Drone Use Disclaimer?

R3AP37 · Feb 3, 2016

Hi Guys and Gals.

I have completed a few events now with the Solo, usually friends or local businesses asking for a new perspective on things. What I am after is a disclaimer that can be signed before the flight and kept with the flight records.

Why now? well in well over 300+ flights, 20 or so being at an event that wanted the Solo and possibly 50 or so events I covered personally using the Solo, I have not had a single issue or accident. I have however been asked to use the Solo for an indoor wrestling event with about 500 in attendance.

I am happy with the location, its is a large sports hall with plenty of room for anything I want, and I have been given a section away from the main populous for me and the bird. BUT this is my first indoors extended flight, they do not require 100% coverage but to be able to provide enough footage for a good mix the bird will need to cover at least 60%-80% of the matches. This is a lot of air time!

Has anyone created a short disclaimer I could use for reference? I have already created ID badges, personal printouts and warning signs for the event but I feel like I need some signatures from the hosts before I go airborne!

EyeWingsuit · Feb 3, 2016

Disclaimer? Or Waiver?
What is it that you'd looking to accomplish/protect?

R3AP37 · Feb 3, 2016

EyeWingsuit said:
Disclaimer? Or Waiver?
What is it that you'd looking to accomplish/protect?

bit of both, I have explained everything to both the owners of the property and the hosts of the event but I want something In writing that all parties can sign so It is agreed, the usual flying blender kind of thing, I want to protect myself, the Drone and the art as much as possible.

Rather then create a single document for this event I want to create a larger base document that has a section that will be tailored to the specific event it is being used for?

make sense? it sounded straight forward in my head

EyeWingsuit · Feb 3, 2016

While it makes sense, I don't know how it can be achieved. The NFL couldn't achieve this outdoors.

While the promoters may indemnify the hosts and yourself, the host/venue owners cannot ask the audience in whole, to indemnify the venue nor the event. Waivers for filming are one thing; waiver of responsibility for personal injury is entirely another.
Here is an example of the waiver we use in skydiving. This is for people actively seeking risk of injury. People attending a wrestling match are wanting to be entertained; it's doubtful every member of the audience would be willing to sign something so specific.
Holding a 333 doesn't allow for this sort of work at all, regardless of specifications of the MPTOM.
Straight from my 333 Certificate of Exemption:

1. All Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating persons, vessels, vehicles, and structuresunless:

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipatingpersons 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 in a manner ensuring the safety of nonparticipating persons;and
b. The owner/controller of any vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission for operating closer to those objects 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.
The PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons are not considered nonparticipating persons under this exemption.

However, I'm not an attorney. I'd suggest seeking the advice of an attorney in this one. Good luck!

R3AP37 · Feb 3, 2016

Its a tricky one indeed, i'm going to seek advice on this one. I'm also going to knock one up just in case someone asks for one in the mean time I shall solve this xD thanks

CanadianSolo · Feb 3, 2016

Yes I agree with @EyeWingsuit! For flying in a non-populated area you could probably use a waiver form for property damage...? Not sure in USA, I know here in Canada you need to carry $100, 000 Liability insurance if your using it for business.

EyeWingsuit · Feb 3, 2016

R3AP37 said:
Its a tricky one indeed, i'm going to seek advice on this one. I'm also going to knock one up just in case someone asks for one in the mean time I shall solve this xD thanks

I can privately share my MPTOM with you, it has a waiver page.

R3AP37 · Feb 3, 2016

EyeWingsuit said:
I can privately share my MPTOM with you, it has a waiver page.

That would be most handy

thank you

erikgraham · Feb 3, 2016

EyeWingsuit said:
While it makes sense, I don't know how it can be achieved. The NFL couldn't achieve this outdoors.

While the promoters may indemnify the hosts and yourself, the host/venue owners cannot ask the audience in whole, to indemnify the venue nor the event. Waivers for filming are one thing; waiver of responsibility for personal injury is entirely another.
Here is an example of the waiver we use in skydiving. This is for people actively seeking risk of injury. People attending a wrestling match are wanting to be entertained; it's doubtful every member of the audience would be willing to sign something so specific.
Holding a 333 doesn't allow for this sort of work at all, regardless of specifications of the MPTOM.
Straight from my 333 Certificate of Exemption:

1. All Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating persons, vessels, vehicles, and structuresunless:

a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipatingpersons 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 in a manner ensuring the safety of nonparticipating persons;and
b. The owner/controller of any vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission for operating closer to those objects 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.
The PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons are not considered nonparticipating persons under this exemption.

