Does "purpose" determine the required regulations?
03-23-2011, 03:57 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does "purpose" determine the required regulations?
MA April 2011 issue page 20,
“Model aircraft are different from commercial, public-use sUAS. No AMA member is allowed to pursue model aircraft operations outside the scope of our Safety Code or for commercial purposes and still be considered to be under the auspices of the AMA.
The Academy and its members strongly condemn careless or reckless use of either model aircraft or sUAS, which endangers people or property. We are hobbyists and sportsman and sportswomen, educators, and scientists. We fly for recreational and educational purposes only.”
So the same airframe when used for recreational or educational use is a "model aircraft" and would be subject to the AMA (CBO) rules, but if that aircraft was used for "commercial purposes" would be a sUAV subject to the stricter FAA sUAV commercial requirements..........................
It begs the question what is "commercial purpose"???????????????????
For example:
At almost all AMA sanctioned events that I have attended there have been noon time demo flights by manufactures/distributors to show off (i.e. generate sales) of their latest greatest aircraft. Is this a "commercial purpose"?
How about a airframe being flown by a sponsored team pilot?
Paid flight instruction? (I know what the AMA says, but what about the FAA?)
Brad
“Model aircraft are different from commercial, public-use sUAS. No AMA member is allowed to pursue model aircraft operations outside the scope of our Safety Code or for commercial purposes and still be considered to be under the auspices of the AMA.
The Academy and its members strongly condemn careless or reckless use of either model aircraft or sUAS, which endangers people or property. We are hobbyists and sportsman and sportswomen, educators, and scientists. We fly for recreational and educational purposes only.”
So the same airframe when used for recreational or educational use is a "model aircraft" and would be subject to the AMA (CBO) rules, but if that aircraft was used for "commercial purposes" would be a sUAV subject to the stricter FAA sUAV commercial requirements..........................
It begs the question what is "commercial purpose"???????????????????
For example:
At almost all AMA sanctioned events that I have attended there have been noon time demo flights by manufactures/distributors to show off (i.e. generate sales) of their latest greatest aircraft. Is this a "commercial purpose"?
How about a airframe being flown by a sponsored team pilot?
Paid flight instruction? (I know what the AMA says, but what about the FAA?)
Brad
03-23-2011, 04:30 PM
#2
RE: Does
Just look at how the FAA currently views commercial activity in relation to full sized aviation. If you are compensated in any way, such as being paid, or even just free flight time (not paying equal share of the expenses, while acting as PIC) then you are operating under "commercial purposes." You can also fall under other regulations, such as '"air taxi" or "air carrier." Many new pilots have gotten burned when a family member pays for the plane rental so the new pilot can fly them to an out of town meeting. We all know it was just a case of "wouldn't it be cool if you flew me there? I'll pay for the rental," but the pilot was compensated for the flight by getting free flight time. Now if you both pay your share of the plane and the family member pays you to "drive" him to the meeting well, now that is legal. So it comes down to knowing the rules and learning the loopholes. A lot can be done "legally," but it's easy for the uninformed to get into trouble.
03-23-2011, 06:11 PM
#4
RE: Does
The difference is using your model to aerial photograph and charging for it, thats a commercial use and not covered under AMA and are what the FAA is after. Better to say, its what the AMA wants the FAA to consider commercial and not included under us hobbyists.
03-23-2011, 09:41 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Does
It begs the question what is "commercial purpose"
because they instead gave us a list of what will be allowed
(g) Special Rule for Model Aircraft.
(1) ... blah blah blah ... shall not promulgate any rules or regulations regarding model aircraft ... blah blah blah ... if such aircraft is
(A) flown strictly for recreational, sport, competition, or academic purposes;
(B) ... blah blah blah ...
(C) ... blah blah blah ...
(2) MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.For purposes of this subsection, the term ``model aircraft'' means ... blah blah blah ... for the exclusive and intended use for sport, recreation, competition, or academic purposes.
(1) ... blah blah blah ... shall not promulgate any rules or regulations regarding model aircraft ... blah blah blah ... if such aircraft is
(A) flown strictly for recreational, sport, competition, or academic purposes;
(B) ... blah blah blah ...
(C) ... blah blah blah ...
