FAA's Enforcable 400 Feet = Death to Jets?
#227
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (54)
Well, I went to Page Field today, bought some jet fuel, and going jet flying New Year's Day! Going to be beautiful here in Florida! This way I can get in some of my inverted spins before they are illegal..... Or, detrimental to the jet, due to ground impact!
Last edited by RCFlyerDan; 12-30-2015 at 02:49 PM.
#228
My Feedback: (49)
OOOps I went South of the approach end of 35 Not North of the Departure end Ya Think that's the reason I couldn't find the R/C field? anyway if they are Landing on 17 Left they would still be 813' AGL at that distance out and probably higher on a straight out departure.. And well inside ya if landing from the pattern on 17R.
#229
My Feedback: (49)
Nothing I have seen would restrict your use case.
Of course if it was up to me (and a bunch of other people that practically begged them) the AMA should have banned all cameras from RC, in much the same way they ban metal props, turbines (that is why we get a "waiver"), etc.
A couple percent of traditional RC people would (unfortunately) be affected but basically ALL of the "FPV" drones could have then been regulated without dragging traditional RC into it.
This could have created the space we needed to distance ourselves from this drone regulation. Of course, in that scenario, your GoPro thing would have been illegal (I do that too and would have to stop) but it would have been a small price to pay to stay out of this drone mess.
Huge mistake by the AMA, opportunity missed
Of course if it was up to me (and a bunch of other people that practically begged them) the AMA should have banned all cameras from RC, in much the same way they ban metal props, turbines (that is why we get a "waiver"), etc.
A couple percent of traditional RC people would (unfortunately) be affected but basically ALL of the "FPV" drones could have then been regulated without dragging traditional RC into it.
This could have created the space we needed to distance ourselves from this drone regulation. Of course, in that scenario, your GoPro thing would have been illegal (I do that too and would have to stop) but it would have been a small price to pay to stay out of this drone mess.
Huge mistake by the AMA, opportunity missed
Now that might get a few riled. go for it.
#231
#232
I don't see how that would be the FAAs problem I don't think they are going to go around to RC sites enforcing AMA rules that would fall on the club officers just making more work for them.
#233
My Feedback: (10)
Ira you are not getting it.
The FAA is going to regulate drones. I think that is very clear. To me it has been clear for a very long time
We had a chance to not be classified as"drones" and therefore not be regulated. For years, the drone guys have been trying to do the OPPOSITE.
THis is the part many people new to this might not know. From the days before the ARC (2006 or 2007?), the rallying cry of the Aerial Photography (AP) "drone" crowd was "how come you are going to regulate us, these RC model guys are doing the same things".
So we should have separated then. We did, to an extent by highlighting commercial vs hobby use. This worked far a little bit, but now the problem has exploded.
We had to somehow ARBITRARILY define what is a drone, by defining what a drone is NOT. Anything short of this is just grey areas. I personally have "drones", and have flown FPV. There are already drone associations, they don't need or want AMA.
The FAA is going to regulate drones. I think that is very clear. To me it has been clear for a very long time
We had a chance to not be classified as"drones" and therefore not be regulated. For years, the drone guys have been trying to do the OPPOSITE.
THis is the part many people new to this might not know. From the days before the ARC (2006 or 2007?), the rallying cry of the Aerial Photography (AP) "drone" crowd was "how come you are going to regulate us, these RC model guys are doing the same things".
So we should have separated then. We did, to an extent by highlighting commercial vs hobby use. This worked far a little bit, but now the problem has exploded.
We had to somehow ARBITRARILY define what is a drone, by defining what a drone is NOT. Anything short of this is just grey areas. I personally have "drones", and have flown FPV. There are already drone associations, they don't need or want AMA.
#236
Ira you are not getting it.
The FAA is going to regulate drones. I think that is very clear. To me it has been clear for a very long time
We had a chance to not be classified as"drones" and therefore not be regulated. For years, the drone guys have been trying to do the OPPOSITE.
THis is the part many people new to this might not know. From the days before the ARC (2006 or 2007?), the rallying cry of the Aerial Photography (AP) "drone" crowd was "how come you are going to regulate us, these RC model guys are doing the same things".
So we should have separated then. We did, to an extent by highlighting commercial vs hobby use. This worked far a little bit, but now the problem has exploded.
We had to somehow ARBITRARILY define what is a drone, by defining what a drone is NOT. Anything short of this is just grey areas. I personally have "drones", and have flown FPV. There are already drone associations, they don't need or want AMA.
