Sepulveda Basin
06-02-2019, 12:05 PM
#9076
My Feedback: (37)
If we did not allow drones (autonomous aircraft) to fly at the basin, we would not be in this position. Been flying at the basin for 25 years, Van Nuys airport was never a problem or even a full scale aircraft flying low and close to the field. You want to keep the field? change the sign to 'Absolutely No Drone Flying'.
06-02-2019, 09:12 PM
#9077
Junior Member
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow the Sepulveda Basin / Apollo 11 Field is a wonderful flying field. I hope that the club can do whatever needed to please the FAA quickly. It would be good if the field could be closed to everyone except AMA members, maybe also closed to all users except to Valley Flyers members. I think that would reduce troubles with the authorities. Can anyone suggest how that could be accomplished, considering that it is a public park? The field and area have been used for model airplanes going back in to the 1950s (I heard of such, but can't recall all the details). So the use for models predates the Van Nuys Airport. Hopefully this problem will be resolved soon.
06-03-2019, 03:52 AM
#9078
If we did not allow drones (autonomous aircraft) to fly at the basin, we would not be in this position. Been flying at the basin for 25 years, Van Nuys airport was never a problem or even a full scale aircraft flying low and close to the field. You want to keep the field? change the sign to 'Absolutely No Drone Flying'.
06-03-2019, 08:58 AM
#9079
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern CA
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bsnider8 has the problem right there the club needs to be able to control anyone flying there or its always going to be problem rule breakers need to be held accountable. If the COE will not allow responsible use they will get irresponsibility
06-03-2019, 09:31 AM
#9080
I hate to see this.. Unfortunately its pretty cut and dry. If you read the FAA mandate and look at the controlled airspace grid, ALL RC fields that fall into the grid have altitude restrictions. Unfortunately the Basin falls into the Zero altitude zone, meaning no flying at all. One of the other big clubs in Socal has been brought down to a 100 foot max ceiling (Coachella) due to where it is on the there controlled airspace grid.
Maybe all the clubs affected can get together to fight this issue? bring forward the years of flying at there sites and the perfect safety records as well??
Maybe all the clubs affected can get together to fight this issue? bring forward the years of flying at there sites and the perfect safety records as well??
06-03-2019, 03:38 PM
#9082
06-03-2019, 03:39 PM
#9083
06-03-2019, 06:00 PM
#9084
If we did not allow drones (autonomous aircraft) to fly at the basin, we would not be in this position. Been flying at the basin for 25 years, Van Nuys airport was never a problem or even a full scale aircraft flying low and close to the field. You want to keep the field? change the sign to 'Absolutely No Drone Flying'.
06-03-2019, 06:50 PM
#9085
I understand that. I was curious if you heard something from the club itself. Many clubs are operating by what the AMA has told them, which is, to continue on as before, get a LOA, etc. The Basin is a different situation since it is not a single club field and is located within 2 miles of a an airport inside controlled airspace.
06-03-2019, 07:00 PM
#9086
I understand that. I was curious if you heard something from the club itself. Many clubs are operating by what the AMA has told them, which is, to continue on as before, get a LOA, etc. The Basin is a different situation since it is not a single club field and is located within 2 miles of a an airport inside controlled airspace.
Just be careful..
06-03-2019, 07:45 PM
#9087
Hi Guys
I am Daniel Metz President of the CVRCCLUB
Yes we have applied for a LOA with the most Altitude and Radius choice for flying possible. 2000' X 2000'.
The comment page on the application allowed us to use 255 characters, so this is what we filled in. This describes our clubs activities and yearly accomplishments. "As a 501-C-3, CBO, Gold Ldr Club, WarBirds, Scale, Gliders, Jets, Aerobatics, AstroCamp, STEM Class, PS Museum Youth, Give $1500 yearly to Vets. At loc since 2001, no full scale issues, Prvt funded $300K. Fly@JC airshows. EAA co/op. 2 POTUS TFR waiver."
The last POTUS TFR Waiver entry represents 2014/2015 when the last president flew into the valley. That waiver gave us a 1/2 mile dome of air space above, and radius around our field.