(2) MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.For purposes of this subsection, the term ``model aircraft'' means ... blah blah blah ... for the exclusive and intended use for sport, recreation, competition, or academic purposes.
but a clear list of allowing it for
Sport
Recreation
Competition
Academic
No reason to guess just what the LAW will consider 'commercial purposes'
since the law wont ban 'Commercial Purposes' nor will the law allow 'Non-Commercial Purposes',
the law will allow a specific list of purposes,
and none of them are called/named 'Non-commercial'
Since CBOs like AMA/DIYD/USAmA/etc will be using s223 to simply sidestep whatever the FAA tries to throw at modeling,
it seems logical that we should be looking at what s223 does in regard to intent/purpose... rather than what DIYD/AMA/USAmA does about intent
03-24-2011, 08:47 AM
#7
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Does
ORIGINAL: bradpaul
It begs the question what is ''commercial purpose''???????????????????
It begs the question what is ''commercial purpose''???????????????????
03-24-2011, 09:15 AM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Spring Hill, FL
Posts: 893
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Does
ORIGINAL: bradpaul
MA April 2011 issue page 20,
“Model aircraft are different from commercial, public-use sUAS. No AMA member is allowed to pursue model aircraft operations outside the scope of our Safety Code or for commercial purposes and still be considered to be under the auspices of the AMA.
The Academy and its members strongly condemn careless or reckless use of either model aircraft or sUAS, which endangers people or property. We are hobbyists and sportsman and sportswomen, educators, and scientists. We fly for recreational and educational purposes only.”
So the same airframe when used for recreational or educational use is a ''model aircraft'' and would be subject to the AMA (CBO) rules, but if that aircraft was used for ''commercial purposes'' would be a sUAV subject to the stricter FAA sUAV commercial requirements..........................
It begs the question what is ''commercial purpose''???????????????????
For example:
At almost all AMA sanctioned events that I have attended there have been noon time demo flights by manufactures/distributors to show off (i.e. generate sales) of their latest greatest aircraft. Is this a ''commercial purpose''?
How about a airframe being flown by a sponsored team pilot?
Paid flight instruction? (I know what the AMA says, but what about the FAA?)
Brad
MA April 2011 issue page 20,
“Model aircraft are different from commercial, public-use sUAS. No AMA member is allowed to pursue model aircraft operations outside the scope of our Safety Code or for commercial purposes and still be considered to be under the auspices of the AMA.
The Academy and its members strongly condemn careless or reckless use of either model aircraft or sUAS, which endangers people or property. We are hobbyists and sportsman and sportswomen, educators, and scientists. We fly for recreational and educational purposes only.”
So the same airframe when used for recreational or educational use is a ''model aircraft'' and would be subject to the AMA (CBO) rules, but if that aircraft was used for ''commercial purposes'' would be a sUAV subject to the stricter FAA sUAV commercial requirements..........................
It begs the question what is ''commercial purpose''???????????????????
For example:
At almost all AMA sanctioned events that I have attended there have been noon time demo flights by manufactures/distributors to show off (i.e. generate sales) of their latest greatest aircraft. Is this a ''commercial purpose''?
How about a airframe being flown by a sponsored team pilot?
Paid flight instruction? (I know what the AMA says, but what about the FAA?)
Brad
I don’t think our insurance position has changed from what it was in the past. I see the subject statement as a focused declaration that as an AMA member if you are knowingly operating outside the safety code or whatever standards are set or operate/fly for pay you are not under the protection of the AMA. You can fly and take photos of your neighbor’s property and give him the aerial photos you cannot sell the photos. I don’t see this declaration changing the Demo flights situation from what the requirements were before.
Regards
Frank
03-24-2011, 10:27 AM
#9
RE: Does
I think the question is not what the AMA may think, but instead what the FAA would deem no longer a model and now a commercial SUAV that would fall under the more strict guidelines.
I think his meaning of "commercial purposes" was clear in layman's terms. Not everyone is versed in the legal jargon, so why make issue over not using the correct "FAA approved" verbiage?
I think his meaning of "commercial purposes" was clear in layman's terms. Not everyone is versed in the legal jargon, so why make issue over not using the correct "FAA approved" verbiage?
