FAA Issues "Interpretation of the special rule for model aircraft"
07-24-2014, 10:56 AM
#576
The constitution doesn't guarantee your right to fly an Extra 300.
07-24-2014, 11:33 AM
#577
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
That must be the yet ratified 28th amendment I've heard about. 
Doubtful the FAA or govt will arrest anyone, that's usually the local boys, and it's usually because of disturbing the peace, or acting recklessly. The feds will go about punishment the more painful way...legal action and fines. And inter, and intra state commerce isn't out of the question with models. How many companies have tried to copy Amazon?
Doubtful the FAA or govt will arrest anyone, that's usually the local boys, and it's usually because of disturbing the peace, or acting recklessly. The feds will go about punishment the more painful way...legal action and fines. And inter, and intra state commerce isn't out of the question with models. How many companies have tried to copy Amazon?
07-24-2014, 03:33 PM
#578
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, they are not going to arrest people for playing with toys. They will arrest the idiots who endanger people and property with their toys.
07-24-2014, 09:04 PM
#581
No. In fact this is probably the worst post ever. I was not talking about sUAV flying amoung full scale aircraft or in any way endangering full scale aircraft. Though at least some of these should be prosecuted by local authorities, the FAA has no business arresting people with their toys that are not endangering full scale aircraft.
07-25-2014, 03:38 AM
#582
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
So far there is only one person suggesting they would do that.
The claims sound hysterical and bombastic and hyperbolic in nature, just as "going to WAR" against the FAA did. Anyone could dream up a one in a million scenario and claim the 'guvment might do it. Panic driven demagoguery does nobody any good.
Unless I'm missing something, do the suggested changes say anything about the FAA arresting anyone? And when was the first/last time we read about any modeler being in trouble over flying a non multirotor/UAV/SUAV craft. I can't say it's never happened, but I can't recall one.
The claims sound hysterical and bombastic and hyperbolic in nature, just as "going to WAR" against the FAA did. Anyone could dream up a one in a million scenario and claim the 'guvment might do it. Panic driven demagoguery does nobody any good.
Unless I'm missing something, do the suggested changes say anything about the FAA arresting anyone? And when was the first/last time we read about any modeler being in trouble over flying a non multirotor/UAV/SUAV craft. I can't say it's never happened, but I can't recall one.
07-25-2014, 03:48 AM
#583
Actually the FAA cannot arrest anyone. They can only send a fine through the mail and if it is not paid they must get the fine by legal means. For certified pilots it is easy to motivate them to pay, they pull their ticket.
07-25-2014, 05:00 AM
#584
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
I guess we agree now, but just a post or two before you said this:
"....Though at least some of these should be prosecuted by local authorities, the FAA has no business arresting people with their toys that are not endangering full scale aircraft...."
"....Though at least some of these should be prosecuted by local authorities, the FAA has no business arresting people with their toys that are not endangering full scale aircraft...."
07-25-2014, 05:57 AM
#585
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Apopka,
FL
Posts: 1,367
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where you can't fly map
Last edited by bradpaul; 07-25-2014 at 06:01 AM.
07-25-2014, 06:21 AM
#586
I know but I thought of that later. The FAA also shouldn't fine anybody for this.
07-25-2014, 06:31 AM
#587
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Cartersville, GA
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Guys,
Just a huge thanks to the more than 1550 who signed the 4-page petition/comment I filed with the FAA several weeks ago. If you haven't signed on, you can read it here:
https://www.change.org/petitions/fed...model-aircraft
As is clearly evident from the lack of discussion in my petition about FPV, I believe it's critical to preserve the core hobby and let rational minds work through the FPV stuff (which straddles the hobby and other areas). I believe trying to defend every aspect of RC simply because it's RC leads to a total loss or at least a significant curtailment of what we do. Most people don't give a rat's behind about our hobby. So if we intend to protect it, we should do it with that in mind. Guys who rant about their right to fly RC need to check that at the door. FPV does present challenges and they need reasonable restrictions.
