cj_rumley

Al,

Bear in mind that 5-mile rule does not stand by itself, i.e., it is a condition attached to the special rule "the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if—" stated in the General paragraph. I probably should not have omitted parts (1) - (4), so here they are

These conditions will only apply if you are exercising the option to bypass FAA regulation by agreeing to control by a (the) CBO. If you are okay with FAA rules and regulations and so don't feel the need for the CBO exemption, these rules won't concern you. Of course we have not yet seen the sUAS NPRM, so can't know if what FAA may impose will be more or less restrictive that what AMA rules are going to be......and AMA is tight-lipped about their response also.
Based on history (ala AC 91-57) my guess is that FAA regulation will be far less restrictive than the doom and gloom scenario that AMA has propagated, but we can only wait and see.

cj

RCFlyerDan

My Feedback: (54)

I am sorry, but could some one define: CBO? Thanks! Dan

cj_rumley

CBO is community based organization. Gummit representatives don't grant favors to sole-source corporations (or try to avoid getting caught at it). Pretending to be one of multiple organizations of modelers is a ruse to circumvent that obstacle. For all practical purposes of discussion here CBO=AMA.

warbird_1

My Feedback: (61)

Gary Fitch, Executive Vice President and very close friend of mine has informed us that a final draft of FAA guidelines should finally be released in september . So that will end all the speculation and second guessing once and for all. I'm thinking it will have minimal impact on AMA members . They have worked tirelessly to insure the preservation of our hobby as we know it. WB_1

RCFlyerDan

My Feedback: (54)

CJ! Thank you! I guess I am still trying to interpret what this whole forum means. I read it one way, and my two buddies read it that I lost.....lol.

Top_Gunn

My Feedback: (6)

Yes, the language in the act about the five-mile stuff is for people who are going to use the CBO provision to get some sort of exclusion from some of the FAA's rules for model airplanes generally. But how likely is it that the FAA'S rules for people who aren't playing by the AMA's rules will be less restrictive than the rules that will apply to AMA fliers? I can't picture the FAA telling us that AMA members have to stay below 400 feet within five miles of an airport unless the airport owner (and ATC, if it's there) agree, but it's OK for everyone else to fly higher. The AMA's communications on the issue have been pretty pessimistic. Maybe they're exaggerating, but the fact that there's legislation making five miles from an airport into a magic number for some purposes, although AC 91-57 said three miles, is what worries me. In part that's because my club's field is more than three miles but less than five miles from a private airport whose former owner once kicked another club off his property. (He has since died, but his family probably won't be more positive about model aviation than he was, since it was their house that got hit, too.) I doubt that there are many flying sites anywhere that aren't within five miles of some airport. The people who think we can solve all our problems by moving away from airports are going to be disappointed.

Dan: A CBO is a "community based organization" that meets all sorts of requirements. In practice, the only CBO will be the AMA. The legislation gives people flying by a CBO's rules (and probably as members of the CBO) an exemption from the new FAA regulations, which have yet to appear, even in proposed form. One condition for qualifying for the exemption is complying with some very unclear stuff if you are within five miles of an airport.

cj_rumley

You are quite welcome, Dan. I do commiserate with your situation and hope to hear you have resolved it to your satisfaction. Also hope that in attempting to give you some useful input that may help you reach your goal for the club, it didn't get spoiled by TMI. There is often a thin line between too little and too much, and I can see as this discussion has evolved I've been guilty of doing both, depending on who read it.

cj

cj_rumley

Al, maybe I should have said I don't expect FAA's rules to be any worse than AMA's(?). [:'(]
I agree that altitude restrictions will probably be the same whether people are playing by CBO's rules or not. Congress gave FAA this override of CBO rules in the Act discussed above
It is in the interest of safety in the NAS that prompted the 400' ceiling in AC 91-57. Certificated aircraft are generally restricted to operation above 500' (except during takeoff/landing) and the 400'-everywhere- rule in the AC allows for a 100' buffer zone. Yes, I know controlled airspace starts at 700' but the big airplanes are still free to fly in the uncontrolled airspace above the 500' floor. They have a rational safety concern backing the current 400' restriction, and I don't doubt they would enforce it if they deemed it necessary. I frankly don't see them bending on this........the AC has been cited as 'Authorization to Fly MA' in much more recent regulatory material including Interim Guidance 08, and I don't see anything that changed more recently to motivate them to change that restriction...........notwithstanding the argument from AMA that they have been operating above that limit since the AC was issued and it hasn't caused any problems. The only change I expect to see from this position is that there will be no "it's only advisory" wiggle room in the way it is worded.

