Flying Toy Planes Now Allowed in DC Area.
02-09-2016, 09:58 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Toy Planes Now Allowed in DC Area.
http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/ama...es-in-dc-area/
We are pleased to announce that AMA members in the Washington, D.C. metro area can resume model aircraft activities inside the D.C. Special Flights Rule Area (SFRA). After weeks of working closely with the FAA to find a resolution, the 14 AMA-charted clubs in the DC metro area can now return to safe operations starting on February 10.
On December 25, the FAA more than doubled the airspace around the D.C. metro area that it considers a ‘no drone zone.’ This meant that, in addition to the longstanding UAS prohibition restrictions in the Flight Restricted Zone (FRZ) and around Washington, D.C., model aviation enthusiasts could not fly in several Virginia and Maryland counties as well. For our members who have been flying safely in the area for decades, this was unacceptable and AMA was committed to a finding a solution.
Thanks to the efforts of the AMA’s Government Affairs team and your District IV Government Relations Committee, we successfully worked with the FAA to roll back these unnecessary flying restrictions in the SFRA. Today, the FAA updated the conditions for flying in the SFRA, issuing a permanent Notice to Airmen (NOTAM). It is important to note there is no change to the 15nm Flight Restricted Zone (FRZ) in D.C. The FRZ will continue to be a no-fly zone.
The FAA acknowledges that our members abide by federal and local policies and for decades have followed AMA’s comprehensive set of safety guidelines. AMA members’ unparalleled safety record shows that this time-tested community-based approach to model aircraft activity works, and helps ensure that hobbyists fly safely and responsibly.
We appreciate your support for AMA and look forward to our continued efforts to protect our hobby and all AMA members.
On December 25, the FAA more than doubled the airspace around the D.C. metro area that it considers a ‘no drone zone.’ This meant that, in addition to the longstanding UAS prohibition restrictions in the Flight Restricted Zone (FRZ) and around Washington, D.C., model aviation enthusiasts could not fly in several Virginia and Maryland counties as well. For our members who have been flying safely in the area for decades, this was unacceptable and AMA was committed to a finding a solution.
Thanks to the efforts of the AMA’s Government Affairs team and your District IV Government Relations Committee, we successfully worked with the FAA to roll back these unnecessary flying restrictions in the SFRA. Today, the FAA updated the conditions for flying in the SFRA, issuing a permanent Notice to Airmen (NOTAM). It is important to note there is no change to the 15nm Flight Restricted Zone (FRZ) in D.C. The FRZ will continue to be a no-fly zone.
The FAA acknowledges that our members abide by federal and local policies and for decades have followed AMA’s comprehensive set of safety guidelines. AMA members’ unparalleled safety record shows that this time-tested community-based approach to model aircraft activity works, and helps ensure that hobbyists fly safely and responsibly.
We appreciate your support for AMA and look forward to our continued efforts to protect our hobby and all AMA members.
02-09-2016, 10:49 AM
#5
I'm glad to see that those fourteen fields are back in operation. That said, I noted the rather well defined and somewhat restrictive operating conditions: "if the aircraft are registered and marked ... follow specific operating conditions ... fly 400 feet or lower above the ground, stay in the operator's line of sight, [and] only fly in clear conditions."
Could this be a harbinger of things to come...perhaps within 30nm of class B airports? Would make sense given the high density traffic in, out, and around them.
http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=84787
Could this be a harbinger of things to come...perhaps within 30nm of class B airports? Would make sense given the high density traffic in, out, and around them.
http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=84787
02-09-2016, 12:21 PM
#7
My Feedback: (5)
Respectfully, if you lived in an area where "all" of the clubs in your area were restricted to 400ft, you might feel pessimistic too. Well, that is me- and I fly mostly larger IMAC planes and this will severely restrict the way I can fly. I don't necessarily blame the AMA- I'm just not happy with the situation. I will need to find a new place to fly that is much further away- we will survive and are glad to be able to fly at all in this zone- but honestly, how can we not feel gloomy about this news?
I feel like I'm a reasonable guy- I can accept any restriction that make sense. I fail to understand why it's not OK to fly above 400 feet here while it's OK to fly above 400 feet in other cities- while un-grounded, I feel like someone "downtown" was just digging in and trying to be able to say they got something in the negotiation too.