I strongly urge those making comments to read the petition above and think about what you write. NPR interviewed a law professor that works with the FCC and fielding comments, and the guy said that most comments are rants and are useless. They are IGNORED. If you are going to comment, make it CONSTRUCTIVE. I've read some downright stupid comments from guys in our hobby. The constitution doesn't guarantee your right to fly an Extra 300. By the same token, regulation needs to be smart and not an exercise in paranoid sweeping laws designed to make the FAA's life easier.
I think the BIGGEST weakness in the FAA's interpretation is the artificial distinction between hobby flying and sponsored/test flying when everything else is the same (e.g. line of sight, proper field, proper altitude, etc). That WILL NOT stand up in court. So let's avoid court by getting them to pull it off the table NOW.
I think they have a huge case for regulating FPV aircraft. We are not going to win rights by commenting on that. That puzzle needs engineers, studies, and technology so make the skies compatible for full scale and fpv/drone/amazon deliver quad aircraft.
In the meantime, I'm going to the field...
MK
Just a huge thanks to the more than 1550 who signed the 4-page petition/comment I filed with the FAA several weeks ago. If you haven't signed on, you can read it here:
https://www.change.org/petitions/fed...model-aircraft
As is clearly evident from the lack of discussion in my petition about FPV, I believe it's critical to preserve the core hobby and let rational minds work through the FPV stuff (which straddles the hobby and other areas). I believe trying to defend every aspect of RC simply because it's RC leads to a total loss or at least a significant curtailment of what we do. Most people don't give a rat's behind about our hobby. So if we intend to protect it, we should do it with that in mind. Guys who rant about their right to fly RC need to check that at the door. FPV does present challenges and they need reasonable restrictions.
I strongly urge those making comments to read the petition above and think about what you write. NPR interviewed a law professor that works with the FCC and fielding comments, and the guy said that most comments are rants and are useless. They are IGNORED. If you are going to comment, make it CONSTRUCTIVE. I've read some downright stupid comments from guys in our hobby. The constitution doesn't guarantee your right to fly an Extra 300. By the same token, regulation needs to be smart and not an exercise in paranoid sweeping laws designed to make the FAA's life easier.
I think the BIGGEST weakness in the FAA's interpretation is the artificial distinction between hobby flying and sponsored/test flying when everything else is the same (e.g. line of sight, proper field, proper altitude, etc). That WILL NOT stand up in court. So let's avoid court by getting them to pull it off the table NOW.
I think they have a huge case for regulating FPV aircraft. We are not going to win rights by commenting on that. That puzzle needs engineers, studies, and technology so make the skies compatible for full scale and fpv/drone/amazon deliver quad aircraft.
In the meantime, I'm going to the field...
MK
07-25-2014, 10:28 AM
#588
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No. In fact this is probably the worst post ever. I was not talking about sUAV flying amoung full scale aircraft or in any way endangering full scale aircraft. Though at least some of these should be prosecuted by local authorities, the FAA has no business arresting people with their toys that are not endangering full scale aircraft.
07-25-2014, 11:32 AM
#590
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Beautiful map, but I would not rely on its accuracy. The airport issue has never been fully specified. I think that, at least, one of us is of the strongly held opinion that every cow pasture landing strip or hospital helipad counts as an airport. While I am not so sure how many there will be, I do think that the map makers may have underestimated the number of real qualifying airports.
The other issue I have with the map maker and the idiot who wrote the article is the rather casual use of the term drone. It would have been more meaningful if they had differentiated between model aircraft and commercial unmanned aircraft. Because, right now, commercial unmanned aircraft are forbidden everywhere. Although, I will admit, that the FAA is in a bind with their efforts to enforce that ban.
