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks And The Reason Robert Thomas 

Brayton Seeks Relief From Section 91.151(b). 
14 

Relief from Section 91.151(b) entitled Fuel requirements for flight in VFR conditions, is 

requested to the extent required to allow flights of the battery powered 3D Robotics Solo UA 

during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under visual flight rules 

(VFR), for a total duration of 20 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, assuming 

normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 3.5 minutes. Robert Thomas Brayton seeks the 

requested relief because without an exemption from Section 91.151(b), the flight time duration of 

the battery powered 3D Robotics Solo UA will severely constrain the practicality of any aerial 

video or still photo flight operations that Robert Thomas Brayton proposes to conduct pursuant to 

this Petition. 

Significantly, as set forth below, the technical specifications of the 3D Robotics Solo UA, 

the 3D Robotics Solo operating documents, and Robert Thomas Brayton’s proposed operating 

limitations, ensure that Robert Thomas Brayton will safely operate the battery powered 3D 

Robotics Solo UA during daylight hours in visual meteorological conditions (VMC), under 

visual flight rules (VFR), with enough battery power to fly for a total duration of 13.5 minutes to 

the first point of intended landing and, assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at 

least 4.5 minutes. 

5. Extent Of Relief Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks And The Reason Robert Thomas 

Brayton Seeks Relief From Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), 

And 91.417(a) & (b). 

Since Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) only 

apply to aircraft with an airworthiness certificate, Robert Thomas Brayton requests relief from 

these Sections because the 3D Robotics Solo UA do not require airworthiness certificates. As set 

forth more fully below, the 3D Robotics Solo UA meet the conditions of FMRA Section 333 for 

operation without an airworthiness certificate. Accordingly, Robert Thomas Brayton will use 
15 

trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or preventive maintenance on the UA 

using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the UA operating documents 

(i.e., the Robert Thomas Brayton Aerial Operations Manual, Monthly Maintenance Log, and 3D 

Robotics Solo Instruction Manual). Furthermore, Robert Thomas Brayton will document and 

maintain all maintenance records for the 3D Robotics Solo UA. 

D. The Reasons Why Granting Robert Thomas Brayton Request Would Be In The Public 

Interest; That Is, How It Would Benefit The Public As A Whole. 

Granting the present Petition will further the public interest by allowing Robert Thomas 

Brayton to safely, efficiently, and economically perform aerial video and photography of 

construction sites, real estate, and landscape over certain areas of the United States. 

Additionally, use of the 3D Robotics Solo UA will decrease congestion of the NAS, 

reduce pollution, and provide significant benefits to the economy. Notably, the benefits of Robert 

Thomas Brayton’s proposed operation of the 3D Robotics Solo UA will be realized without 

implicating any privacy issues. 

1. The Public Will Benefit From Decreased Congestion Of The NAS. 

The 3D Robotics Solo UA Is battery powered and serve as a safe, efficient, and 

economical alternative to the manned aircraft traditionally utilized to obtain aerial imagery. By 

reducing the amount of manned aircraft needed to perform aerial acquisitions, an exemption 

allowing the use of a 3D Robotics Solo UA would reduce the amount of manned aircraft in the 

NAS, reduce noise and air pollution, as well as increase the safety of life and property in the air 

and on the ground. 

Furthermore, by reducing the number of manned aircraft operating in the NAS, 

congestion around airports caused by arriving and departing aircraft will be reduced. The 
16 

3D Robotics Solo UA do not require an airport to takeoff or land. Likewise, a reduction of 

manned aircraft conducting aerial video and photography missions would result in fewer aircraft 

that must be handled by air traffic control during the ground, takeoff, departure, arrival, and 

landing phases of flight operations. 

2. The Public Will Benefit From The Safety And Efficiency Of The 3D Robotics 

Solo UA. 

Conducting aerial acquisitions with the 3D Robotics Solo UA, instead of manned aircraft, 

will greatly benefit the public by drastically reducing the levels of air and noise pollution 

generated during traditional aerial video and still photography flight operations. By using battery 

power and electric motors, the 3D Robotics Solo UA produce no air pollution, and is the most 

viable environmentally conscious alternative to the cabin class, six cylinder internal combustion 

engine aircraft that are typically utilized for aerial video and photography, while burning 

approximately 20-30 gallons per hour of leaded aviation fuel. The 3D Robotics Solo UA, while 

reducing the carbon footprint of aerial acquisitions, also eliminates noise pollution, as the UA Is 

propelled by battery powered electric motors, rather than an internal combustion engine. 