03-24-2011, 12:49 PM
#10
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Does
ORIGINAL: cfircav8r
I think the question is not what the AMA may think, but instead what the FAA would deem no longer a model and now a commercial SUAV that would fall under the more strict guidelines.
I think his meaning of ''commercial purposes'' was clear in layman's terms. Not everyone is versed in the legal jargon, so why make issue over not using the correct ''FAA approved'' verbiage?
I think the question is not what the AMA may think, but instead what the FAA would deem no longer a model and now a commercial SUAV that would fall under the more strict guidelines.
I think his meaning of ''commercial purposes'' was clear in layman's terms. Not everyone is versed in the legal jargon, so why make issue over not using the correct ''FAA approved'' verbiage?
You can have commercial use when using a airframe for:
Sport
Recreation
Competition
Academic
Brad
03-25-2011, 06:45 AM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Does
and it is the FAA that decided if what someone trys to claim is a CommercialRecreation
fits into the "for the exclusive and intended use for sport, recreation, competition, or academic purposes."
I mean, the FAA is really lax and forgiving and GoodOleBoy when it comes to
doing quasi-commercial activities with a noncommercial pilots license, right?
Are you really just hopping the FAA will look the other way like the AMA
and not get all Gift-Nazi like the NCAA?
what did the ARC say about Manufacturers doing flying-
Wow, seems they allow manufacturers only to TEST, not to do sales of production line product.
And seeing how they TWICE said test I get the feeling that they meant TEST rather than Airshow Sales Demo
fits into the "for the exclusive and intended use for sport, recreation, competition, or academic purposes."
I mean, the FAA is really lax and forgiving and GoodOleBoy when it comes to
doing quasi-commercial activities with a noncommercial pilots license, right?
Are you really just hopping the FAA will look the other way like the AMA
and not get all Gift-Nazi like the NCAA?
what did the ARC say about Manufacturers doing flying-
Manufacturers which are flight testing aircraft intended to be operated for the sole
purpose of sport, recreation, and/or competition and they are tested at an approved
field as defined by ...
Manufacturers which are flight testing aircraft intended to be operated for other than
sport, recreation, and/or competition and they are tested at an approved field as
defined by ...
purpose of sport, recreation, and/or competition and they are tested at an approved
field as defined by ...
Manufacturers which are flight testing aircraft intended to be operated for other than
sport, recreation, and/or competition and they are tested at an approved field as
defined by ...
And seeing how they TWICE said test I get the feeling that they meant TEST rather than Airshow Sales Demo
03-25-2011, 06:55 AM
#12
RE: Does
Well let's start with the definition:
To answer the first post, yes the same aircraft (model or otherwise) could be used for both recreational and commercial purposes. Case in poiint the Cessna 180 used in the Flying Wild Alaska show.
CFR 14, Part 1 Section 1.1 General Definitions: Commercial operator means a person who, for compensation or hire, engages in the carriage by aircraft in air commerce of persons or property, other than as an air carrier or foreign air carrier or under the authority of Part 375 of this title. Where it is doubtful that an operation is for “compensation or hire”, the test applied is whether the carriage by air is merely incidental to the person's other business or is, in itself, a major enterprise for profit.
03-25-2011, 08:43 AM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Does
If I mail a letter to Horizon or Futaba and ask for a free 'gift' shirt of similar value that the demo pilots get,
will they send me a 'gift' shirt
or will they tell me how much those shirts cost and want me to buy one, because they are product.
If the answer to Why do those Demo pilots get them and I dont
is that they earn the shirts with their flying,
how could anyone not consider that part of a compensation package for service rendered by the demo pilots
Just like trying to use a LightSport pilots license to fly folks to Vegas
and those folks 'gift' me a laptop & a nice card (prepaid visa is nice) worth 130% the trip cost.
Thats not commercial air taxi, its just flying folks 'for free' and some unrelated 'gifts'
We are all just gonna pretend the FAA is... well... stupid.
I dont think that plan will work,
the FAA has been around the block a few times
and has already learned a bunch of the tricks folks play
to pretend they are only flying noncommercial on their noncommercial license
Besides, as was said before,
the whole 'noncommercial' phrase as a qualifier is NOT what the senate bill says.
will they send me a 'gift' shirt
or will they tell me how much those shirts cost and want me to buy one, because they are product.