Can the rule be waivered by, say an agreement between modelers and airport operators? Dunno, it doesn't seem to have been considered.
Can it be relaxed in vast areas of the country where certificated aircraft are restricted to a 1000' floor and class E controlled airspace starts at 1200? That doesn't seem to have been considered either. Too simple for big city politicians, I guess.

cj

RCFlyerDan

My Feedback: (54)

To those who have contributed to this forum in a civilized manner, I appreciate it. I have learn some new information that I was not aware. Due to this new information, I guess it is best to wait until Sept, or hopefully Congress, FAA and AMA will have come together on the answers. For our Club's situation, I don't see our 400 foot restriction going away due to the field location at 2.2 miles from center, and to this new information.
I guess, for me to fly jets in the hobby, I will have to move to a more non restrictive Club, and probably one of the 4 that I belong to in order to satisfy my turbine needs and enjoyment.
Again, Thank you everyone! Let's let this forum close. It has been very beneficial to a couple of my Club's Officer and myself.
Dan
PS- House and income producing guest house for sale.....Best suited for a Foamie pilot......lol.

MajorTomski

Yes, your airport operator can request it. It would be a good thing to include in your discussions with them. I believe the GA airport south of the AMA national site has just such a standing NOTAM.

Hossfly

Hello to all posting here, especially to RCF Dan and Major T . This is just a rather funny episode of what the AA can and will try, although it happened many years ago, in the early-mid '70s or so. I remember the episode but not the time other than mid-winter and I was flying as a First Officer in the 737 during a time period when FAA and United were running a program to determine if the 737 should be 2 or 3 men crew. The Captain and I were both RC buddies, but different Clubs in the Chicago area. We were doing a 737 Turn around from Ohare to Denver and back at a midnight departure, returning at 5AM + on a 3 days per week schedule. Lots of RC time 4 days a week! HA!

Story: At ORD, FAA man comes on board. Wants to fly in back to flt. check Stews. No seat available. So he wants to fly in cockpit to check crew which was 3 on this shedule
Capt. Ted says OK but you have to use tiny,(butt and knees) seat as we are doing crew check and our 3rd man has duties to perform, so he has to have the 3rd man seat.
FAA man became hostile. Capt called Dispatch and Duty Flight Manager. Both concurred Capt was correct due to the Agreement between United and FAA. This happened in mid-winter. FUNNY NOW: In May both Capt. Ted and I, now flying the 727, were called informing that the FAA had filed a CRIMINAL CHARGE against both Capt and FO, for refusing cockpit to FAA Officer. In June the Court dismissed the Charges as we had performed to the agreement and had contacted managers to confirm. NOT GUILTY.
Then in July, IIRC, we were notified the charges had been filed with Federal District Court. Comes the court, the judge reviewed all: To FAA he stated, "These men have been found not-guilty of any charge in a lower court. UAL acted in accordance with an agreement with the FAA. Therefore, FAA, get this Bullst out of my court." End of Story!

However, never under-estimate the FAA when they think they can find something to enhance their position. In today's court system, anything CAN happen.

Many Edits to:
If still showing AA in 2nd row of text, This is my 5th try to edit. It is supposed to be FAA.

phlpsfrnk

It can also be made a part of the Airport Directory Remarks (See Example attached).

Regards
Frank

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Hmmm...not sure what the problem is here...Tried to post my concerns in the proper forum for site problems/de-bugging but was not allowed to post there... My avatar is now missing and it shows that I am a basic member now...What the heck... I hope this gets fixed as I have paid for many years now, at the platinum member level, to support RCU...