By using the 3D Robotics Solo UA to perform aerial acquisitions, the substantial risk to 

life and property in the air and on the ground, which is usually associated with traditional 

manned aircraft flight operations, will be substantially reduced or completely eliminated. Aside 

from the lack of flight crew members located onboard the aircraft, the 3D Robotics Solo UA 

(weighing approximately 3 pounds 9 ounces maximum gross weights with lengths of 18 inches, 

widths of 18 inches, and with no fuel on board), has less physical potential for collateral damage 

to life and property on the ground, and in the air, compared to the manned aircraft that typically 

conduct similar operations (weighing approximately 6,000 pounds with a wingspan of 

approximately 42 feet, a length of 34 feet, and a fuel capacity of 180 gallons) conduct similar 
17 

operations (weighing approximately 6,000 pounds with a wingspan of approximately 42 feet, a 

length of 34 feet, and a fuel capacity of 180 gallons). 

3. Performing Aerial Video and Photography Operations With The 3D Robotics 

Solo UA Will Benefit The Economy. 

In addition to being safe and efficient, the 3D Robotics Solo UA Is also an economical 

alternative to using manned aircraft to conduct similar aerial operations. As such, operation of 

the 3D Robotics Solo UA will allow United States based companies, like Robert Thomas 

Brayton, to remain competitive and contribute to growth of the U.S. economy. Specifically, with 

the rising cost of aviation fuel and the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) regulatory 

actions phasing out leaded aviation fuels, U.S. owned and operated companies must adopt new 

and alternative technology in order to remain competitive. Operating the battery powered 3D 

Robotics Solo UA is one such technology that not only allows companies greater operational 

flexibility compared to manned aircraft, but provides such flexibility without the high operational 

cost of a traditional manned aircraft. 

By operating the 3D Robotics Solo UA, companies such as Robert Thomas Brayton, can 

remain competitive and profitable, and therefore, provide greater job stability to employees and 

contractors, which will ultimately contribute to growth of the U.S. economy. Improved financial 

performance of U.S. companies, through commercial use of the 3D Robotics Solo UA, provides 

a stable workforce that increases consumer spending; improves local, state, and federal tax 

revenues; and allows companies to invest in research and development in order to remain 

competitive both in the United States and abroad. 

4. There Are No Privacy Issues. 

Similar to the manned aerial acquisition flight operations that have been conducted for decades, 

Robert Thomas Brayton’s proposed operation of the 3D Robotics Solo UA will not implicate any 
18 

privacy issues. Specifically, the 3D Robotics Solo UA will be operated only in compliance with 

operating documents (i.e., the Robert Thomas Brayton Aerial Operations Manual, Monthly 

Maintenance Log, and 3D Robotics Solo Instruction Manual) which requires property owner 

involvement as well as local law enforcement notification, and in accordance with the Federal 

Aviation Regulations, including the minimum altitude requirements of 14 C.F.R. § 91.119. 

E. The Reasons Why Granting The Exemption Would Not Adversely Affect Safety, Or 

How The Exemption Would Provide A Level Of Safety At Least Equal To That 

Provided By The Rule From Which Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks Exemption. 

1. Reasons Why The 3D Robotics Solo UA Meet The Conditions Of The FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA) Section 333. 

In consideration of the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with the 

unmanned aircraft and its operation, Robert Thomas Brayton’s operation of the 3D Robotics Solo 

UA meet the conditions of FMRA Section 333, and will not require an airworthiness certificate 

in accordance with 14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H. 

Section 333 provides authority for a UA to operate without airworthiness certification and 

sets forth requirements for considering whether a UA will create a hazard to users of the NAS or 

the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security. Specifically, FMRA Section 333 states 

the following, in part: 

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other requirement of this subtitle, and not later 

than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation 

shall determine if certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the 

national airspace system before completion of the plan and rulemaking required by 

section 332 of this Act or the guidance required by section 334 of this Act. 

(b) Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft Systems.--In making the determination under 

subsection (a), the Secretary shall determine, at a minimum--

(1) which types of unmanned aircraft systems, if any, as a result of their size, 

weight, speed, operational capability, proximity to airports and populated 

areas, and operation within visual line of sight do not create a hazard to users 
19 

of the national airspace system or the public or pose a threat to national 

security; and

(2) whether a certificate of waiver, certificate of authorization, or airworthiness 

certification under section 44704 of title 49, United States Code, is required 

for the operation of unmanned aircraft systems identified under paragraph 

(1). 

(c) Requirements for Safe Operation.--If the Secretary determines under this section that 

certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the national airspace 

system, the Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe operation of such 

aircraft systems in the national airspace system. 