The FAA is going to regulate drones. I think that is very clear. To me it has been clear for a very long time
We had a chance to not be classified as"drones" and therefore not be regulated. For years, the drone guys have been trying to do the OPPOSITE.
THis is the part many people new to this might not know. From the days before the ARC (2006 or 2007?), the rallying cry of the Aerial Photography (AP) "drone" crowd was "how come you are going to regulate us, these RC model guys are doing the same things".
So we should have separated then. We did, to an extent by highlighting commercial vs hobby use. This worked far a little bit, but now the problem has exploded.
We had to somehow ARBITRARILY define what is a drone, by defining what a drone is NOT. Anything short of this is just grey areas. I personally have "drones", and have flown FPV. There are already drone associations, they don't need or want AMA.
do think the FAA already knows that most of the people they have a problem with are not AMA members flying at RC sites and I don't think this two tier rule that many would like to see will work anyway because if the
FAA is going to regulate RC craft they can't just regulate modelers that don't belong to the AMA and I don't think the FAA views camera use as always a bad thing. Just my .02
#237
Mr. Matt! Do you think it would be wise to make previous YouTube videos private? This due to some unforeseen rule that was broken while flying prior to this craziness and insanity? Some of them I don't want to loose, yet, I don't think they can be copied back to my Hard drive?
#238
... If my club opens its runway to light sport airplanes, get a airport identifier from the faa, then the club becomes the airport manager. The airport manager then allows RC pilots to fly over 400 and the club now controls the airspace, sorry closed to full scale at this time.
Designated airspace for RC traffic does not eliminate the problem of registration nor airspace competition between RC and Full-scale in all cases. In the past, when we had an event with many RC planes the Airport Manager used to issue a NOTAM. We used to then close the airport to full-scale planes. However, we then had full-scale pilots asking us to not do that so they could fly in to watch the RC events. Also, it used to be a real hassle to issue a NOTAM. (It is currently a lot easier with the new on-line system.) By the way, when we did issue a NOTAM, we were told to "stay under 5,000' and within 5 miles of the airport!"
Since then, our RC Club has coordinated with the local Airport Authority to identify mutually satisfactory Operational Rules so that we no longer close the Airport when we are flying RC. When we are running an event (we do 4 a year) we occasionally have full-scale pilots fly in, land on the same runway we are using and park on the end of the RC flight line to watch the RC activity. Our AOPA rep is one of these pilots.
Our Operational Rules ensure we do not have an airspace conflict with full-scale planes. (e.g. Spotter with designated observation responsibilities and/or two-way RF communications with any approaching or departing full-scale aircraft.) There is even address as what to do if an RC pilot gets trapped in the air by some full-scale pilot who refuses to follow approach protocols and fails to be making approach notifications. The Operational Rules also include an exception to the 400' limitation given the establishment of certain conditions. Our club even provides the radios. If there is a lot of RC activity going on, we go to the point of establishing the Airport's tower communications. Several clubs do this at several Michigan airports. Our operations are a bit more formalized in the Operational Rules, which are briefed to pilots before gaining unsupervised access to the site.
Of course full-scale planes have the right of way. The rules here require that RC aircraft get on the ground before a full-scale plane is on the runway for departures and before a full-scale plane is visibly in the approach corridor on arrivals. However, if an RC pilot gets trapped, they are to loiter in designated safe air space out of the approach, etc. It all seems to be working, even when full-scale pilots forget to "switch on or use their radios," etc.
We have run our operations and methods to integrate RC and full-scale aircraft in the same airspace by the MDOT Aeronautic Division Reps. They have even placed symbols on the Airport Directory Map showing where we are located on the airport. They also have put a comment in the Airport's Directory indicating our presence. Overall they have been very supportive of an RC Club flying off the airport. After all, it is vastly safer for the overall public than flying large scale RC Aircraft over houses and other occupied areas.
We also had a visit from an FAA Rep. while we were flying off the Airport. He asked questions about what we were doing at the Airport, and how we were integrating our activities with the full-scale operations. He indicated that he was satisfied and even hung around for a while to swap stories. Again, flying RC off an airport or within 5 miles of an airport can be done safely. Our regulators know that. They have been very supportive. They know that a broad sweeping rules do not fit all situations. That is why they have us coordinating with airports with in 5 miles of RC operations.