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

welcome to v bulletin. the lowest of the low in forum software.

RCKen

My Feedback: (9)

I've ran into this with several members that have their avatars missing. I've reported the problem to the Tech Staff. For other members I was able to do a Google search and was able to find their avatars, but for some reason that's not working on yours. If you have a copy of your avatar you can upload it and get it back in place.

Ken

cj_rumley

LOL! You think you got problems? Appears everyone got logged off automatically. Imagine how many folks have stayed logged on for months/years and long ago forgot their passwords.

Roboform: 'Thanks for the memories....'

cj

Sport_Pilot

Controlled airspace is only where there is control services provided and sometimes required. It has nothing to do with their jurisdiction.

The FAA jursidiction is basically this.

Public lands - All airspace from the surface up.
Private lands - All airspace from the surface up around airports, heliports, etc. From their minimum altitude requirements over all other private lands. Case in point, they can not authorize flight over your land below the minimum airspace requirements. This has been established with police helicopter's, and a warrant is required when flying them below the minimum altitude. But this is a bit gray and has waffled back and forth a bit.

If the 400 foot rule was hard fact away from airports then the FAA would be hammering at each AMA event where they have pattern contests and sailplane contests (with no notams) well above 400 feet. The aerobatic box's established in the AMA rulebook top out at about 1,000 feet.

Thomas B

My Feedback: (4)

The FAA spends very little time out in the field looking for violations with the exception of ramp checks of paperwork and licenses at airports and even that is fairly rare. Otherwise, their enforcement and investigation comes into play when there has been an accident, incident or complaint that triggers them. They are reactive and not proactive, for the very most part.


tge

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Yep, good points! Now if the FAA could just inure some organization to be a mini FAA, we then could have endless little Generals, sergeants and loyal troops to keep an eye on us...Vying for position within the hierarchy would be a new great pastime for those that only desire such authority/recognition...and from what I've seen that type of "individual"... and I use the term "individual" very, very loosely... is of no short supply...

Sport_Pilot

Oh, yes! Just like those who believe the FAA is all powerful and rule all of the sky, right down to your welcome mat! You know till recently the IRS thought they could deny requests for tax exempt status because a group had "Tea Party" in their name.

50+AirYears

When my club lost a field it had for almost 40 years to a developer, the only suitable site we were able to find in a reasonable time and cost was a sealed fly ash dump, almost 3 miles from the end of the runway of the county airport. We are also at least 50 feet over the average level ground.
One of the first thing the officers did was to contact the airport administrators and have a discussion. Since we already had a good relationship, having participated in several air shows, and working with local CAP and scouts, we had no trouble. For a while after we started flying there, we had some GA planes still turning on final over the field, but by a year later, they were making the turn at least a half mile closer to the airport, well away from our operations. We sometimes still have a problem with bizzjets and cargo planes having to make a long low straight approach,, but we have a very strict rule: full size have absolute right of way under all situations. No exceptions. Our jet fliers, and most of the large scalers, use spotters.
We also found that trying to visually estimate an rc planes altitude is nearly impossible. We've had several flights made with recording altimeters at our previous field, and very rarely did anybody come close to the correct altitude. Examples that come to mind, a 2 meter powered glider at a dot in the sky, guesses were from 200 to 600 feet, actual 2200 feet. Top Flight Red Box F4U guessed at anywhere from 100 to 500 feet, actually at 75 feet.
Just remember, in case of an incident, who will the investigators believe, you claiming you were flying at well under
the 400 foot suggestion, or a full size pilot stating his altimeter showed him at say 700 feet AGL?
BTW, the full size pilots don't always stay above 500 feet away from an approach path. I once dumped an rc plane into the weeds because I saw a low flying Globe Swift suddenly do a pylon turn away from me. At least 3 feet of his starboard wing went out of site behind some 15 to 20 foot trees separating our field from a neighboring soy bean field. He was LOW. I hope he had trouble cleaning his seat.