FAA ceiling on R/C
#51
My Feedback: (46)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Bridgewater,
NJ
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: rcpattern
I was at a MAJOR UAV conference in New Mexico last week. The idiot with the first person view goggles flying around New York a couple of weeks ago, did not do the R/C guys any favors at all. DHS and the FAA were both very unhappy with that. I don't know how it will affect the overall outcome, but it certainly didn't help our community at all,
Arch
I was at a MAJOR UAV conference in New Mexico last week. The idiot with the first person view goggles flying around New York a couple of weeks ago, did not do the R/C guys any favors at all. DHS and the FAA were both very unhappy with that. I don't know how it will affect the overall outcome, but it certainly didn't help our community at all,
Arch
#52
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R
I think the damage will be done by way of the FAA not being in a mood to be more lenient. What I mean is that the rules are likely pretty well fleshed out right now from rumors I have heard. But as the review process goes on internally if there are any questions like "Do we really need to be that strict?. The answer will be "yes" and the video will be the proof.
I think the damage will be done by way of the FAA not being in a mood to be more lenient. What I mean is that the rules are likely pretty well fleshed out right now from rumors I have heard. But as the review process goes on internally if there are any questions like "Do we really need to be that strict?. The answer will be "yes" and the video will be the proof.
#53
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot
That said if it was against FAA regs, then writing more would not have caught him.
That said if it was against FAA regs, then writing more would not have caught him.
As far as this incident goes, I assume that he likely transited airspace where it may have been possible to encounter F/S traffic and given his lack of "see & avoid" ability due to operating beyond Visual Line of Sight (VLOS) then I suspect this is very much a concern for the FAA.
#54
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: J Lachowski
Only thing going in our favor from this incident is that he was not, from what I have been told, an AMA member.
Only thing going in our favor from this incident is that he was not, from what I have been told, an AMA member.
#56
My Feedback: (56)
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: rcpattern
I was at a MAJOR UAV conference in New Mexico last week. The idiot with the first person view goggles flying around New York a couple of weeks ago, did not do the R/C guys any favors at all. DHS and the FAA were both very unhappy with that. I don't know how it will affect the overall outcome, but it certainly didn't help our community at all,
Arch
I was at a MAJOR UAV conference in New Mexico last week. The idiot with the first person view goggles flying around New York a couple of weeks ago, did not do the R/C guys any favors at all. DHS and the FAA were both very unhappy with that. I don't know how it will affect the overall outcome, but it certainly didn't help our community at all,
Arch
#57
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
The main thing what i have heard is that the people flying in Europe fly their airplanes far height as compared to that in the US or any other country. The plane look small in the air. I think you need to maintain a certain decent distance to make the plane look better to the Judges.. Going way up at a great height & making the plane looks small make it look bad.. this is my thought which i shared with you.
#58
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
And for those who want to practice for contests in Europe where you say they fly much higher? Are we going to be like the old Soviet Union was, who could not compete because they had few sites where they could legally fly?
#59
My Feedback: (21)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Apple River IL
Posts: 951
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
[quote]ORIGINAL: stuntflyr
ORIGINAL: hook57
Mark,
I guess Johnny Law and his lower rung counterparts like to use the "no-can-do" on people as a matter of course. Make's them feel powerful. Not all, but I see it enough for me to make such a sweeping statement.
I hope it's all easily adapted to, what our future holds.
I'm glad I'm not in Chicago tonight. They cancelled our DFW-MSP-ORD-STL today and sent us home from DFW. I went to the Huntington Harbor Christmas Boat Parade, it was 79F, calm and dry and cooled nicely into the upper 60's by 10pm.
I'm going to get that Tipo going this month and see if I can do some of those 399 foot loops.
Chris...
ORIGINAL: stuntflyr
Below 70 feet, usually. C/L are currently not model airplanes but kites. I'd want that in writing though. Park Rangers and FAA guys (except Mark ''Hook 57'') cannot be trusted to know that they aren't restricted without black and white, to the point print.
Chris...
Below 70 feet, usually. C/L are currently not model airplanes but kites. I'd want that in writing though. Park Rangers and FAA guys (except Mark ''Hook 57'') cannot be trusted to know that they aren't restricted without black and white, to the point print.
Chris...
I guess Johnny Law and his lower rung counterparts like to use the "no-can-do" on people as a matter of course. Make's them feel powerful. Not all, but I see it enough for me to make such a sweeping statement.
I hope it's all easily adapted to, what our future holds.
I'm glad I'm not in Chicago tonight. They cancelled our DFW-MSP-ORD-STL today and sent us home from DFW. I went to the Huntington Harbor Christmas Boat Parade, it was 79F, calm and dry and cooled nicely into the upper 60's by 10pm.
