cj_rumley

Dan,

Not to be the wet blanket, but you ought to be aware of a law enacted by Congress last year that could monkey-wrench your planning:

A couple of items to take notice of

1) this section is the direct result of AMA lobbying of Congress, so may give you insight as to where they stand

2) item 5 is essentially AC 91-57 language except that
- the airport perimeter where special rules apply is extended from 3 mi to 5 mi
- it can no longer be dissed as "only advisory"

Suggest you wait until FAA releases rules governing sUAS operations (NPRM long delayed, possibly by end of this year) or at least until FAA recognizes AMA as a CBO under the special provisions in this act, and AMA makes its own rule covering this issue. This is consistent with the recommendations of Rich Hansen, the AMA Gov Affairs guy, when the issue of notifying airport operators surfaced some months ago.

cj

bradpaul

In agreement with the above but as always the "devil is in the details" ...................................... it says "should" not "must". So hopefully the NPRM and or AMA (CBO) will further clarify.

BYW, I find it interesting that the AMA requires a written frequency sharring agreement or 2.4G only agreement before thay will issue a charter/landowner policy to a club that has a field within 3 miles of another club field.

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

find a clu away from the airport then no trouble

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

most clubs here in california fly over 400 foot>> i dont know what 400 foot looks like>>

warbird_1

My Feedback: (61)

i'm forming a club at a local ,uncontrolled county airport . i have had great concern over the 400' rule for quite some time. first , it's pretty hard to judge 400' when your flying close to over your head. how do you enforce what you can't see? The airport manager as well as the airport board are , in their words, " very excited to have activity at the airport. i have the task of writing the by-laws on the club that's coming online soon so i have to think this out carefully. I would like to have a jet rally there next summer and the manager was totally on board with it. We can have access to the main runway " 60x3500' as well. We will be using the grass runway for class C events and club flying.This was a sweet deal that fell right in my lap. the grass runway will give us a perfect see and avoid veiw of incoming aircraft as well as radios to hear what's coming in. i like to go ballistic straight up but with this 400' rule that will be a thing of the past. https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.7...09583&t=h&z=16

allelectric

Thanks Major, Its nice to get truly good information on this issue. Our club is not within the 3 mile range. But the glide path for the full size airport is just east of us. And we all respect manned aircraft in the area. We have low flying aircraft in the area. Not as much anymore as the crop dusters are not flying much anymore. And I think that's the answer is common sense. If we are flying and an aircraft is spotted in the area. We just land. They are not usually there for long.



And May All Your Landings Be Smoooooth[8D]

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

it would also be nice if the pilots know where the field is and watch out also

cj_rumley

added to my post #26 above (Edit function isn't working right now):

[link=http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/amagov/2012/02/22/your-questions-answered-the-faa-reauthorization-bill-and-five-mile-rule/]This Link[/link] will get you to Rich Hanson's comments re the 5 mile rule.

Tampaflyer

My Feedback: (42)

watching this.. they are one of the fields in my area...

but it is also why i took my turbine activites else where...

the field is great , facilities well built, but TIGHT flying space for a larger aircraft. sur they can be flown there, but to many hazards and risks.

good luck dan, your in for some fun.

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

Curiously, Rich Hanson's comments seem to suggest that the 5-mile rule will apply only in the case of field within five miles of a "public airport." But the FAA Modernization and Reform Act provides a special rule for flying models within five miles of an airport, not just a public airport. Anybody know what his referring to "public airports" means? Where I live, it's unusual not to be within five miles of some airport, as there were 13 airports in my county, the last time I checked. (Most of the people I've asked, including full-scale pilots, guessed one or two for the number of airports in this county. Lots of people have small airports on their property.)

cj_rumley

Hey...you're the lawyer, Al

I don't understand what he said in "There are still a lot of unanswered questions regarding how the MA provision in the Bill will be enacted and what oversight authority the FAA will continue to have on us." This is Public Law and it applies to modelers whether or not they belong to a CBO. So how is anything pending re FAA authority or how they view it, or what agreements may be made between AMA aka CBO and FAA. It's the law...........I have no such questions, and I didn't write it - AMA did!

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Job security speak???

koastrc

If ever there was a time for regulation making agencies to be more a part of our lives I can't find it in our history. When our Nation was at total war with Axis we did not seem to be burdened with all these regulations. During WWII we did what we had to do. Most of the rules now are justification rules. All this stuff about regulating model air-craft is nothing more than a theoretical over reach. We can come up with all sorts of cute things to say here on the net. It does not change a thing. Any law or rule that cannot be understood is not worth the paper it written on. Laws like that are usually ruled on by the courts as vague and unenforceable.

on_your_six

My Feedback: (11)

Discussed often...if they put the location of towers on the sectionals, why not RC fields? The information should be there for the moving map systems. It might also help in the case of an emergency.