We were the only club ever allowed to have a Wounded Warrior benefit Jet Event during a POTUS visit. We had 6 SS officers, a bomb sniffing dog, a FAA representative and Rich Hanson in attendance. After 1/2 hour they were having a wonderful time. I told them to order anything they wanted from our food truck caterer. The second year I called the Special office of Security at the white house again. They said "You guys were great so no problem" I have emails from all of the above too.
A interesting Federal Aviation Regulation have been found as well. It is in the May 2019 Reg. issue.
"Open air assembly of persons
Title 14 of Federal Air Regulations (FARs) para.91.119(b) says “over any open air assembly of persons, the minimum safe altitude is 1000’ above the highest obstacle within a radius of 2000’." The highest object is a power line within that 2000' radius, it is approx 100' high.
We also have joined the local EAA chapter and have attended their fly ins and meetings. By the way Jackie Cochran Airport does not have a Manned Tower, we are in E-2 class airspace. There is an inverted air space cake above us, the lowest AGL over our field right now is 1200'.
The FAA and full-scale aviation people tend to judge things in terms of flight-hours. We think the following is an extremely conservative estimate.
In making our case for the safety of our field operations vs manned aircraft, if we presume 40 model flights in a typical week, at 5 minutes per flight = 200 flight-minutes or 3.33 flight-hrs/week.
3.33 hrs/week x 50 weeks/yr x 18 yrs = 3,000 model flight-hrs with not even a single incident of conflict with manned airplanes. We think 3,000 incident-free flight hours over 18 years is an impressive number.
The last thing that we are doing now is to use the Air Maps For Drones web site. We post a flight plan for the period of time we are flying, that web based site allows a designation of "Flying for Fun"
It allows a 1000' altitude and 1500' flying radius choice. It also contradicts the drone map grid over us and says we can fly at 400"?
Dan
I am Daniel Metz President of the CVRCCLUB
Yes we have applied for a LOA with the most Altitude and Radius choice for flying possible. 2000' X 2000'.
The comment page on the application allowed us to use 255 characters, so this is what we filled in. This describes our clubs activities and yearly accomplishments. "As a 501-C-3, CBO, Gold Ldr Club, WarBirds, Scale, Gliders, Jets, Aerobatics, AstroCamp, STEM Class, PS Museum Youth, Give $1500 yearly to Vets. At loc since 2001, no full scale issues, Prvt funded $300K. Fly@JC airshows. EAA co/op. 2 POTUS TFR waiver."
The last POTUS TFR Waiver entry represents 2014/2015 when the last president flew into the valley. That waiver gave us a 1/2 mile dome of air space above, and radius around our field.
We were the only club ever allowed to have a Wounded Warrior benefit Jet Event during a POTUS visit. We had 6 SS officers, a bomb sniffing dog, a FAA representative and Rich Hanson in attendance. After 1/2 hour they were having a wonderful time. I told them to order anything they wanted from our food truck caterer. The second year I called the Special office of Security at the white house again. They said "You guys were great so no problem" I have emails from all of the above too.
A interesting Federal Aviation Regulation have been found as well. It is in the May 2019 Reg. issue.
"Open air assembly of persons
Title 14 of Federal Air Regulations (FARs) para.91.119(b) says “over any open air assembly of persons, the minimum safe altitude is 1000’ above the highest obstacle within a radius of 2000’." The highest object is a power line within that 2000' radius, it is approx 100' high.
We also have joined the local EAA chapter and have attended their fly ins and meetings. By the way Jackie Cochran Airport does not have a Manned Tower, we are in E-2 class airspace. There is an inverted air space cake above us, the lowest AGL over our field right now is 1200'.
The FAA and full-scale aviation people tend to judge things in terms of flight-hours. We think the following is an extremely conservative estimate.
In making our case for the safety of our field operations vs manned aircraft, if we presume 40 model flights in a typical week, at 5 minutes per flight = 200 flight-minutes or 3.33 flight-hrs/week.