In seeking this exemption, Robert Thomas Brayton submits that the 3D Robotics 

Solo UA can operate safely in the NAS pursuant to FMRA Section 

333, as demonstrated by: (a) the characteristics of the 3D Robotics Solo UA; (b) the pilot 

certification requirement; and (c) the specific operating limitations. 

a. The Specifications Of The 3D Robotics Solo UA Demonstrate Its Safe 

Characteristics.

The 3D Robotics Solo UA do not create a hazard to users of the NAS or the public, or 

otherwise pose a threat to national security considering its size, weight, speed, and operational 

capability. 

i. Technical Specifications Of The 3D Robotics Solo UA. 

The technical specifications of the 3D Robotics Solo UA Is set forth by the 3D Robotics 

Solo Specifications and Data 

Sheet, attached hereto as Exhibit A. 

ii. The 3D Robotics Solo UA Autonomous Flight And Navigation Modes 

Enable The UA To Remain Within A Defined Operational Area. 

The 3D Robotics Solo UA may be operated in both manual and fully autonomous flight 

modes. A complete description of the flight and navigational modes of the 3D Robotics Solo UA 

is provided at pages 25-30 of the 3D Robotics Solo User Manual, attached hereto as Exhibit B. 
20 

iii. The 3D Robotics Solo UA Is Designed For Automatic Return To Home 

Point Or Hover In The Event Of Loss Of The Control Link Or 

Navigation. 

When the Control Link is lost, the 3D Robotics Solo UA will remain stationary, in flight, 

for 3 seconds or more. If, after 3 seconds, the 3D Robotics Solo UA do not reacquire control link 

data from the GCS, the UA will assume that the Control Link is lost and the UA will return to the 

home position (i.e., failsafe mode) via GPS, and will descend to the takeoff position and 

shutdown. 

A complete description of the Failsafe Functions of the 3D Robotics Solo UA Is set forth 

at page 25 through 26 of the 3D Robotics Solo User Manual, attached hereto as Exhibit B. 

iv. The 3D Robotics Solo GCS And Its Operation.

A complete description of the operation and specifications of the 3D Robotics Solo GCS 

and 

flight control software is provided at pages 28 through 33 of the 3D Robotics Solo User Manual 

User Manual attached hereto as Exhibit B. 

b. Flight Operations Of 3D Robotics Solo UA Is Limited To The Line Of Sight 

Of A Certificated Pilot in Command With A Safety Observer. 

Robert Thomas Brayton will only utilize certificated pilots who possess a current and 

valid airman medical certificate to act as a pilot in command (PIC) of the 3D Robotics Solo UA. 

Additionally, a safety observer will assist all pilots during flight time. 

c. Flights Of 3D Robotics Solo UA Will Be Conducted Pursuant To Specific 

Operating Limitations. 

In seeking this exemption, Robert Thomas Brayton proposes to commercially operate 3D 

Robotics Solo UA for the special purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over 

certain areas of United States, pursuant to the following specific operating limitations: 

1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption will be limited to the following 

aircraft described in the operating documents, rotorcraft UA weighing less than 55 
21 

pounds maximum gross weight: 3D Robotics Solo Unmanned Aircraft Systems. 

Proposed operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to 

amend this grant. 

2. UA operations under this exemption will be limited to conducting operations for the 

purpose of aerial video and photography. 

3. The UA may not be flown at an indicated airspeed exceeding 20 knots. 

4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 200 feet above ground level 

(AGL), as indicated by the procedures specified in the operating documents unless a 

special request is made and approved by ATC. All altitudes reported to ATC must be 

in feet AGL. 

5. The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC at all times. 

This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than 

corrective lenses, as specified on the PIC’s FAA-issued airman medical certificate. 

6. The use of first person view (FPV) by the PIC or safety observer (SO) is not 

permitted. 

7. All operations must utilize a safety observer (SO). The SO may be used to satisfy the 

VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS capability. The SO 

and PIC must be able to communicate verbally at all times. Electronic messaging or 

texting is not permitted during flight operations. The PIC must be designated before 

the flight and cannot transfer his or her designation for the duration of the flight. The 

PIC must ensure that the SO can perform the functions prescribed in the operating 

documents. 

8. The SO must not perform any other duties beyond assisting the PIC with seeing and 

avoiding other air traffic and other ground based obstacles/obstructions and is not 

permitted to operate the camera or other instruments. 

9. The operating documents and the grant of exemption must be accessible during UA 

operations and made available to the Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy 

exists between the conditions and limitations contained in the grant of exemption and 

the procedures outlined in the operating documents, the conditions and limitations 

contained in the grant of exemption take precedence and must be followed. 

