Ownership: The ups and downs of aerial videos

But pilots who attach cameras to the outside of their airplanes risk running afoul of the FAA’s “careless or reckless” catchall if cameras ever fall off. A 2014 FAA memo said the agency regarded “temporary” camera attachments as beyond the regulatory purview of FAR Part 43—but “the use of these type of attachments...are not supported by the FAA, and may (in the case of an in-flight detachment) lead to ‘careless operations.’” The regulatory catchall (FAR 91.13 and 91.15) bars pilots from operating an aircraft “in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another” or allowing “any object” to be dropped that “creates a hazard to persons or property,” and a falling camera fits that description.

More recently, the FAA said in a 2016 issue of its Safety Briefing publication that type-certificated aircraft owners and pilots need “FAA approval on a case-by-case basis” to attach external cameras.

“For mounts that strap on or secure with a common screw, a minor alteration is typically approved,” the FAA said, “and an entry in the aircraft logbook is made by a qualified maintainer.”

NFlight founder Patrick Carter tells customers that an A&P mechanic must make an entry in the airframe logbook of any type-certificated aircraft and return it to service after an external camera mount has been installed. Experimental aircraft get more leeway when it comes to external camera mounts than FAA type-certificated ones, but not a blank check. The builder of a kit airplane, for example, can test a camera mount on his aircraft, make a logbook entry proclaiming that it causes no adverse flying characteristics, and use it as he or she sees fit. If the camera falls off, however, the pilot/builder is responsible.

Ryan Mohr, an A&P mechanic with inspection authorization, pilot, and designer of the FlightFlix line of aerial camera attachments, has hired an FAA-designated engineering representative (DER) to examine the camera mounts his company produces and supply engineering data that A&Ps and IAs can use to obtain Part 337 field approvals. That paperwork sells for $350 and allows the camera mounts to become approved parts of the aircraft they’re attached to.

FlightFlix mounts are made from aviation-grade materials but aren’t FAA/PMA parts. The company is pursuing a broad supplemental type certificate (STC) that will allow its camera mounts to be installed in many kinds of aircraft—but the STC is not yet complete.

Mohr says pilots should take a common-sense approach to flying with cameras—and avoid sticky mounts and suction cups. One thing that the FAA, Carter, and Mohr agree on: Suction cups and sticky mounts are unreliable and frequently fail.

“Suction cups and sticky mounts have a terrible record for falling off in flight,” he said. “They’re not up to the job.”

Email [email protected]