3.33 hrs/week x 50 weeks/yr x 18 yrs = 3,000 model flight-hrs with not even a single incident of conflict with manned airplanes. We think 3,000 incident-free flight hours over 18 years is an impressive number.
The last thing that we are doing now is to use the Air Maps For Drones web site. We post a flight plan for the period of time we are flying, that web based site allows a designation of "Flying for Fun"
It allows a 1000' altitude and 1500' flying radius choice. It also contradicts the drone map grid over us and says we can fly at 400"?
Dan
06-04-2019, 07:52 AM
#9089
My Feedback: (11)
I understand it is law as well. Our jets are being blamed as well as the drones. Because the jets are fast, noisy, and use smoke.
The Valley Flyers are working with the park district to keep the field open. The latest update as of yesterday, is they are working to have at least a 250' max altitude. No landing approaches from the north past the end of the runway. No take offs headed north should the wind direction change. No flying over the golf course.
Some options being looked at:
1. Move the runway further south, of course this is expensive.
2. Field becomes organized under Valley Flyers
3. AMA is required for anyone flying there
4. The electric flying area north of the pits and runway would be closed
This information was provided at our local club meeting last night by a Valley Flyers member who is directly involved.
Hope we can get this resolved.
Jeff
The Valley Flyers are working with the park district to keep the field open. The latest update as of yesterday, is they are working to have at least a 250' max altitude. No landing approaches from the north past the end of the runway. No take offs headed north should the wind direction change. No flying over the golf course.
Some options being looked at:
1. Move the runway further south, of course this is expensive.
2. Field becomes organized under Valley Flyers
3. AMA is required for anyone flying there
4. The electric flying area north of the pits and runway would be closed
This information was provided at our local club meeting last night by a Valley Flyers member who is directly involved.
Hope we can get this resolved.
Jeff
06-04-2019, 08:40 AM
#9090
Originally Posted by [email protected]
It allows a 1000' altitude and 1500' flying radius choice. It also contradicts the drone map grid over us and says we can fly at 400"?
Dan
But overall you sound like you have things well under control and this is why I was asking since the statements seemed to indicate a similar issue as the Basin. Your situation is entirely different than the Basin's.
Good luck to you.
06-04-2019, 08:46 AM
#9091
Thank you Bill,
Your comments are duly noted. We are trying very hard to keep what we have created.
I will download that app now. I wish there was a NOTAM based app, that talked to the the full scale guys real time.
I appreciate your endorsement and I will keep everyone posted.
Dan
Your comments are duly noted. We are trying very hard to keep what we have created.
I will download that app now. I wish there was a NOTAM based app, that talked to the the full scale guys real time.
I appreciate your endorsement and I will keep everyone posted.
Dan
06-04-2019, 11:38 AM
#9094
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Woodland Hills,
CA
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand it is law as well. Our jets are being blamed as well as the drones. Because the jets are fast, noisy, and use smoke.
The Valley Flyers are working with the park district to keep the field open. The latest update as of yesterday, is they are working to have at least a 250' max altitude. No landing approaches from the north past the end of the runway. No take offs headed north should the wind direction change. No flying over the golf course.
Some options being looked at:
1. Move the runway further south, of course this is expensive.
2. Field becomes organized under Valley Flyers
3. AMA is required for anyone flying there
4. The electric flying area north of the pits and runway would be closed
This information was provided at our local club meeting last night by a Valley Flyers member who is directly involved.
Hope we can get this resolved.
Jeff
The Valley Flyers are working with the park district to keep the field open. The latest update as of yesterday, is they are working to have at least a 250' max altitude. No landing approaches from the north past the end of the runway. No take offs headed north should the wind direction change. No flying over the golf course.
Some options being looked at:
1. Move the runway further south, of course this is expensive.
2. Field becomes organized under Valley Flyers
3. AMA is required for anyone flying there
4. The electric flying area north of the pits and runway would be closed
This information was provided at our local club meeting last night by a Valley Flyers member who is directly involved.
Hope we can get this resolved.
Jeff
06-04-2019, 12:47 PM
#9095
Originally Posted by [email protected]
Hi Bill
Can I post a Notam on this site? You can send me a private message if you wish.