Otherwise, the operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operating 

documents. The operator may update or revise its operating documents. It is the 

operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and present updated and revised 

documents to the Administrator upon request. The operator must also present updated 

and revised documents if it petitions for extension or amendment to the grant of 

exemption. If the operator determines that any update or revision would affect the 

basis upon which the FAA granted the exemption, then the operator must petition for 

amendment to its grant of exemption. The FAA’s UA Integration Office (AFS-80) 
22 

may be contacted if questions arise regarding updates or revisions to the operating 

documents. 

10. Prior to each flight the PIC must inspect the UA to ensure that it is in a condition for 

safe flight. If the inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the 

UA, the aircraft is prohibited from operating until the necessary maintenance has 

been performed and the UA is found to be in a condition for safe flight. The Ground 

Control Station must be included in the preflight inspection. All maintenance and 

alterations must be properly documented in the aircraft records. 

11. Any UA that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UA operation 

or flight characteristics, e.g. replacement of a flight critical component, must undergo 

a functional test flight. The PIC who conducts the functional test flight must make an 

entry in the aircraft records. 

12. The pre-flight inspection must account for all potential discrepancies, e.g. inoperable 

components, items, or equipment, not already covered in the relevant sections of the 

operating documents. 

13. The operator must follow the UA manufacturer’s aircraft/component, maintenance, 

overhaul, replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements. 

14. The operator must carry out its maintenance, inspections, and record keeping 

requirements, in accordance with the operating documents. Maintenance, inspection, 

alterations, and status of replacement/overhaul component parts must be noted in the 

aircraft records, including total time in service, description of work accomplished, 

and the signature of the authorized person returning the UA to service. 

15. Each UA operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer Safety 

Bulletins. 

16. The authorized person must make an entry in the aircraft record of the corrective 

action taken against discrepancies discovered between inspections. 

17. The PIC must possess at least a private pilot certificate and at least a current thirdclass medical certificate. 

18. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC meets the operator’s 

qualification criteria and demonstrates the ability to safely operate the UA in a 

manner consistent with how the UA will be operated under the exemption, including 

evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from 

persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC qualification flight hours must be 

logged in a manner consistent with 14 C.F.R. § 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of 

training the operator’s PICs are permitted under the terms of the exemption. 

However, training operations may only be conducted during dedicated training 

sessions. During training, proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons not 

essential for flight operations are considered nonparticipants, and the PIC must 
23 

operate the UA with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 

C.F.R. § 91.119. 

19. UA operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 C.F.R. § 

1.1. All operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). 

If flight at night is required, a special request will be made at the FAA office closest 

to proposed area of operations. Flights under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are 

not authorized. 

20. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point as 

denoted on a current FAA-published aeronautical chart unless a letter of agreement 

with that airport’s management is obtained, and the operation is conducted in 

accordance with a NOTAM as required by the operator’s COA. The letter of 

agreement with the airport management must be made available to the Administrator 

upon request. 

 

21. The UA may not be operated less than 200 feet below or less than 2,000 feet 

horizontally from a cloud or when visibility is less than 3 statute miles from the PIC. 

22. If the UA loses communications or loses its GPS signal, it must return to a 

predetermined location within the planned operating area and land or be recovered in 

accordance with the operating documents. 

23. The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies in 

accordance with the operating documents. 

24. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast 

weather conditions) there is enough power to fly at normal cruising speed to the 

intended landing point and land the UA with 25% battery power remaining. 

25. The operator must obtain an Air Traffic Organization (ATO) issued Certificate of 

Waiver or Authorization (COA) prior to conducting any operations under the grant of 

exemption. This COA will also require the operator to request a Notice to Airman 

(NOTAM) not more than 72 hours in advance, but not less than 48 hours prior to the 

operation. All operations shall be conducted in accordance with airspace requirements 

in the ATO issued COA including class of airspace, altitude level and potential 

transponder requirements. 

26. All aircraft operated in accordance with the exemption must be identified by serial 

number, registered in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 47, and have identification (NNumber) markings in accordance with 14 C.F.R. part 45, Subpart C. Markings must 

be as large as practicable. 

27. Before conducting operations, the radio frequency spectrum used for operation and 

control of the UA must comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) 

or other appropriate government oversight agency requirements. 
24 

28. The documents required fewer than 14 C.F.R. 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to 

the PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UA any time the UA is operating. These 

documents must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement 

official upon request. 

29. The UA must remain clear and yield the right of way to all manned aviation 

operations and activities at all times. 

