By letter dated November 13, 2015, Mr Ryan William Perchalski, of Up in the Air Photo, 2417 Abbey

Ave Orlando, FL 32833 petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption from

part 21, subpart H; and Sections 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b)(2), 91.103(b), 91.109,

91.119, 91.121, 91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), and 91.417(a)

and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption would allow Mr

Perchalski to operate the PHANTOM 3 professional quad­copter unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to

conduct aerial videography and cinematography to enhance local tour operators customer retention

and revenue in the area and augment real estate listing videos/photos.

The petitioner supports his request with the following information:

The petitioner has provided the following information – contained in his petition and supporting

documentation including: 1) Supplemental Response for Petition, 2) PHANTOM Flying Flow Chart

V1.0 (Simplified Version), Phantom 3 Professional Quick Start Guide en v1.2, Phantom 3

Professional Release Note en 9.9, 3) Phantom 3 Professional User Manual V1.6, 4) personal

protocols and controls, (all hereinafter referred to as operating documents).

The FAA has organized the petitioner’s information into four sections: 1) the unmanned aircraft

system (UAS), 2) the UAS Pilot In Command (PIC), 3) the UAS operating parameters and 4) Public

Interest.

Unmanned Aircraft System

The petitioner states he plans to operate a UAS, the PHANTOM 3 professional, which is comprised

of an unmanned aircraft (UA or PHANTOM) and a transportable ground station.

The PHANTOM is referred to as a quad­copter with a maximum gross weight of about 3 pounds. It

is equipped with four rotors that are driven by electric motors powered by batteries. The UA has a

maximum airspeed of 30 knots. Petitioner plans operate the UA over various areas near and around

Orlando, Florida to enhance academic community awareness and augment real estate listing

videos/photos.

Petitioner makes the following representations of operational enhancements which he proposes to

abide by to ensure this exemption will provide a level of safety at least equal to existing rules:

• He will only operate in reasonably safe environments that are strictly controlled, are away from

power lines, elevated lights, airports and actively populated areas; and
• He will conduct extensive preflight inspections and protocols, during which safety carries primary

importance.

The petitioner states that given the size, weight, speed, and limited operating area associated with

the aircraft to be utilized by him, an exemption from 14 CFR part 21, Subpart H (Airworthiness

Certificates) and § 91.203 (a) and (b) (Certifications required), subject to certain conditions and

limitations, is warranted and meets the requirements for an equivalent level of safety under 14 CFR

part 11 and Section 333 of P.L. 112­95 (Section 333).

Petitioner requests an exemption from § 45.23 Marking of the aircraft because his UA will not have a

cabin, cockpit or pilot station on which to mark certain words or phrases. Further, he states that

two­inch lettering is difficult to place on such a small aircraft with dimensions smaller than the

minimal lettering requirement. Regardless of this, petitioner states that he will mark his UAS in the

largest possible lettering by placing the word “Experimental” on its fuselage as required by § 45.29(f)

so that he or anyone assisting him as a spotter will see the markings.

The petitioner states that an exemption from §§ 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2) and 91.417(a)

and (b) Maintenance inspections may be required and should be granted since they only apply to

aircraft with an airworthiness certificate. However, the petitioner states as a safety precaution he will

perform a preflight inspection of his UAS before each flight as outlined in his operating documents.

UAS Pilot in Command (PIC)

The petitioner asserts that under § 61.113 (a) and (b) private pilots are limited to non commercial

operations, however he can achieve an equivalent level of safety as achieved by current regulations

because his UAS does not carry any pilots or passengers. Further, he states that, while helpful, a

pilot license will not ensure remote control piloting skills. He further indicates that the risks of

operating a UAS are far less than the risk levels inherent in the commercial activities outlined in 14

CFR part 61, et seq., thus he requests an exemption from § 61.113 Private Pilot Privileges and

Limitations: Pilot in command.

Regarding UAS operational training, the petitioner states he has flown numerous practice flights

totaling an excess of 20hrs at time of writing in remote areas as a hobbyist simulating flights for

future commercial use to gain familiarization with the characteristics of his UAS’ performance under

different temperature and weather conditions. He further states that he practices computerized

simulated flights to maintain adequate skills and response reflex time.