If the answer to Why do those Demo pilots get them and I dont
is that they earn the shirts with their flying,
how could anyone not consider that part of a compensation package for service rendered by the demo pilots
Just like trying to use a LightSport pilots license to fly folks to Vegas
and those folks 'gift' me a laptop & a nice card (prepaid visa is nice) worth 130% the trip cost.
Thats not commercial air taxi, its just flying folks 'for free' and some unrelated 'gifts'
We are all just gonna pretend the FAA is... well... stupid.
I dont think that plan will work,
the FAA has been around the block a few times
and has already learned a bunch of the tricks folks play
to pretend they are only flying noncommercial on their noncommercial license
Besides, as was said before,
the whole 'noncommercial' phrase as a qualifier is NOT what the senate bill says.
03-25-2011, 09:05 AM
#14
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Orange County,
CA
Posts: 5,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Does
ORIGINAL: KidEpoxy
If I mail a letter to Horizon or Futaba and ask for a free 'gift' shirt of similar value that the demo pilots get,
will they send me a 'gift' shirt or will they tell me how much those shirts cost and want me to buy one, because they are product.
If I mail a letter to Horizon or Futaba and ask for a free 'gift' shirt of similar value that the demo pilots get,
will they send me a 'gift' shirt or will they tell me how much those shirts cost and want me to buy one, because they are product.
03-25-2011, 10:25 AM
#15
RE: Does
Paid flight instruction? Look at all those who advertise to teach you to fly using supplied trainers. FAA going to issue airworthyness certs to a bunch of $100.00 RCM trainers?
Paid sponsorship? I put a company logo on my plane and they buy my fuel, although it may be for "competition" thats a commerical transaction.
Manufacturers paying someone to test and promote their models?
Unless we all go back to drawing our own plans, building from wood we cut ourselves, I cannot see how model avaiation is seperated from commercial based on the previous statements. AMA keeps commercial endeavors seperated to keep the liability of the insturance defined to general hobbiest, but if this goes into a regulation or law, it is a whole differenet matter.
Paid sponsorship? I put a company logo on my plane and they buy my fuel, although it may be for "competition" thats a commerical transaction.
Manufacturers paying someone to test and promote their models?
Unless we all go back to drawing our own plans, building from wood we cut ourselves, I cannot see how model avaiation is seperated from commercial based on the previous statements. AMA keeps commercial endeavors seperated to keep the liability of the insturance defined to general hobbiest, but if this goes into a regulation or law, it is a whole differenet matter.
03-25-2011, 12:03 PM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Does
with the exception of a hat and shirt. Those are given to the Team members as a way of identifying them, not in way of compensation
There are very few people who get paid (almost none), there are only a few more with a full ride (free equipment),
and it is these Compensatees that the FAA is supposed to just not notice?
like the way they dont know about the laptop and prepaid visa gifts after my 'for free' rides
'for identification'
Identified as what?
The senate bill dont say compensation or commerce is prohibited,
it has a list of EXCLUSIVE purposes and intent that is allowed.
And I just dont see "Shilling commercial products" as one of the listed exclusive purposes.
'Exclusive" is written into the list, you cant have a 'Academic AND ProductShill' flight cause the list is exclusive to THOSE 4 purposes.
Its one thing for a NON-Affiliated guy telling folks how good his 40%XYZ flys and showing off a bit with it,
its another to have factory reps flying to shill product.... in as far as to stop the hobby flyers for a bit to hold a special advertisement flight
03-25-2011, 01:16 PM
#17
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Does
IMHO..... and I have been wrong before....... the important phrase in this poorly worded statement is:
That only non-commercial pursuit of model aircraft operations are under the auspices of the AMA and therefore under future AMA CBO rules. Does not matter if the model aircraft operation is for Sport, Recreation, Competition, Education, etc............................
Brad
MA April 2011 issue page 20,
“Model aircraft are different from commercial, public-use sUAS. No AMA member is allowed to pursue model aircraft operations outside the scope of our Safety Code or for commercial purposes and still be considered to be under the auspices of the AMA.