30. The UA may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle. 

31. Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating 

persons (persons other than the PIC, SO, operator trainees or essential persons), 

vessels, vehicles, and structures unless: 

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating 

persons from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The operator 

must ensure that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection. If a 

situation arises where nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are 

within 500 feet of the UA, flight operations must cease immediately and/or; 

b. The aircraft is operated near vessels, vehicles or structures where the 

owner/controller of such vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission 

and the PIC has made a safety assessment of the risk of operating closer to 

those objects and determined that it does not present an undue hazard, and; 

c. Operations nearer to the PIC, SO, operator trainees or essential persons do not 

present an undue hazard to those persons per § 91.119(a). 

32. All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled-access property with 

permission from the land owner/controller or authorized representative. Permission 

from land owner/controller or authorized representative will be obtained for each 

flight to be conducted. 

33. Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or vertical 

boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA must be reported 

to the FAA's UA Integration Office (AFS-80) within 24 hours. Accidents must be 

reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions 

contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov. 

2. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 61.113(a) And 

(b) Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

Robert Thomas Brayton submits that the equivalent level of safety established by Section 

61.113(a) and (b) will be maintained because no PIC will be allowed to operate the 3D Robotics 

Solo UA unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour and currency 
25 

requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the 3D Robotics Solo UA in a manner 

consistent with the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and maintaining 

appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures. 

Considering Robert Thomas Brayton’s proposed area of operations, and the operating 

limitations set forth-above; the parallel nature of private pilot aeronautical knowledge 

requirements to those of commercial pilot requirements (See Exemption No. 11062); and the 

airmanship skills necessary to safely operate the 3D Robotics Solo UA, Robert Thomas Brayton 

submits that the additional manned airmanship experience of a commercially certificated pilot 

would not correlate to the airmanship skills necessary for Robert Thomas Brayton’s specific 

proposed flight operations. 

The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 61.113(a) and (b) specific to 

UA, in circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption 

Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 

11150, 11153, 11156, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161). 

Robert Thomas Brayton will not allow any PIC to operate the 3D Robotics Solo UA 

unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum flight-hour requirements or the 3D 

Robotics Solo UA training and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the 

3D Robotics Solo UA in a manner consistent with this exemption, including evasive and 

emergency maneuvers and maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and 

structures. 

Specifically, the PIC must have accumulated and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 

C.F.R. § 61.51(b), 25 hours of total time as a UA rotorcraft pilot (with a minimum of 5 hours of 

those hours as a UA pilot operating the same make and model of UA to be used for operations 
26 

under the exemption). In addition to the hour requirements, the PIC must accomplish 3 takeoffs 

and landings in the preceding 90 days (for currency purposes). 

As in Exemption Nos. 11062, 11138, and 11153, prior documented flight experience that 

was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations will ensure an equivalent level of safety 

during Robert Thomas Brayton’s proposed operations. The Administrator has held that prior 

documented flight experience that was obtained in compliance with applicable regulations would 

ensure safe operations, stating as follows: 

In Exemption No. 11062, the FAA required that prior to conducting operations for the 

purpose of motion picture filming (or similar operations), the PIC must have accumulated 

and logged, in a manner consistent with 14 CFR 61.51(b), 25 hours of total time as a UA 

rotorcraft pilot including at least 10 hours logged as a UA pilot with a multi-rotor UA. 

Prior to operations under Exemption No. 11062, the PIC must also have accumulated and 

logged a minimum of 5 hours as a UA pilot operating the same make and model of UA to 

be used for operations under the exemption. For clarification, the FAA considers these 

minimum hour requirements to be inclusive rather than additive; i.e. 5 hours make and 

model time may be included in the 10 hours of multi-rotor time and the 10 hours may be 

included in the total 25 hours of UA rotorcraft time. In addition to the hour requirements, 

the PIC must accomplish 3 takeoffs and landings in the preceding 90 days (for currency 

purposes). The FAA finds that at a minimum, the flight-hour requirements in Exemption 

No. 11062 are appropriate to practice and build proficiency in the skills necessary to 

safely conduct the petitioner’s proposed operations. The FAA also finds that prior 

documented flight experience that was obtained in compliance with applicable 

regulations would satisfy this requirement. Training, proficiency, and experiencebuilding flights can also be conducted under the grant of exemption to accomplish the 

required flight time. During training, proficiency, and experience-building flights the PIC 

is required to operate the UA with appropriate distances in accordance with 14 C.F.R 

91.119. 

Exemption No. 11138 at page 15. 

