JohnShe

Nope, not even close. It is all rumor and wild speculation. There have been no new drone regulations published. It will be a while before any are published. It is anybody's guess what they will say. the only thing I know for sure is that these new drone regulations will only address commercial and public service operations.

Silent-AV8R

So, I am a member of Team Futaba. I get free t-shirts, a modest discount, and free service when I need it. So in your view I am flying as a commercial/compensated pilot?? I help people understand the various radios, help people at the field when they have questions, and wear my shirt at events I attend. How exactly is this representing an increased risk of any kind in your mind??

Silent-AV8R

According to the video Q&A with Rich Hanson yesterday the NPRM could come as early as before Christmas. It might go into early January 2015, but they are closer now than they ever have been. He also said that an extremely high number of comments are expected and that the final Rule may not become effective until well into 2016.

As far as content, people need to keep in mind that this Rule will cover commercial and public use sUAS. It will have no effect on modelers operating under Section 336. As far as the commercial end goes, I think the requirements sseen in the approved Section 333 permits granted to date by the FA offer a good view into their thinking.

- 55 pounds max ready to fly weight
- PPL & 3rd class medical (this may be replaced by some other type of sUAS specific cert later on)
- "eyes on" VLOS only (no FPV/goggles)
- day time only
- below 400 feet
- no class B or C operations (initially)

This is from their "Roadmap" document published in November 2013:

and

Hircflyer

I agree nothing in writting yet from the FAA, however there has been many rumors, articles, and leaks indicating the FAA is going to require some sort of certification to operate a UAS in commerical use. All I was indicating is long published requirements for a commerical ticket.

r_adical

My Feedback: (19)

Actually you could fly LSA as long as your medical has never been denied

Geek1945

What concerns me is some mindless primate who buys a RTF at any of 1000's of retailers, and charges up the batteries to fly near any airport. Hey, many have some open spaces around which appear a good place to fly. We all know some small airports look closed most of time during the week too. Of course many RC models are darn hard to see even when you know where there are, even worse if your a pilot on TO or LD with the sun in your eyes unaware of the UFO. Even at 80 knts taking an evasive maneuver at 400 AGL is mighty risky even it's just a big bird as any PPL will tell you. Didn't the 'Red Baron' book on tactics say to always attack when the sun was in your enemies eyes? Worst of all the media is constantly on the lookout for blood & guts even if the RC flyers are minors.

Yes it might seem nothing more than a covered pile of manure till the reporters enhance their reporting into a national event. As I've posted before the FAA will react if the pressure is great enough and that's what worries me especially the shotgun approach where even the innocent are impacted. Most RC flyers aren't even aware they can call the airport tower and advise them of their intentions which would likely be approved eliminating this problem all together.

For hire RC flyers should know this already especially if they wish to continue in business. All it takes is enough smarts to call even if you don't believe there's a reason too! Remember one call to ATC will also tell the FAA we really do understand the problem and are taking actions to do our part. That's my plan even if DFW is 85 miles away, because the ATC taking the call will "hey, I just got a call from a guy advising he is operating a model airplane at N 32.28.128 & W 098.03.500" a hour later everyone at work will know about it especially the managers who will have some thing new to report on the morning Headquarters Telcon. Just imagine if all RC flyers started doing this, then only the mindless primate would be involved not the whole RC community.

I believe there's a great potential for good things to happen in model aviation world wide IF the public gets a chance to see the opportunities our hobby can offer.

Ed
FAA Airways Facilities Tech Retired

Sport_Pilot

Only the smaller or lower class of drones will be less than 400 feet. Regulations are supposedly being written for more capable drones to fly in navigable airspace.

Sport_Pilot

How is it fair that they use their interpretation as regulation? It was not even changed or AFAIK rationalized after the comment period. How is that fair?

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

ask the sheep surrounded by wolves, just exactly what in live is "FAIR".
fair is a human construct that can NEVER be actually achieved.

ira d

I missed the point you site when I read policy, But I was talking about the part where they said the FAA should counsel before taking other actions.

JohnShe

What interpretation? If you mean, the Interpretive rule for section 336, it is not in effect yet, as I think you are saying. But, they were using per-modernization act interpretations to file their complaint against Pirker. Now that the courts approved the appeal of the earlier court decision, the FAA can take action against the idiots, morons, malefactors and sociopaths. An action that I am strongly in favor of. It seems quite fair to me.

j41captn

My Feedback: (5)

Will the FAA require a NOTAM every time we fly? Will they put up a TFR over our flying field? LOL I don't think so. The FAA states "We're from the FAA and we're here to help" and "We're not happy until you're not happy"

JohnShe

lol!