Moral to the story: Get involved in your community so that the community supports your RC Operations. Start by teaching the local Airport Manager how to fly RC. Obviously he has some interest in aviation activities. Get involved with the local school with programs that benefit the students and parents. Build a relationship with the local Rotary Club. They are the community leaders and often can also provide grants. Once you build these types of relationships, it suddenly becomes easy to approach the local "Authorities" and establish some rules that allow RC operations and other public activities to coexist. The attitude that we were here first, or screw you we are protected by the absence of laws governing us will no longer get any operation very far for very long.
#239
My Feedback: (19)
Mr. Matt! Do you think it would be wise to make previous YouTube videos private? This due to some unforeseen rule that was broken while flying prior to this craziness and insanity? Some of them I don't want to loose, yet, I don't think they can be copied back to my Hard drive?
In the same line of thinking last I heard that manufacturers of our hobby are in commercial endeavors and are technically not allowed to test or fly their stuff under the hobbyist rules. I have not heard of any of them getting in trouble though.
#240
Do they check if they have current auto registration and drivers license? Just because the state doesn't check for that at the field means that the club has to check for drivers license.
#241
Ira you are not getting it.
The FAA is going to regulate drones. I think that is very clear. To me it has been clear for a very long time
We had a chance to not be classified as"drones" and therefore not be regulated. For years, the drone guys have been trying to do the OPPOSITE.
THis is the part many people new to this might not know. From the days before the ARC (2006 or 2007?), the rallying cry of the Aerial Photography (AP) "drone" crowd was "how come you are going to regulate us, these RC model guys are doing the same things".
So we should have separated then. We did, to an extent by highlighting commercial vs hobby use. This worked far a little bit, but now the problem has exploded.
We had to somehow ARBITRARILY define what is a drone, by defining what a drone is NOT. Anything short of this is just grey areas. I personally have "drones", and have flown FPV. There are already drone associations, they don't need or want AMA.
The FAA is going to regulate drones. I think that is very clear. To me it has been clear for a very long time
We had a chance to not be classified as"drones" and therefore not be regulated. For years, the drone guys have been trying to do the OPPOSITE.
THis is the part many people new to this might not know. From the days before the ARC (2006 or 2007?), the rallying cry of the Aerial Photography (AP) "drone" crowd was "how come you are going to regulate us, these RC model guys are doing the same things".
So we should have separated then. We did, to an extent by highlighting commercial vs hobby use. This worked far a little bit, but now the problem has exploded.
We had to somehow ARBITRARILY define what is a drone, by defining what a drone is NOT. Anything short of this is just grey areas. I personally have "drones", and have flown FPV. There are already drone associations, they don't need or want AMA.
#242
Thread Starter
My Feedback: (54)
Len!
Sounds like a nice little country county airport where one plane a day is a busy day. When flying corp, I used to fly into little airports where we were the most exciting thing to show up on the ramp that day. Since it is only 3800', this keeps most Corp Jets out. Our minimum safe runway was 4000', and I would sometimes go in a smaller airport depending on total take off wt, temp, etc. Today, since it is only in the 20's up there, I doubt that either full scale or r/c is very busy. Here in Florida, even our little county airports are busy, especially this time of the year. Savor what you have, when it warms up.
Sounds like a nice little country county airport where one plane a day is a busy day. When flying corp, I used to fly into little airports where we were the most exciting thing to show up on the ramp that day. Since it is only 3800', this keeps most Corp Jets out. Our minimum safe runway was 4000', and I would sometimes go in a smaller airport depending on total take off wt, temp, etc. Today, since it is only in the 20's up there, I doubt that either full scale or r/c is very busy. Here in Florida, even our little county airports are busy, especially this time of the year. Savor what you have, when it warms up.
#243
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate NY although I often wonder why...
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having said that I'm not sure what the longer ball is.
#244
To the extent there is a successful fight to get CBO status from the FAA (if in fact we don't have it now) it seems to me a hollow victory. As soon as there is an incident, Congress asks "Why?", the FAA answers "Because we don't oversee the CBO's" and Congress changes the rule/law etc and we are where we are.
Having said that I'm not sure what the longer ball is.
Having said that I'm not sure what the longer ball is.
#245
Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have fun flying! I'm taking the Bandit out on New Years too. Let's just forget about this crap and have fun!
#248
From 20 USC 7801 Definitions:
(6) Community-based organizationThe term ‘‘community-based organization’’means a public or private nonprofit organizationof demonstrated effectiveness that—(A) is representative of a community orsignificant segments of a community; and(B) provides educational or related servicesto individuals in the community.
#249
My Feedback: (49)