Accordingly, Robert Thomas Brayton will ensure safe operations by not allowing any 

PIC to operate the 3D Robotics Solo UA unless that PIC has demonstrated, by meeting minimum 

flight-hour and currency requirements, that the PIC is able to safely operate the 3D Robotics Solo 
27 

UA in a manner consistent with the exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and 

maintaining appropriate distances from people, vessels, vehicles and structures. 

3. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.7(a) Would 

Not Adversely Affect Safety. 

The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.7(a) will be maintained because 

prior to every flight, Robert Thomas Brayton will ensure that the 3D Robotics Solo UA is in an 

airworthy condition based upon the UA’s compliance with its operating documents and as stated 

in the conditions and limitations herein. 

Additionally, the FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.7(a) specific to UA, 

in circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 

11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 

11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161). 

4. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.121 Would 

Not Adversely Affect Safety.

The equivalent level of safety established by Section 91.121 will be maintained because 

the altitude information of the 3D Robotics Solo UA will be provided to the PIC via GPS 

equipment and a radio communications telemetry data link, which downlinks from the UA to the 

GCS for active monitoring of the flight path and altitude. This altitude information, combined 

with Robert Thomas Brayton’s operation of the 3D Robotics Solo UA within visual line of sight, 

at or below 200 feet AGL, will ensure a level of safety equivalent to Section 91.121. The altitude 

information will be generated by GPS equipment installed onboard the aircraft. Prior to each 

flight, a zero altitude initiation point is automatically established by the UA at ground level. 

The FAA has previously granted relief from Section 91.121 specific to UA, in 

circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those presented herein (e.g. Exemption 
28 

Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11112, 11136, 11138, 

11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 11161). 

5. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Section 91.151(b) 

Would Not Adversely Affect Safety.

A grant of this exemption would ensure an equivalent level of safety established by 

14 C.F.R. Section 91.151(b) as a result of (1) the technical specifications of the 3D Robotics Solo 

UA; (2) the limitations on the proposed flight operations; and (3) the location of the proposed 

flight operations. Accordingly, Robert Thomas Brayton will ensure that it will safely operate the 

battery powered 3D Robotics Solo UA during daylight hours in VFR conditions, with enough 

battery power to fly for a total duration of 13.5 minutes to the first point of intended landing and, 

assuming normal cruising speed, to fly after that for at least 4.5 minutes. 

Here, as in Exemption No. 11109, the technical specifications of the 3D Robotics Solo 

UA; the limitations on the proposed flight operations; and the location of the proposed 

operations, will ensure an equivalent level of safety established by 14 C.F.R. Section 91.151(b). 

Furthermore, safety will be ensured as the 3D Robotics Solo UA provide audible and visual 

warnings to the PIC at the GCS when the UA experiences low battery voltage, the first warning 

occurring at approximately 33% remaining battery power, and again at approximately 10% 

remaining battery power. At the critically low battery level, the 3D Robotics Solo UA will 

descend and land automatically. 

Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the FAA concerning Section 91.151 

establish that safety is not adversely affected when the technical characteristics and operating 

limitations of the UA Is considered. Relief has been granted for manned aircraft to operate at less 

than the minimums prescribed in Section 91.151, including 
29 

Exemption Nos. 2689, 5745, and 10650. Moreover, the FAA has previously granted relief from 

Section 91.151 specific to UA, in circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those 

presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 8811, 10808, 10673, 11042, 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 

11066, 11067, 11080, 11109, 11110, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 

11160, 11161). 

6. Reasons Why An Exemption From The Requirements Of Sections 91.405(a), 

91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), And 91.417(a) & (b) Would Not Adversely 

Affect Safety. 

In seeking this exemption, Robert Thomas Brayton submits that the equivalent level of 

safety with regard to the regulatory maintenance and alteration requirements established by 

Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) will be met because 

Robert Thomas Brayton will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations, or 

preventive maintenance on the UA using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed in the 

operating documents (i.e., the Robert Thomas Brayton Aerial Operations Manual, Monthly 

Maintenance Log, and 3D Robotics Solo Instruction Manual). Furthermore, Robert Thomas 

Brayton will document and maintain all maintenance records for the 3D Robotics Solo UA. 

Since the 3D Robotics Solo UA will be inspected as prescribed by the operating 

documents, Robert Thomas Brayton will maintain the equivalent level of safety established by 

Sections 91.405(a), 91.409(a)(1), and 91.409(a)(2). A copy of the 3D Robotics Solo User Manual 

are attached hereto as Exhibit C and D; a copy of the 3D Robotics Solo UA Maintenance LOG is 

attached hereto as Exhibit E. 