I'm going to get that Tipo going this month and see if I can do some of those 399 foot loops.
Chris...
Mark
#60
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
I've said this before, I think that overall the majority of people in this hobby will be largely unaffected. But a small minority will be very badly affected. Sadly everything I like to do is in that small minority. Your average sport RC guy who makes up the bilk of this hobby will likely not notice a huge impact.
IMAC, pattern, pylon racing and soaring I think are in some real jeopardy unless the FAA moves in a direction different from what it appears they are moving right now. I think best case we can hope for is a more flexible altitude cap far away from anything (airports and population areas) and perhaps even then only with an event specific waiver.
Again, find your field here:
http://www.runwayfinder.com
Then start looking for places away from the yellow and any airport or other high traffic airspace.
IMAC, pattern, pylon racing and soaring I think are in some real jeopardy unless the FAA moves in a direction different from what it appears they are moving right now. I think best case we can hope for is a more flexible altitude cap far away from anything (airports and population areas) and perhaps even then only with an event specific waiver.
Again, find your field here:
http://www.runwayfinder.com
Then start looking for places away from the yellow and any airport or other high traffic airspace.
#61
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: F.Imbriaco
Suggest you attend a controline meet and observe if they fly like a kite. Tethered flight? Well, that is a stretch.
ORIGINAL: stuntflyr
Yes, they are referred to by the FAA as being of tethered flight and are exempt from TFR's. Any other info you want to enlighten me on I would be glad to read it. Thank you,
Chris...
ORIGINAL: F.Imbriaco
If I understand your statement , controline models are'nt aircraft , but kites.
You are very misinformed .
ORIGINAL: stuntflyr
Below 70 feet, usually. C/L are currently not model airplanes but kites. I'd want that in writing though. Park Rangers and FAA guys (except Mark ''Hook 57'') cannot be trusted to know that they aren't restricted without black and white, to the point print.
Chris...
Below 70 feet, usually. C/L are currently not model airplanes but kites. I'd want that in writing though. Park Rangers and FAA guys (except Mark ''Hook 57'') cannot be trusted to know that they aren't restricted without black and white, to the point print.
Chris...
You are very misinformed .
Chris...
Oh, I see. You thought I was deriding C/L flying. Far from it, I still compete in Stunt about 4 times a year in California, building a Nats ship in Mo. The good thing is that the FAA kinda wants to ignore C/L. they seem to think the type isn't a threat.
Chris...
#62
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
As far as altitude FAA planes cannot fly less than a thousand feet in the yellow areas (and a good part of the non yellow areas). Except when near an airport on landingand takeoff. So would the FAA allow us to fly to 900 feet in those areas? I know noise would be a problem for some fields though.
#63
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot
As far as altitude FAA planes cannot fly less than a thousand feet in the yellow areas (and a good part of the non yellow areas). Except when near an airport on landing and takeoff. So would the FAA allow us to fly to 900 feet in those areas? I know noise would be a problem for some fields though.
As far as altitude FAA planes cannot fly less than a thousand feet in the yellow areas (and a good part of the non yellow areas). Except when near an airport on landing and takeoff. So would the FAA allow us to fly to 900 feet in those areas? I know noise would be a problem for some fields though.
The populated area exclusion is not related to altitude. Look at AC 91-57 which is the foundation document for much of what the FAA is thinking about right now. It speaks to operating "away from populated areas". I have read on other forums that the actual sUAS operators will be excluded from such areas as well. It's interesting to look at a sectional chart. In the LA area the Sepulveda Basin field is actually in a non-yellow area so would be fine. That is if it wasn't just a hair over a mile from Van Nuys airport!!
#64
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
Our club is just outside of a yellow area, but there are neighbor hoods on three sides, so planes shouldn't be below 1000 feet. Shouldn't the club be allowed at least 900 feet not 400 feet?
#66
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot
Our club is just outside of a yellow area, but there are neighbor hoods on three sides, so planes shouldn't be below 1000 feet. Shouldn't the club be allowed at least 900 feet not 400 feet?
Our club is just outside of a yellow area, but there are neighbor hoods on three sides, so planes shouldn't be below 1000 feet. Shouldn't the club be allowed at least 900 feet not 400 feet?
Clearly answered in Post #63. Please read the first sentence again. I am not clear what is confusing about what I wrote.
#67
My Feedback: (56)
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: stuntflyr
Oh, I see. You thought I was deriding C/L flying. Far from it, I still compete in Stunt about 4 times a year in California, building a Nats ship in Mo. The good thing is that the FAA kinda wants to ignore C/L. they seem to think the type isn't a threat.
Chris...
