AARON COBB

SquareBox Media

2472 Loch Haven Ct. Frisco, Tx 75034

Phone: 214-697-0873

Email: acobb2938@gmail.com

Following the Grant of Exemption No. 11138 in the matter of the Petition of Douglas Trudeau, Realtor,

and Regulatory Docket ID. FAA-2014-0481, Petitioner Aaron Cobb requests an exemption from the

same specific sections of 14 CFR:

1.61.113(a) and (b): PRIVATE PILOT PRIVILEGES and LIMITATIONS

2.63.13: APPLICABILITY

3.91.7(a): CIVILAIRCRAFT WORTHINESS

4.91.119(c): MINIMUM SAFE ALTITUDES

5.91.121: ALTIMETER SETTINGS

6.91.151(a)(1): FUELREQUIREMENTS

7.91.405(a): MAINTENANCE REQUIRED

8.91.407(a)(1): OPERATION AFTER MAINTENANCE REBUILDING ALTERATION

9.91.409(a)(1) and (2): INSPECTIONS

10.91.417(a) and (b): MAINTENANCE RECORDS

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

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 the Petitioner's UAS permits exemption from Part 21 because the 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. The petitioners

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 on board pilots

or passengers, and given the size of the UAS, this Regulation is inapplicable. 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 the 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 Petitioner, Aaron Cobb.

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

Applicable Codes of Federal Regulation require aircraft to be marked according to

certain specifications. UAS's are 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, the Petitioner will 

mark her UAS 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 as an 

assistant/observer with the UAV will see the markings. The FAA has previously issued exemptions to

this regulation. 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.

Petitioner, Aaron Cobb, while not holding a private pilots license, has had several hours of flight 

training. The petitioner believes he can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current

Regulations because his UAS does not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, while helpful in

understanding airspace regulations, laws and guidelines, 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 the Petitioner to operate the

UAS and 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. The Petitioner's UAS will never operate at an altitude

greater than 200 AGL; safely below the standard of 400 AGL. The Petitioner will however operate the

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

the 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.

See: Safety/Flight Manual (“Operating Documents”) - 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 Petitioner, Aaron Cobb's UAS. However, as a safety precaution the Petitioner will

inspect the UAS before and after each flight.
To allow petitioner Aaron Cobb to operate the commercially available DJI PHANTOM 2 VISION+

or equivalent quad-copter unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to conduct aerial videography and

photography for hobby and recreational purposes. To also use it for marketing and promotional

purposes in the real estate industry.

Residents of Frisco, Texas are enjoying an economic and real estate boom. A UAS is a quick, low cost

and safe way to capture photographs and short videos that promote both the area and showcase a

property. The market is demanding of such services from real estate agents and the petitioner is

attempting to offer clients and the general public such services while respecting and following FAA

laws and guidelines.

The petitioner believes that his use of an UAS will pose no threat to the public given its small size and

lack of combustible fuel. The petitioner proposes that use of his UAS will minimize ecological impact

and promote education and economic growth in Frisco, Texas.

Petitioner Aaron Cobb notes the FAA's findings in the Grant of Exemption No 11138 in the matter of

the petition of Douglas Trudeau, Realtor, and Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0481: The FAA finds

that a grant of exemption is in the pubic interest. The enhanced safety and reduced environmental

impact achieved using a UA with the specifications described by the petitioner and carrying no

passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater proportions, carrying crew in

addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find that the UAS operation enabled by this

exemption is in the public interest.

Petitioner Aaron Cobb submits the following representations of enhancements to current aerial

videography and photography for real estate:

• My UAS weighs less than 5 pounds complete;

• I only operate my UAS below 200 feet (well within the 400 foot permissible ceiling set by the

FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012);

• My UAS only operate for 10-15 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;

• The 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 and during daylight hours;
• I conduct extensive pre-flight inspections during which safety carries primary

importance;

• I always obtains all necessary permissions prior to operation;

• I have procedures in place to abort flights in the event of safety breaches or potential

danger.

Petitioner Aaron Cobb notes the Conditions and Limitations relative to the Grant of Exemption

No. 11138 in the matter of the petition of Douglas Trudeau, Realtor, and Regulatory Docket

No. FAA-2014- 0481 and will comply with the 33 items as listed in the Exemption. Petitioner

Aaron Cobb has an almost identical model Phantom 2 Vision +, with the only difference being

the model this Petitioner owns has a built-in video camera, rather than the removable Go-Pro

option.

Following the Grant of Exemption No. 11138 in the matter of the Petition of Douglas Trudeau,

Realtor, and Regulatory Docket ID. FAA-2014-0481, Petitioner Aaron Cobb requests an

exemption from the same specific sections of 14 CFR:

1.61.113(a) and (b): PRIVATE PILOT PRIVILEGES and LIMITATIONS

2.63.13: APPLICABILITY

3.91.7(a): CIVILAIRCRAFT WORTHINESS

4.91.119(c): MINIMUM SAFE ALTITUDES

5.91.121: ALTIMETER SETTINGS

6.91.151(a)(1): FUELREQUIREMENTS

7.91.405(a): MAINTENANCE REQUIRED

8.91.407(a)(1): OPERATION AFTER MAINTENANCE REBUILDING ALTERATION

9.91.409(a)(1) and (2): INSPECTIONS

10.91.417(a) and (b): MAINTENANCE RECORDS

Petitioner Aaron Cobb seeks an exemption for the purpose of using the PHANTOM 2 Vision +

or equivalent for hobby, recreational and commercial photography and videography to provide

real estate clients and the general public with educational footage and to use such footage for

marketing/promotional purposes.

The Petitioner notes the FAA's findings in the Grant of Exemption No 11138 in the matter of

the petition of Douglas Trudeau, Realtor, and Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0481: The

FAA finds that a grant of exemption is in the pubic interest. The enhanced safety and reduced

environmental impact achieved using a UA with the specifications described by the petitioner

and carrying no passengers or crew, rather than a manned aircraft of significantly greater

proportions, carrying crew in addition to flammable fuel, gives the FAA good cause to find

that the UAS operation enabled by this exemption is in the public interest.