07-25-2014, 12:22 PM
#591
If you want to know about airports in the US you can start here: https://www.airnav.com/airports/us and here: http://aeronav.faa.gov/new_afd.asp?e...Date=24JUL2014
07-25-2014, 12:45 PM
#592
My Feedback: (102)
Here is perfect example of luancy and tempting fate. The local papers are describing plans this fall for the use of a quadcopter drone at a college football game (SEC-think around 88,000 fans). This is just another examploe of the type of things that we should be discouraging. Hopefully no one is hurt, but if someone is injured I hope they find a good lawyer.
http://www.al.com/news/montgomery/in...l#incart_river
http://www.al.com/news/montgomery/in...l#incart_river
07-25-2014, 02:32 PM
#593
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want to know about airports in the US you can start here: https://www.airnav.com/airports/us and here: http://aeronav.faa.gov/new_afd.asp?e...Date=24JUL2014
I hope that the FAA and the AMA will settle out which ones that chartered clubs need top notify. And once that is determined, I hope the AMA will provide the necessary assistance if it is needed.
07-25-2014, 03:49 PM
#594
You have missed the point. The problem is not: Where are the airports? We know that. What we don't know is which airports will we be required to notify or make an arrangement with if we are within 5 miles of the airport. Some have already pointed out that there are landing strips all over the place. Many of them are just cow pastures. But some are serious airports with regular use that may need to be notified. So the real question is: Which airport do we need to notify?
I hope that the FAA and the AMA will settle out which ones that chartered clubs need top notify. And once that is determined, I hope the AMA will provide the necessary assistance if it is needed.
I hope that the FAA and the AMA will settle out which ones that chartered clubs need top notify. And once that is determined, I hope the AMA will provide the necessary assistance if it is needed.
07-25-2014, 04:05 PM
#595
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
simple: got to Google Earth Find your/any Flying field High lite the Ruler in the upper line click on LINE in the upper left corner of the pop up box change the MAP LENGTH to Miles ... Put the cross hairs on the center of your field left click and draw a line to the nearest airport of interest left click on the center (Usually marked with a small plane) Now read the Miles in the ruler box. If more than 5 miles don't worry, if under 5 well U might have to worry
07-25-2014, 05:01 PM
#597
My Feedback: (198)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: El Reno, OK
Posts: 6,707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You still don't get it. GOOGLE earth or any other mapping tool will tell us what we already know. That an airport is there. Big deal, only the FAA can tell us if we have to notify it. Until then, there is nothing to worry about and probably nothing to worry about if we do have to notify it.
I don't know that it's on anyone's radar to answer (either the FAA nor AMA), as they both are likely more concerned (rightfully) with the airports that **DO** have control towers and require ATCC notifications by FS.
07-25-2014, 05:14 PM
#598
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Round Hill, VA
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07-25-2014, 07:33 PM
#599
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Cartersville, GA
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The current language in the FAA's interpretation is so broad, it could affect nearly every square inch of land in the USA. The need to give a specific operational definition of the word "airport." IMO, this needs to be limited to airports that are open to the public, listed in the AFD, listed on the sectional charts, and actively used by full-scale aircraft.
07-25-2014, 08:29 PM
#600
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Aguanga,
CA
Posts: 1,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
................
The current language in the FAA's interpretation is so broad, it could affect nearly every square inch of land in the USA. The need to give a specific operational definition of the word "airport." IMO, this needs to be limited to airports that are open to the public, listed in the AFD, listed on the sectional charts, and actively used by full-scale aircraft.
The current language in the FAA's interpretation is so broad, it could affect nearly every square inch of land in the USA. The need to give a specific operational definition of the word "airport." IMO, this needs to be limited to airports that are open to the public, listed in the AFD, listed on the sectional charts, and actively used by full-scale aircraft.
What did FAA mean by within 3 mi of an airport for the past 30+ years since AC 91-57 was issued?
What in the language of FAA's use of the term 'airport' in their interpretation of the statute established by congress suggests in any way that it has been redefined?