However, I'm not an attorney. I'd suggest seeking the advice of an attorney in this one. Good luck!

If he's flying indoors, the FAA is not (and cannot) be involved. So 333 isn't even required and none of the FAA guidelines are in effect, including flying near people. That doesn't mean he couldn't get sued, but the FAA would have nothing to do with it. Basically, if he crashed into people, it would be the same as if a boom crane or something like that fell over.

erikgraham · Feb 3, 2016

erikgraham said:
If he's flying indoors, the FAA is not (and cannot) be involved. So 333 isn't even required and none of the FAA guidelines are in effect, including flying near people. That doesn't mean he couldn't get sued, but the FAA would have nothing to do with it. Basically, if he crashed into people, it would be the same as if a boom crane or something like that fell over.

Incidentally, I'd recommend using a p3 for this shoot. You won't benefit from any of Solo's smart shots since you won't have GPS. You might as well take advantage of the P3s sonar and optical flow stabilization for indoor work - and get some prop guards.

EyeWingsuit · Feb 3, 2016

erikgraham said:
If he's flying indoors, the FAA is not (and cannot) be involved. So 333 isn't even required and none of the FAA guidelines are in effect, including flying near people. That doesn't mean he couldn't get sued, but the FAA would have nothing to do with it. Basically, if he crashed into people, it would be the same as if a boom crane or something like that fell over.

There is no suggestion the FAA is involved, nor a 333 required. The point is that any endeavor that might harm people cannot be undertaken with out their permission. The point to the waiver link is to demonstrate how the USA laws apply to safety waivers and how they may be implemented. Simply putting up a sign that says "enter this wrestling match at your own risk" won't cover it, not here, and likely not in the UK.

The OP is in the UK, so FAA rules don't apply. However, it's not accurate that an air authority has no control inside a building. In the USA, interior spaces are not part of the NAS, but in Canada, Transport Canada has airspace authority in any building where people congregate. Flying a drone over a basketball or baseball game inside the Rogers Centre, for example, falls under Transport Canada. I don't know the rules in the UK.

As much as I don't know anything about UK liability laws, I do know their liability laws regarding air sports, and they're significantly more stringent than the US or Canadian laws regarding air sports.

erikgraham · Feb 3, 2016

EyeWingsuit said:
There is no suggestion the FAA is involved, nor a 333 required. The point is that any endeavor that might harm people cannot be undertaken with out their permission. The point to the waiver link is to demonstrate how the USA laws apply to safety waivers and how they may be implemented. Simply putting up a sign that says "enter this wrestling match at your own risk" won't cover it, not here, and likely not in the UK.

The OP is in the UK, so FAA rules don't apply. However, it's not accurate that an air authority has no control inside a building. In the USA, interior spaces are not part of the NAS, but in Canada, Transport Canada has airspace authority in any building where people congregate. Flying a drone over a basketball or baseball game inside the Rogers Centre, for example, falls under Transport Canada. I don't know the rules in the UK.

As much as I don't know anything about UK liability laws, I do know their liability laws regarding air sports, and they're significantly more stringent than the US or Canadian laws regarding air sports.

Fair enough. I was just responding/reacting to the 333 reference as irrelevant. But point taken. Actually multiple points taken. ;-)

R3AP37 · Feb 4, 2016

I have permission from all that are attending the event, including the hosts and the owners of the building. We have put in place guidelines that we signed on before anything went ahead. So far it is structured just like equipment use,

I maintain safety by not being dangerous
They maintain my Safety
IF anyone makes deliberate contact with drone then it is the host and building owners responsibility to deal with the situation and if the drone is damaged, it is up to them to financially back the repairs.

This is what they came up with and what we will sign on so far. Obviously it is much more detailed and complicated but this is a breakdown.