AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

Is This a Win For the AMA?

Reply

Old 05-20-2019, 12:07 PM
  #1  
TimJ
Thread Starter
 
TimJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 1,170
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default Is This a Win For the AMA?

https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?ne...Uo_iiRgO5lHF2c

While recreational flyers may continue to fly below 400 feet in uncontrolled airspace without specific certification or operating authority from the FAA, they are now required to obtain prior authorization from the FAA before flying in controlled airspace around airports. Furthermore, they must comply with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions when flying in controlled and uncontrolled airspace.

The new requirement to obtain an airspace authorization prior to flying a drone in controlled airspace replaces the old requirement to notify the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower prior to flying within five miles of an airport.

Until further notice, air traffic control facilities will no longer accept requests to operate recreational drones in controlled airspace on a case-by-case basis. Instead, to enable operations under the congressionally-mandated exception for limited recreational drone operations, the FAA is granting temporary airspace authorizations to fly in certain “fixed sites” in controlled airspace throughout the country. The fixed sites (MS Excel) are listed online and will be routinely updated.

The sites are also shown as blue dots on Unmanned Aircraft Systems Facility Maps. The maps depict the maximum altitude above ground level at which a drone may be flown safely for each location in controlled airspace.

In the future, recreational flyers will be able to obtain authorization from the FAA to fly in controlled airspace. The FAA currently has a system called the Low Altitude Authorization and Notification Capability (LAANC), which is available to non-recreational pilots who operate under the FAA’s small drone rule (PDF) (Part 107). The FAA is upgrading LAANC to allow recreational flyers to use the system. For now, however, recreational flyers who want to operate in controlled airspace may only do so at the fixed sites.

Another new provision in the 2018 Act requires recreational flyers to pass an aeronautical knowledge and safety test. They must maintain proof that they passed, and make it available to the FAA or law enforcement upon request. The FAA is currently developing a training module and test in coordination with the drone community. The test will ensure that recreational flyers have the basic aeronautical knowledge needed to fly safely.

Some requirements have not changed significantly. In addition to being able to fly without FAA authorization below 400 feet in uncontrolled airspace, recreational users must still register their drones, fly within visual line-of-sight, avoid other aircraft at all times, and be responsible for complying with all FAA airspace restrictions and prohibitions.

Additionally, recreational flyers can continue to fly without obtaining a remote pilot certificate provided they meet the eight statutory conditions of Section 349 of the Act, which are described in a Federal Register notice.

If recreational flyers do not meet any of the conditions, they could choose to operate under Part 107 with a remote pilot certification. Drone operators who fail to comply with the appropriate operating authority may be subject to FAA enforcement action.

Furthermore, flying a drone carelessly or recklessly may also result in FAA enforcement action.

The FAA will help recreational flyers learn and understand the changes by posting updates and additional guidance, including regulatory changes, on the FAA website.

If you are thinking about buying a drone, the FAA can help you get started with registration and important safety information.
So it would seem that no one is allowed to fly in controlled airspace without prior authorization, unless you fly at an AMA sanctioned flying site...
TimJ is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2019, 12:27 PM
  #2  
TimJ
Thread Starter
 
TimJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Orange County CA
Posts: 1,170
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

View point of the AOPA. https://aopa.org/news-and-media/all-...edium=Facebook
TimJ is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2019, 04:55 PM
  #3  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,617
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

This was far from a win for anyone, including the FAA.
The FAA has been forced(for lack of a better way of saying it) into a "knee jerk" reaction to make sweeping changes to how model aircraft are being looked upon. By putting out a set of rules on the same day they were supposed to be enforced shows that the FAA is scrambling to meet the requirements Congress has set upon them. The AMA has not done anything that could say they received concessions in the rules since the FAA has not put anything in writing that says AMA members are not going to be held to a different standard than anyone else that wants to fly an R/C
Hydro Junkie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-20-2019, 06:10 PM
  #4  
mongo
My Feedback: (14)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 2,651
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

overall, win for no one...
mongo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 09:02 AM
  #5  
Stickslammer
 
Stickslammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 319
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Well, that may be so, but I don`t see any losers here. If anyone wants to fly R/C and keep it all on the up and up, than they can.
Stickslammer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 09:12 AM
  #6  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,722
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Still too early to say. There is mention of " Fixed sites " and I take that to mostly mean AMA club sites. Obviously the FAA does not want to outright admit those sites are AMA or that AMA is the only recognized CBO. My hunch is that there are leagal implications of some sort that prevents them from doing so. I'm certain that things will be made more clear in the near future. Everything that I have been told about the three clubs that I fly with is that all three have long standing agreements with nearby airport controllers and those agreements are still valid as of right now.
speedracerntrixie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-25-2019, 11:02 AM
  #7  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,722
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default







Saw this picture on Facebook. It sums up most people's experiences with chartered clubs.
speedracerntrixie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 08:08 AM
  #8  
r_adical
My Feedback: (19)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Garrison, MT
Posts: 167
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Stickslammer View Post
Well, that may be so, but I don`t see any losers here. If anyone wants to fly R/C and keep it all on the up and up, than they can.

How About the fields that are not published on the list that are now effectively shut down? Since they are in "controlled airspace"

Did they get hurt?