The Academy and its members strongly condemn careless or reckless use of either model aircraft or sUAS, which endangers people or property. We are hobbyists and sportsman and sportswomen, educators, and scientists. We fly for recreational and educational purposes only.”
“Model aircraft are different from commercial, public-use sUAS. No AMA member is allowed to pursue model aircraft operations outside the scope of our Safety Code or for commercial purposes and still be considered to be under the auspices of the AMA.
The Academy and its members strongly condemn careless or reckless use of either model aircraft or sUAS, which endangers people or property. We are hobbyists and sportsman and sportswomen, educators, and scientists. We fly for recreational and educational purposes only.”
Brad
03-25-2011, 03:14 PM
#18
RE: Does
If you work in aircraft sales and a perspective buyer wants to try the aircraft out you can take them up in the aircraft. Now I know what your thinking, "they are pilots so are therefore the one flying," however due to insurance requirements the salesman must be pilot in command and will log it as such. The salesman does not have to be a commercial pilot, even though he is getting paid during the flight and is receiving flight time, since the FAA has deemed that flight as being incidental to the job, although he does have to meet other requirements. So Futaba selling radios by paying pilots to fly at contests would be a borderline prospect. They are in a competition, and the argument may be that they are sales reps and the flying is just to show off the merchandise. These are things that will most assuredly be hashed out over many years, after the rules are in place, before a standard practice is reached.
03-25-2011, 05:37 PM
#19
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 2,972
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Does
ORIGINAL: bradpaul
No AMA member is allowed to pursue model aircraft operations outside the scope of our Safety Code or for commercial purposes and still be considered to be under the auspices of the AMA.
Brad
No AMA member is allowed to pursue model aircraft operations outside the scope of our Safety Code or for commercial purposes and still be considered to be under the auspices of the AMA.
Brad
Oh, now I see where the term, "commercial purposes" comes from. Looks like you have gone full circle.
03-25-2011, 06:58 PM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio,
TX
Posts: 6,681
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Does
These are things that will most assuredly be hashed out over many years, after the rules are in place, before a standard practice is reached.
The AMA(&Weschester) is free to make up whatever conditions it wants on its insurance.
The FAA on the other hand dont give a tinkersdam about what AMA insures
when they decide to charge someone with a violation of fed law.
S223 has no requirement for model pilots to have insurance.
03-25-2011, 07:19 PM
#21
RE: Does
Yes, the FAA will hash this out with anyone they feel has violated their rules, through the arbitration process in some cases, or through the courts. I agree the AMA will have no say, or pull for that matter.
Pilotfighter, for the sake of argument when you see the words "commercial purposes" in this thread take it to mean any use of a model aircraft that would cause the FAA to not classify the flight under the proposed model aviation exemption.
Pilotfighter, for the sake of argument when you see the words "commercial purposes" in this thread take it to mean any use of a model aircraft that would cause the FAA to not classify the flight under the proposed model aviation exemption.
03-29-2011, 06:33 AM
#23
RE: Does
ORIGINAL: cfircav8r
Yes, the FAA will hash this out with anyone they feel has violated their rules, through the arbitration process in some cases, or through the courts. I agree the AMA will have no say, or pull for that matter.
Yes, the FAA will hash this out with anyone they feel has violated their rules, through the arbitration process in some cases, or through the courts. I agree the AMA will have no say, or pull for that matter.
But then again I've spoken with my companies PMI and he's saying no one in the FAA field office really has the time or desire to go monitor RC flying fields too, unles of course there is an event that involves people in 1:1 scale planes
03-29-2011, 10:13 AM
#24
RE: Does
Yes they will not go to a remote field and nab guys giving paid model instruction to a couple locals, but if you start going around big cities advertising aerial photography for a hefty profit and attempt to fly under the model exemption they will find out and pursue action. The same holds true for full scale if you are not being stupid you can get away with quite a bit. The question each has to ask themselves is do I want to break regs or just stay legal, even if I am sure I wont get caught. Some do live by the philosophy "it's only illegal if you get caught."
03-29-2011, 11:14 AM
#25
RE: Does
Folks the commercial thing comes from our constitution. It says the Feds can regulate interstate commerce, not intrastate commerce. Getting paid to teach flying RC is not interstate. Taking photo's might be.