Dan
Can I post a Notam on this site? You can send me a private message if you wish.
Dan
06-04-2019, 02:04 PM
#9096
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: murrieta,
CA
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand it is law as well. Our jets are being blamed as well as the drones. Because the jets are fast, noisy, and use smoke.
The Valley Flyers are working with the park district to keep the field open. The latest update as of yesterday, is they are working to have at least a 250' max altitude. No landing approaches from the north past the end of the runway. No take offs headed north should the wind direction change. No flying over the golf course.
Some options being looked at:
1. Move the runway further south, of course this is expensive.
2. Field becomes organized under Valley Flyers
3. AMA is required for anyone flying there
4. The electric flying area north of the pits and runway would be closed
This information was provided at our local club meeting last night by a Valley Flyers member who is directly involved.
Hope we can get this resolved.
Jeff
The Valley Flyers are working with the park district to keep the field open. The latest update as of yesterday, is they are working to have at least a 250' max altitude. No landing approaches from the north past the end of the runway. No take offs headed north should the wind direction change. No flying over the golf course.
Some options being looked at:
1. Move the runway further south, of course this is expensive.
2. Field becomes organized under Valley Flyers
3. AMA is required for anyone flying there
4. The electric flying area north of the pits and runway would be closed
This information was provided at our local club meeting last night by a Valley Flyers member who is directly involved.
Hope we can get this resolved.
Jeff
06-04-2019, 02:18 PM
#9097
I also think that perhaps your club could become affiliated with Cal State North Ridge to develop a STEM Drone school at that site. After all if you cannot beat them, join them. It seems that the AMA now calls all of our planes, Jets included "Drones".
Re-incorporate as a 501-C-3 as that is one of the base requirements for becoming a CBO. Just a suggestion!
Perhaps this is the reason they avoid that area?
Maybe this can help. A interesting Federal Aviation Regulation have been found as well. It is in the May 2019 Reg. issue. Use it as a supporting REG for your field? Although I do not think that Van Nuys airport would mandate that steep of a take off nor approach.
"Open air assembly of persons
Title 14 of Federal Air Regulations (FARs) para.91.119(b) says “over any open air assembly of persons, the minimum safe altitude is 1000’ above the highest obstacle within a radius of 2000’."
Dan
Re-incorporate as a 501-C-3 as that is one of the base requirements for becoming a CBO. Just a suggestion!
Perhaps this is the reason they avoid that area?
Maybe this can help. A interesting Federal Aviation Regulation have been found as well. It is in the May 2019 Reg. issue. Use it as a supporting REG for your field? Although I do not think that Van Nuys airport would mandate that steep of a take off nor approach.
"Open air assembly of persons
Title 14 of Federal Air Regulations (FARs) para.91.119(b) says “over any open air assembly of persons, the minimum safe altitude is 1000’ above the highest obstacle within a radius of 2000’."
Dan
06-04-2019, 07:14 PM
#9098
Originally Posted by [email protected]
It seems that the AMA now calls all of our planes, Jets included "Drones".
06-04-2019, 08:22 PM
#9099
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: murrieta,
CA
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But I don't fly - "unmanned aerial systems", I, me, a person operates via remote control, using a radio transmitter, miniature aircraft. My operation of said aircraft is not autonomous or at anytime (other than during periods of equipment failure) out of my direct control. It is true that I don't fly a "man-carying" aircraft at this location, but I am in constant control of said aircraft non the less. It is "manned" by me at all times while in the sky via remote control. I'm just saying in different ways to try to get a point across.
06-04-2019, 09:03 PM
#9100
But I don't fly - "unmanned aerial systems", I, me, a person operates via remote control, using a radio transmitter, miniature aircraft. My operation of said aircraft is not autonomous or at anytime (other than during periods of equipment failure) out of my direct control. It is true that I don't fly a "man-carying" aircraft at this location, but I am in constant control of said aircraft non the less. It is "manned" by me at all times while in the sky via remote control. I'm just saying in different ways to try to get a point across.