NZFF

What to do with that fighter pilot's license...

I particularly like the fact that Droidworx is one of those Think Local Act Global companies.
The flying bits are made in Raglan, the camera gimbals in Wellington.
I like even more the fact that the bottom end of the range is edging into hobbyist territory, and I definitely want one.
More at
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/small-busi...-eye-in-the-sky

I watch a similar setup filming redevelopment in the area , they setup and flew from a retirement village , great camera shots as the had a monitor running in the back 4x4 , it was great entertainment for the retirees .

They might be using the "flown by a licensed pilot" approach to satisfy CAA and councils OSH requirements for comercial use over built up area's. The truth is that this new generation of rc vtol aircraft can be purchased buy anyone for a reasonably low cost and flown legaly within the RC community. There popularity as a cheap arial photo rig is growing at an enormous rate and every second guy I come across with one claims he's going to make millions out of it. Because this type of operation in a commercial scence is in its infancy, their is yet to be in place sets of rules and requirements for commercial use. At the moment it seems you have to negotiate with councils and insurance companys on a person by person basis with no guaranteed results. Their size vary's from that of a hamster to something you could theroreticaly take a ride on......

Like this guy who made his machine out of nothing more than readily available components from online chinese rc model stores.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L75ESD9PBOw

You make an interesting point Andrew. There is NO specific rules or even guidance in place for UAV operations other than those provided for RC hobby aircraft.
The use of a UAV at Wellington airport, during the Rugby world cup, raised a lot of issues. Keep an eye out for a press statement coming from NZALPA (NZ Pilots assoc) regarding UAV's.
The potential problem is not dissimilar to cheap laser pointers. They are unnecessarily readily available to the public (even class 3 that are banned in most other countries) and some idiots think it is a great idea to illuminate aircraft.
As relatively cheap and readily available drones like the Parrot become more popular they will be become more plentiful and I guess bigger and better. First person view (FPV) is in it's infancy but like the Parrot it is possible to fly it without actually seeing it.
This is a potential risk to the public at large as well as aircraft. It can also potentially have an adverse effect on the legitimate RC hobby flyers with councils being forced to adopt control measures such as banning from parks etc or the problem of swamping of the available radio spectrum and interference with household appliances etc.
Watch the game of 'pass the parcel' begin after the first UAV (can be heavy when fitted with a camera) loses control and strikes a member of the public or causes a cyclist, motorcyclist or car driver to be startled resulting in an accident.
ICAO are working on the issue but polar ice caps will melt quicker than the time it will take for them to determine a global standard. Even then NZ's current adherence to ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices is woeful.
The UK have a very good document called CAP 371 which has excellent guidance on required measures for the operation of UAV's. Hopefully NZCAA will use this as a template for future regulations and rules.