RCFlyerDan

My Feedback: (54)

Thank you CJ:
No, I was not aware of the terminoligy of the new law coming out. I was aware that the FAA and Congress were regulating UAV's, but not line of site r/c models. From what I read there that you have posted, is that posting a NOTAM is still a good thing!! That way I the Club and it's members don't have to wait the year or more that it takes Congress and AMA to get the rule approved. CJ, I have been flying at this Club for 9 years, and it has been hostle place to fly for the past two years. As mentioned by TampaFlyer(Boeing Pilot and turbine r/c pilot), it is a very tight airspace, with tight boundaries, so the only way to go is vertical. I have successfully flown my Flash out of the Field for a couple years, prior to selling it. I have also flown my CARF 44% Giles out of there now for 4 years. To fly my other jets, I have to drive 100+ miles each way to fly the F-18 or my CARF Viper. I have flown the Viper out of the field so far, only 3 flights. What started me to go down this path, is that I was working with on of my advance student's as an Instructor, and spotter for him while he was flying, and working on new manuevers. We were not using a buddy box. The President of the Club(mostly a foamie pilot, with a couple 60 size glow) is so obsessed with this 400 foot rule, that he came out and yelled at me for improper spotting for aircraft. Funny thing is, there is no rule on how to spot, in the Club or AMA rules. I am tired of the flucuating rule on this subject. I wasn't even flying, didn't have a transmitter in my hand or even have any of my planes at the field that day. I tried to get his resignation, but the BOD wouldn't support it, so going this legal direction.

RCFlyerDan

My Feedback: (54)

Since it is at an uncontrolled airport, just don't put the 400 feet in the Club by-laws, and notify the airport manager in writing. We are dealing with an ATC controlled airport. But, as I said earlier, the Club Field is techniqually controlled from the ground up, so, to me the 400 feet is irrelevant?

RCFlyerDan

My Feedback: (54)

Thanks Jon! The feild you are flying at up off of 52, do you have any future plans to pave the runway? Have to fly the F-18 off of paved, thus drive to Cape Coral or Ocala.

RCFlyerDan

My Feedback: (54)

A public airport, IMHO, means any airport that a licenced pilot has access to for flight. In Florida, there are a lot of "privately own airports" where residences that own the airport. Or the farmer that has enough land to have his own private strip. I am sure there are a lot of those in Cali too.

RCFlyerDan

My Feedback: (54)

When I was a private pilot, yes it would, thus the NOTAM for our field.

RCFlyerDan

My Feedback: (54)

Interesting, But, Mr Hanson says to operate as normal. As normal now would be to have a NOTAM placed on the airport in question.

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

OK, but the question is why is the AMA's guy who deals with this issue talking about "public airports" only, when the law refers to "airports." The provision in the law that's supposed to give modelers, or at least some of us, a sort of exemption was supposedly drafted by the AMA. The quality of that drafting does not inspire confidence. For example, the law about something that "should" be done (agreements with airports in some situations). As has been discussed at length in other threads, laws saying people "should" do something are very rare. Usually laws tell you what you must do or what you may do. And it says nothing about what happens if the agreement that "should" be made isn't.

I'm glad the AMA is trying to help with this matter: nobody else is. Still, ....

cfircav8r

My Feedback: (1)

There are absolutely no requirements for altitude all they say is you will give prior notice and if it is perminant should set up an agreed upon proceedure. I have dealt with controlled airports in the past and have found them willing to allow most anything as long as they stay informed and it doesn't impead traffic flow or safety. Talk with the airport tell them where you are, what you intend to do and show that you want to come to a mutually agreable solution. You will be amazed at how much they will be willing to do and allow, after all they are there to serve the community, and most know and appreciate this.

RCFlyerDan

My Feedback: (54)

Exactly on the Altitude! After the two incidences with the full scale reports, the Airport Manager and other gentleman were very polite, courtious. I am just trying to educate the Officers and BOD at our Club, that once a NOTAM is posted, the 400 feet is irrelevant, especially if we impliment spotters for the gas and turbine pilots, which, we have kind of done on our own without a Club rule. I know the Tower ATC will be very open to a NOTAM, even though I haven't talked to them personally. Since Florida is a vacation destination, we get a lot of out of state planes and pilots. Thus, I want to make them aware were are there, and take caution, as per the NOTAM.

cj_rumley

The "must do" is giving prior notice of your intention to operate model aircraft if within 5 mi of the airport. The "should do" is parenthetical good advice that if followed would save the bother of having to do so every time you fly. Agree that use of "should" is rare in laws (and contracts), but in this instance it doesn't seem inappropriate.
Regarding Hanson's talk of "public airports" only, perhaps he simply read into the law what he wanted it to be.

cj

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

Laws that give good advice (or even bad advice) are rare. You may well be right, but the fact that the legislation even contains advice shows how sloppy its drafting was: mixing advice and rules is sure to create misunderstandings. My concern is that the FAA may use this language to impose very strict rules for cases in which there's no agreement. And while it's true, as another commenter noted, that the law contains no altitude restrictions, it seems obvious that the FAA rules will impose those restrictions, at least close to airports. The FAA certainly won't, and shouldn't, allow modelers to fly at any altitude near any airport, just by notifying the airport that they are doing that. Even full-scale planes can't do that.

You may be right about Hanson's wishful thinking. My main concern about airports isn't the big ones. The FAA isn't out to get us and controlled airports are likely to cooperate with reasonable requests. It's the guy with the private strip who may not want us flying anywhere near his house, or who may not even bother responding to our inquiries, who worries me. The result could be a 400-foot limit near private airports, even some that get little if any use. One airport within five miles of where I fly is a small airport (but big enough to have been on the sectional chart for a few years, unlike nine of the airports in my county). A local club flew there for a couple of years. I flew there myself dozens of times and never saw a full-scale plane. The owner kicked the club out after a while though, after a plane hit his house. Under today's rules we have no concerns about that field. If the FAA imposes a 400-foot height limit on RC planes flying within five miles of any airport unless the airport owner agrees otherwise, we could have a problem.