I feel like I'm a reasonable guy- I can accept any restriction that make sense. I fail to understand why it's not OK to fly above 400 feet here while it's OK to fly above 400 feet in other cities- while un-grounded, I feel like someone "downtown" was just digging in and trying to be able to say they got something in the negotiation too.
Last edited by DMichael; 02-09-2016 at 02:00 PM.
02-09-2016, 12:28 PM
#8
My Feedback: (26)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Chicago,
IL
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those who don't fly model aircraft that are currently flown above 400 feet-I understand why you all don't think this is restrictive. For those who DO fly model aircraft above 400 feet (Gliders, Pattern, IMAC, Turbine fixed wing), this will cause concern.
And yes I have read the thoughts that we can "redesign" some flying maneuvers wrt competition-which while possible, certainly doesn't address how people expect to operate their model aircraft.
This may be the "new" way of operating in the SFRA around DC-it remains to be seen how AMA and others will consider operations at other AMA Chartered clubs
And yes I have read the thoughts that we can "redesign" some flying maneuvers wrt competition-which while possible, certainly doesn't address how people expect to operate their model aircraft.
This may be the "new" way of operating in the SFRA around DC-it remains to be seen how AMA and others will consider operations at other AMA Chartered clubs
02-09-2016, 12:31 PM
#9
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
DMichael,
Granted I'm not in your area, but the doom and gloom has been here before the FAA issue, and will be here afterwards. Mine was more of a general comment about the constant negativity when it comes to the AMA on these boards.
As for the negotiations, I guess we'll presume there were some. Really at the end of the day the AMA didn't go in wielding any leverage really, at least not that I'm aware of. If anything, they went in with a suit going forward, so that they came away with something I think is a victory. Compromise was probably inevitable and I don't know that they could get everything they wanted. The needs of the masses might have won out here.
That being said...I think this is yet another opportunity for the leadership in that district to continue their work not only with the FAA, but now more importantly, the clubs closest to your areas that do not have the limitations. They certainly can't force clubs to accept new members or change the way they operate but they can certainly get in there and get some discussions going...perhaps some gentle persuasion or carrot and stick sorta thing.
Granted I'm not in your area, but the doom and gloom has been here before the FAA issue, and will be here afterwards. Mine was more of a general comment about the constant negativity when it comes to the AMA on these boards.
As for the negotiations, I guess we'll presume there were some. Really at the end of the day the AMA didn't go in wielding any leverage really, at least not that I'm aware of. If anything, they went in with a suit going forward, so that they came away with something I think is a victory. Compromise was probably inevitable and I don't know that they could get everything they wanted. The needs of the masses might have won out here.
That being said...I think this is yet another opportunity for the leadership in that district to continue their work not only with the FAA, but now more importantly, the clubs closest to your areas that do not have the limitations. They certainly can't force clubs to accept new members or change the way they operate but they can certainly get in there and get some discussions going...perhaps some gentle persuasion or carrot and stick sorta thing.
02-09-2016, 12:34 PM
#10
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
For those who don't fly model aircraft that are currently flown above 400 feet-I understand why you all don't think this is restrictive. For those who DO fly model aircraft above 400 feet (Gliders, Pattern, IMAC, Turbine fixed wing), this will cause concern.
And yes I have read the thoughts that we can "redesign" some flying maneuvers wrt competition-which while possible, certainly doesn't address how people expect to operate their model aircraft.
This may be the "new" way of operating in the SFRA around DC-it remains to be seen how AMA and others will consider operations at other AMA Chartered clubs
And yes I have read the thoughts that we can "redesign" some flying maneuvers wrt competition-which while possible, certainly doesn't address how people expect to operate their model aircraft.
This may be the "new" way of operating in the SFRA around DC-it remains to be seen how AMA and others will consider operations at other AMA Chartered clubs
How many clubs in this area hosted Glider, turbine, and IMAC events prior to this year?