Last edited by r_adical; 05-28-2019 at 08:10 AM.
r_adical is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 08:36 AM
  #9  
Stickslammer
 
Stickslammer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 319
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Do you mean the list of AMA sanctioned fields? I`m assuming there are some fields that are not sanctioned by the AMA that are legal to fly on provided the rules are followed as viewed by the FAA. As far as I know they can be in controlled or uncontrolled airspace. I think I saw on here where some R/C pilots were flying at civilian and military airfields. Arrangements and permissions had been in place for some time. All I`m saying is that if you really want to fly there is nothing stopping you. If the flying field that I belong to gets shut down, than yes, I and they who also belong get hurt. But it doesn't have to be permanent. Some who have been in it for a long time may decide to give it up. Others like me will keep an eye open to find another place to fly.
Stickslammer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 08:43 AM
  #10  
r_adical
My Feedback: (19)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Garrison, MT
Posts: 167
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Stickslammer View Post
Do you mean the list of AMA sanctioned fields? I`m assuming there are some fields that are not sanctioned by the AMA that are legal to fly on provided the rules are followed as viewed by the FAA. As far as I know they can be in controlled or uncontrolled airspace. I think I saw on here where some R/C pilots were flying at civilian and military airfields. Arrangements and permissions had been in place for some time. All I`m saying is that if you really want to fly there is nothing stopping you. If the flying field that I belong to gets shut down, than yes, I and they who also belong get hurt. But it doesn't have to be permanent. Some who have been in it for a long time may decide to give it up. Others like me will keep an eye open to find another place to fly.

Read the FAA notice carefully from 17 May 2019

It clearly has a list of APPROVED fields in an Excel Spreadsheet that is not a complete list of all fields in controlled airspace

Fields in Maryland, Montana and other states (California) have been affected, it is clearly an incomplete list
r_adical is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 12:56 PM
  #11  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,617
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by r_adical View Post
Read the FAA notice carefully from 17 May 2019

It clearly has a list of APPROVED fields in an Excel Spreadsheet that is not a complete list of all fields in controlled airspace

Fields in Maryland, Montana and other states (California) have been affected, it is clearly an incomplete list
Several flying fields in Washington state are also not listed, many being used by AMA sanctioned clubs. That being the case, it's obvious to me that whether or not the club is sanctioned by the AMA makes no difference to the FAA since all the FAA has to do the kill a club is not let them fly at their home airfield. The first airfield that comes to mind is located in Marymoor Park, a field owned and maintained by King County. Since the park is located in Redmond, clearly no where close to the "Big 5", those being Joint Base Lewis/McCord, NAS Whidbey Island, Paine Field, King County International Airport and Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, is in class "G" airspace and not within 5 miles of any airport of any size, there's logical no reason it's not listed

Last edited by Hydro Junkie; 05-28-2019 at 01:16 PM.
Hydro Junkie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 05:45 PM
  #12  
mongo
My Feedback: (14)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 2,651
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

they are only interested in listing the "approved" sites that are NOT in class G airspace.
any sites in G are good to go up to 400 ft without approval.
mongo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2019, 08:41 AM
  #13  
r_adical
My Feedback: (19)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Garrison, MT
Posts: 167
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by mongo View Post
they are only interested in listing the "approved" sites that are NOT in class G airspace.
any sites in G are good to go up to 400 ft without approval.

That may indeed be true however we are in Class E Airspace have been for 42 years and are not listed and we are not alone
r_adical is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2019, 04:01 AM
  #14  
Appowner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 945
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by r_adical View Post
That may indeed be true however we are in Class E Airspace have been for 42 years and are not listed and we are not alone
I would suggest representatives from your group get with the local ATC and see what needs to be done. After 42 years it could be as simple as no record of what ever agreement you may have had with ATC. Verbal agreements are one thing. But they are the government and they work on paper trails.
Appowner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2019, 04:27 PM
  #15  
invertmast
My Feedback: (22)
 
invertmast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: North Port, Fl
Posts: 7,727
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

The fixed sites have Nothing to do with normal “AMA” fields. They are strictly referring to fields that are within a certain distance to Full scale airports, which they are more severly limiting the altitude ceiling.

Prior to this release ALL RC flying within the airspace of a full scale airport had to be approved on a case by case basis with the airport operating authority. With this new ruling, they are providing a blanket authority to allow any and All RC/drone operations within these “fixed sites” (full scale airports) with certain restrictions, most of which i have seen involve altitude limits below the 400’agl blanket limit for the Us.

So no, your local club doesnt need to be on this list UNLESS it falls within one of the FAA selected airspace restriction areas.
invertmast is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2019, 05:47 PM
  #16  
r_adical
My Feedback: (19)
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Garrison, MT
Posts: 167
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

We are in Class E airspace non towered but controlled by SLC center 400 miles away

we have an agreement with the airport authority which now is not good enough

we are working the process to get the LOA

r_adical is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2019, 07:24 PM
  #17  
rhklenke
My Feedback: (24)
 
rhklenke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 5,770
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by r_adical View Post
We are in Class E airspace non towered but controlled by SLC center 400 miles away

we have an agreement with the airport authority which now is not good enough

we are working the process to get the LOA

Curious, what club is this and what airport is it near?

Bob
rhklenke is offline  
Reply With Quote

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service