N410DC

I think the long-term intention is for the FAA is implement a new level of license for Commercial UAV pilots. If this is case, there should be some means for a pilot to receive training and to accumulate experience in UAVs (not full scale aircraft) in order the fulfill the requirements of the new license. Yes, this will cost money, since the pilot will probably have to pay an instructor and/or for an written and/or practical examination. However, this is not all that unreasonable, if the pilot intends to make money from flying.

I do not think they will require a license for pilots who fly for non-commercial purposes. Keep in mind that some full-scale experimental aircraft can be flown for non-commercial purposes, by unlicensed pilots. If the FAA allows this, I don't see them requiring a license for a much smaller model aircraft.

At the moment, the FAA has can only issue a pilot's license to someone flying a full scale aircraft. The FAA has issued a waivers for commercial UAV flight. In one instance, 6 movie production companies were allowed to fly UAVs for aerial photography. Under this specific waiver, the pilots of the UAVs are require to possess a private pilot's license (not sure if a current medical certificate is also required.) I don't think this means that a private pilot's license will be required to fly UAVs in the future. The FAA simply implemented this restriction for the time being, since the pilots cannot yet obtain a UAV license.

The article cited buy the OP clearly indicates that a license will only be required for commercial drone operations. The title of the article and the tile of this thread are misleading; the titles imply that a license will be required for all drone operations.

franklin_m

It's not that it's increasing the danger. That's not my point at all. The point is simply that if a full scale pilot receives compensation in any form, discounts etc.not available to the general public in exchange for flying, then it requires a commercial ticket. I'm an advocate for aligning the policy - that is make 14 CFR 61.113 apply to aircraft operations regardless of size.

Here's Cornell Law's link to the law: http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/61.113

Sport_Pilot

My issue with it is that the FAA will be essentially regulating intrastate commerce which is against the Constitution.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Constitution??? What's that?

The only thing we need as a civilization is a government that insures all we have to do is shuffle around in a mindless daze...Picking our feet up and watching where we put them down is asking way to much from society. Get on the teet and defend it with every word you can muster is the plan nowadays...No individuals...just special interest groups allowed...

franklin_m

Will? They already are for full scale pilots. Article 1, Section 8 says: [The Congress shall have Power] "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"

So I agree that the Constitution gives Congress the authority to regulate interstate commerce; if Congress chooses to delegate this authority to FAA in one or more laws that they pass, then FAA's action was, is, and will be fully compliant with the interstate commerce clause.

Sport_Pilot

Flying a drone or RC for commerce is not among other states, it is intrastate, not interstate as I said. When you fly from point A and back to point A the commerce is not interstate and Congress does not have the authority to regulate. Now flying commercially among full scale might be another matter.

franklin_m

But Congress gave FAA to regulate air safety. If they feel that certain commercial operations impact safety, then they've got all the authority they need to regulate. The interstate commerce argument is secondary to the safety argument.

N410DC

The FAA has been regulating full-scale sponsored pilots for decades. I think an it would be extremely difficult to argue that the FAA has been violating the constitution for several decades.

Sport_Pilot

The FAA is only authorized to regulate safety in navigable airspace. Unless near an airport you are not in navigable airspace when flying below 400 feet and thus the FAA cannot regulate commerce.

Sport_Pilot

Full scale is capable of interstate commerse, thus it can be regulated. UAV flying below 400 feet and from point A back to point A is not capable of interstate commerce.

cj_rumley

Seem simple, doesn't it?

Maybe if AMA et al were not crying Wolf! about FAA wanting to regulate model airplanes, it might come across that what FAA really wants to control is the airspace, and so safety of operations therein. Regulating safety of navigation in the airspace isn't the same as regulating any particular sorts of 'aircraft.' Model aircraft, drones (dromes in another thread) kites, cannonballs and pumpkins flying in some parts of the airspace that have been segregated out for operations by particular types of aircraft are potentially obstructions to safe navigation by the designated types. An analogy that comes to mind is rules of the road. In the interest of highway safety DMV doesn't allow golf carts, skateboards or bicycles on the freeways. That doesn't mean they need or have any nefarious desire to regulate golf carts, skateboards or bicycles.

OTOH, if one feels that that it's okay to drive a golf cart on the interstate highways when it doesn't involve commerce, who am I to discourage him from doing so?

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

You don't have the Department of Public Safety on speed dial??? Can't rely on John to do everything...can we? Besides, on the interstate commerce thingy, wouldn't you want to protect the roads as there may be a UPS semi loaded with model airplane stuff. LOL