Likewise, the exemption sought will not adversely affect safety because Robert Thomas 

Brayton will use trained technicians to perform maintenance, alterations or preventive 

maintenance on the UA using the methods, techniques, and practices prescribed by the 

operating documents. 
30 

Furthermore, the exemption sought would maintain an equivalent level of safety 

established by Sections 91.407, 91.417(a) and 91.417(b), because all maintenance of the 3D 

Robotics Solo UA will be performed by trained technicians. 

Maintenance will be documented and maintained utilizing the monthly maintenance log. 

Significantly, previous exemptions granted by the FAA concerning Sections 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b) establish that safety is not 

adversely affected when the technical characteristics and operating limitations of the UA Is 

considered. 

In consideration of Robert Thomas Brayton’s proposed operating limitations, the 

operating documents, and the technical aspects of the 3D Robotics Solo UA, Robert Thomas 

Brayton submits that safety will not be adversely affected by granting exemption from 14 C.F.R. 

Sections 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1) and (a)(2), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a) and (b). The FAA has 

previously granted relief specific to UA in circumstances similar, in all material respects, to those 

presented herein (e.g. Exemption Nos. 11062, 11063, 11064, 11065, 11066, 11067, 11080, 

11109, 11110, 11112, 11136, 11138, 11150, 11153, 11156, 11157, 11158, 11159, 11160, 

11161). 

7. The FAA May Prescribe Any Other Conditions For Safe Operation. 

In accordance with Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 

(FMRA) and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16 entitled Special Conditions, Robert Thomas Brayton requests 

that the FAA prescribe special conditions for the intended operation of the 3D Robotics Solo UA, 

which contain such safety standards that the Administrator finds necessary to establish a level of 

safety equivalent to that established by 
31 

14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, and 14 C.F.R §§ 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7 (a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 

91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). Such special conditions will 

permit safe operation of the UA for the limited purpose of conducting aerial video and 

photography over certain areas of the United States for compensation or hire. FMRA Section 333 

sets forth the requirements for considering whether a UA will create a hazard to users of the 

NAS or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security; and further, provides the 

authority for such UA to operate without airworthiness certification in accordance with any 

requirements that must be established for the safe operation of the UA in the NAS. 

Likewise, the Administrator may prescribe special conditions pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 

21.16, for operation of the 3D Robotics Solo UA, since the airworthiness regulations of 14 

C.F.R. Part 21 do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards, due to the novel or 

unusual design features of the aircraft. Section 21.16, entitled Special Conditions, states the 

following: 

If the FAA finds that the airworthiness regulations of this subchapter do not contain 

adequate or appropriate safety standards for an aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller 

because of a novel or unusual design feature of the aircraft, aircraft engine or propeller, 

he prescribes special conditions and amendments thereto for the product. The special 

conditions are issued in accordance with Part 11 of this chapter and contain such safety 

standards for the aircraft, aircraft engine or propeller as the FAA finds necessary to 

establish a level of safety equivalent to that established in the regulations. 

See 14 C.F.R. § 21.16. 

Therefore, in accordance with FMRA Section 333 and 14 C.F.R. § 21.16, the FAA may 

prescribe special conditions for Sentry Protective Services intended operation of the 3D Robotics 

Solo UA, which contain such safety standards that the Administrator finds necessary to establish 

a level of safety equivalent to that established by 

14 C.F.R. Part 21, Subpart H, and 14 C.F.R Sections 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 

91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). 
32 

F. A Summary That Can Be Published In The Federal Register, stating: The Rules From 

Which Robert Thomas Brayton Seeks Exemption: 

Robert Thomas Brayton seeks exemption from the requirements of 14 C.F.R Sections 

61.113(a)&(b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & 

(a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b). 

A Brief Description Of The Nature Of The Exemption Robert Thomas Brayton 

Seeks: 

This exemption will permit Robert Thomas Brayton to commercially operate an 

Unmanned Aircraft System (UA) for the purpose of conducting aerial video and 

photography over certain areas of the United States.

G. Any Additional Information, Views, Or Arguments Available To Support Robert 

Thomas Brayton’s Request. 

This Petition is made pursuant to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 

(FMRA) Section 333, which directs the Secretary of Transportation to determine if certain UA 

may operate safely in the NAS. As such, Robert Thomas Brayton’s request for exemption may 

be granted pursuant to the authority of FMRA Section 333 and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, as set forth 

above. 

FMRA Section 333 sets forth the requirements for considering whether a UA will create a 

hazard to users of the NAS or the public, or otherwise pose a threat to national security; and 

further, provides the authority for such UA to operate without airworthiness certification. 