02-09-2016, 01:53 PM
#14
My Feedback: (5)
I'm mostly plugged into the IMAC events- I know there were two IMAC events in the SFRA last year. I think there was a glider event too. But honestly, any club event or even just any day at the field- unless you are flying a small plane or quad- you are going over 400 feet even if you don't think you are. We will adapt- and, as I said, not unhappy with the AMA. I personally am friends with some of the local AMA reps- I am just unhappy with the situation. I have just in one fell swoop lost my field and many of the fields in the surrounding area if I choose to want to continue to fly my planes the way I always have... how many can say that?
It's easy to sit in an area that's not currently affected and think we shouldn't complain (not aimed at you, Porcia, but when I see posts mocking folks who are complaining as if the "sky is falling"- I believe that is an unkind position to take). It will be different when it happens to you....
It's easy to sit in an area that's not currently affected and think we shouldn't complain (not aimed at you, Porcia, but when I see posts mocking folks who are complaining as if the "sky is falling"- I believe that is an unkind position to take). It will be different when it happens to you....
Last edited by DMichael; 02-09-2016 at 02:02 PM.
02-09-2016, 02:28 PM
#15
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What Franklin doesn't understand is there are many field across the country that have a hard 400 foot cap that fly Turbine, IMAC not so much. But it is possible with a few rules changes. It isn't a start, it is progress forward for us as modelers to continue to keep flying.
02-09-2016, 03:05 PM
#16
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Under the new procedures, hobbyists and recreational unmanned aircraft operators can fly aircraft that weigh less than 55 lbs. (including any attachments such as a camera) in the area between 15 and 30 miles of Washington, D.C. if the aircraft are registered and marked, and they follow specific operating conditions. The operating conditions require them to fly 400 feet or lower above the ground, stay in the operator's line of sight, only fly in clear conditions, and avoid other aircraft."
Is this the future?
Mike
Is this the future?
Mike
02-09-2016, 04:01 PM
#17
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
"Under the new procedures, hobbyists and recreational unmanned aircraft operators can fly aircraft that weigh less than 55 lbs. (including any attachments such as a camera) in the area between 15 and 30 miles of Washington, D.C. if the aircraft are registered and marked, and they follow specific operating conditions. The operating conditions require them to fly 400 feet or lower above the ground, stay in the operator's line of sight, only fly in clear conditions, and avoid other aircraft."
Is this the future?
Mike
Is this the future?
Mike
02-09-2016, 04:03 PM
#18
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
I'm mostly plugged into the IMAC events- I know there were two IMAC events in the SFRA last year. I think there was a glider event too. But honestly, any club event or even just any day at the field- unless you are flying a small plane or quad- you are going over 400 feet even if you don't think you are. We will adapt- and, as I said, not unhappy with the AMA. I personally am friends with some of the local AMA reps- I am just unhappy with the situation. I have just in one fell swoop lost my field and many of the fields in the surrounding area if I choose to want to continue to fly my planes the way I always have... how many can say that?
It's easy to sit in an area that's not currently affected and think we shouldn't complain (not aimed at you, Porcia, but when I see posts mocking folks who are complaining as if the "sky is falling"- I believe that is an unkind position to take). It will be different when it happens to you....
It's easy to sit in an area that's not currently affected and think we shouldn't complain (not aimed at you, Porcia, but when I see posts mocking folks who are complaining as if the "sky is falling"- I believe that is an unkind position to take). It will be different when it happens to you....
02-09-2016, 06:09 PM
#20
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike
02-09-2016, 07:06 PM
#21
I fear that it'll come to class B & C airports next if the near misses with airliners don't taper off soon.
02-09-2016, 10:50 PM
#22
I agree and in the end I think the FAA will get the rules it wants i.e. the 400' limit and other things at many of the flying sites even if they have to do a shut down and negotiate a reopening like they did in DC.
02-10-2016, 04:11 AM
#24
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: El Paso,
TX
Posts: 5,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02-10-2016, 04:39 AM
#25
Banned
My Feedback: (8)
Is it any different than the way the AMA worked with the FAA before? What is unclear about the rules? The 400ft issue was worked out for 99.99% of the membership. It's different for this group of clubs given the proximity to the DC area. That's just the way that it is. I'm guessing this is somehow the AMA's fault, another failure of theirs, their inability to get everything they want..... but I believe this will be the best result the folks in DC area can hope for as of now.