As discussed in detail above, Robert Thomas Brayton will operate the 3D Robotics Solo 

UA safely in the NAS, without creating a hazard to users of the NAS, or the public, or otherwise 

pose a threat to national security. 

CONCLUSION 

As set forth herein, Robert Thomas Brayton seeks an exemption pursuant to 14 C.F.R. § 

11.61 and Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (FMRA), which will 
33 

permit safe operation of the 3D Robotics Solo UA commercially, without an airworthiness 

certificate, for the limited purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certain areas 

of the United States. By granting this 

Petition, the FAA Administrator will be fulfilling the Congressional mandate of the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, while also advancing the interests of the public, by 

allowing Robert Thomas Brayton to safely, efficiently, and economically operate the 3D 

Robotics Solo UA commercially within the NAS. 

WHEREFORE, in accordance with the Federal Aviation Regulations and the FAA 

Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Section 333, Robert Thomas Brayton respectfully 

requests that the Administrator grant this Petition for an exemption from the requirements of 14 

C.F.R Sections 61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) 

& (a)(2), and 91.417(a) & (b), and permit Sentry Protective Services to operate the 3D Robotics 

Solo UA commercially for the purpose of conducting aerial video and photography over certain 

areas of the United States. Dated: April 20, 2015 

 Respectfully submitted, 

Robert Thomas Brayton 

Robert Thomas Brayton

Robert Thomas Brayton 

P.O. Box 894 

Comanche, Texas 76442 

(210) 244-3970 

Email: rtbpaints@aol.com 

 
34 

Appendices: 

A – 3D Robotics Solo Specifications Data Sheet 

B – Monthly Maintenance Log & Pilot Log 

 
35 

APPENDIX – A 

3D ROBOTICS SOLO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Robert Thomas Brayton only utilizes safe and reliable UA. 3DR is an industry leader in small 

UA production. 3DR UA is loaded with ground breaking software enabling the user to set 

parameters which will not allow flight into controlled airspace. Parameters can also be set to 

limit flight to no higher than a predetermined and set altitude as well as limit flight to a 

predetermined and set distance. In addition, 3DR software provides real-time altitude and 

location information to the PIC via the linked monitor (smart phone/tablet devices) 

1.1 3D Robotics Solo 

1.1.1 Aircraft 

1.1.1.1 Supported Battery – 3DR 5200mAH, 14.8V LiPo Battery 

1.1.1.2 Weight (Battery & Propellers Included) – 3lbs 3oz (1.5 kg) 

1.1.1.3 Hover Accuracy (Ready to Fly) – Vertical: .8m; Horizontal: 2.5m 

1.1.1.4 Max Yaw Angular Velocity - 2000/s 

1.1.1.5 Max Tilt Angel - 350

1.1.1.6 Max Ascent Speed – 6m/s 

1.1.1.7 Max Descent Speed – 2m/s 

1.1.1.8 Max Flight Speed – 15m/s (NOT RECOMMENDED) 

1.1.2 Gimbal 

1.1.2.1 Working Current – Static: 750mA; Dynamic: 900mA 

1.1.2.2 Control Accuracy - ±0.030

1.1.2.3 Controllable Range – Pitch: -900 - 00

1.1.2.4 Maximum Angular Speed – Pitch: 900/s 

1.1.3 Camera 

1.1.3.1 Operating Temperature Range - 320F - 1040F (00C - 400C) 

1.1.3.2 Sensor Size – 1/2.3” 

1.1.3.3 Effective Pixels – 14M 

1.1.3.4 Resolution – 4384x3288 

4.1.3.5 HD Video Recording – 1080p30 & 720p 

4.1.3.6 Recording Field of View - 1100/850

1.1.4 Transmitter 

1.1.4.1 Operating Frequency – 2.4GHz ISM 

1.1.4.2 Communication Distance (unobstructed) – FCC Compliance: 1000m 

1.1.4.3 Receiver Sensitivity (1%PER) - -97dBm 

1.1.4.4 Transmitter Power – FCC Compliance: 100mW 

1.1.4.5 Working Voltage – 120mA@3.7V 
36 

 

APPENDIX – B 

MONTHLY MAINTENANCE LOG

month:_________( year:________

UA$#:$___________ Date(Issue( 

Discovered

Date(Issue( 

Addressed

Issue(Description(&(Maintenance(Conducted Maintenance(Performed(By:((( 

Print(&(Sign

Software(Updates

 

Airframe(

Engines

Propellers

Camera(Gimbal

Landing(Gear 

Vibration(Dampening

 

Other:

 

Pilot Log