ORIGINAL: F.Imbriaco
Suggest you attend a controline meet and observe if they fly like a kite. Tethered flight? Well, that is a stretch.
ORIGINAL: stuntflyr
Yes, they are referred to by the FAA as being of tethered flight and are exempt from TFR's. Any other info you want to enlighten me on I would be glad to read it. Thank you,
Chris...
ORIGINAL: F.Imbriaco
If I understand your statement , controline models are'nt aircraft , but kites.
You are very misinformed .
ORIGINAL: stuntflyr
Below 70 feet, usually. C/L are currently not model airplanes but kites. I'd want that in writing though. Park Rangers and FAA guys (except Mark ''Hook 57'') cannot be trusted to know that they aren't restricted without black and white, to the point print.
Chris...
Below 70 feet, usually. C/L are currently not model airplanes but kites. I'd want that in writing though. Park Rangers and FAA guys (except Mark ''Hook 57'') cannot be trusted to know that they aren't restricted without black and white, to the point print.
Chris...
You are very misinformed .
Chris...
Oh, I see. You thought I was deriding C/L flying. Far from it, I still compete in Stunt about 4 times a year in California, building a Nats ship in Mo. The good thing is that the FAA kinda wants to ignore C/L. they seem to think the type isn't a threat.
Chris...
That's exactly what I thought. Glad to see you are a Ukie stunt pilot !
#68
My Feedback: (92)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rosamond, CA
Posts: 2,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
I just can't understand why there is such a confusion between the SUAS and R/C models. They are operated in completely different manners. SUAS's are almost all autonomous for their mission, not manually flown except for perhaps the launch and recovery. Disregarding FPV models, why can't the FAA see and understand the basic difference in operation?
I was involved in a demonstration to the rules proposal group at our club field in Lancaster. It became obvious very quickly that the vast majority of them had no idea about the depth of the R/C aircraft hobby. If this is not handled properly by the FAA and the AMA it will be for the most part, the end of the hobby. We are in for a long, hard fight.
I was involved in a demonstration to the rules proposal group at our club field in Lancaster. It became obvious very quickly that the vast majority of them had no idea about the depth of the R/C aircraft hobby. If this is not handled properly by the FAA and the AMA it will be for the most part, the end of the hobby. We are in for a long, hard fight.
#69
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: TonyF
I just can't understand why there is such a confusion between the SUAS and R/C models. They are operated in completely different manners. SUAS's are almost all autonomous for their mission, not manually flown except for perhaps the launch and recovery. Disregarding FPV models, why can't the FAA see and understand the basic difference in operation?
I just can't understand why there is such a confusion between the SUAS and R/C models. They are operated in completely different manners. SUAS's are almost all autonomous for their mission, not manually flown except for perhaps the launch and recovery. Disregarding FPV models, why can't the FAA see and understand the basic difference in operation?
I was involved in a demonstration to the rules proposal group at our club field in Lancaster. It became obvious very quickly that the vast majority of them had no idea about the depth of the R/C aircraft hobby.
As far a the death of the hobby. I am not sure about that. Certainly if the worse case scenario is applied to us then things like pattern, IMAC, soaring, pylon racing, and turbines are dead meat. But that still leaves a lot of guys able to have fun with their planes. Frankly, I do not think the FAA really cares deep down how badly they impact our hobby.
#70
My Feedback: (22)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: palm harbor,
FL
Posts: 2,232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
what is a typical ceiling for an average flyer??I mean what height do rc flers truly fly and keep an eye on the plane.sure glider pilots chase thermals and you expect them to be much higher than glow planes.but for most of us what is the practical working height of an rc plane.I am older so I dont get too high except for spins and blenders.and foamy pilots are typically very low .jets on the other hand need lots of space and height . can we actually make a flying height that is really enforceable.???how does any person measure a planes height. sounds ok but in reality I think its a very difficult thing to realistically quantify. I feel each club needs to decide when someone is too high or flying dangerously.
#71
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
can we actually make a flying height that is really enforceable.???how does any person measure a planes height. sounds ok but in reality I think its a very difficult thing to realistically quantify.
The concept is largely unenforceable. The FAA Altitude Police? Get serious.
I predict that if this kind of regulation comes to pass, it will be largely ignored unless someone presents a problem - like flying in full scale airspace near an airport, etc.
#72
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: Silent-AV8R
Clearly answered in Post #63. Please read the first sentence again. I am not clear what is confusing about what I wrote.
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot
Our club is just outside of a yellow area, but there are neighbor hoods on three sides, so planes shouldn't be below 1000 feet. Shouldn't the club be allowed at least 900 feet not 400 feet?
Our club is just outside of a yellow area, but there are neighbor hoods on three sides, so planes shouldn't be below 1000 feet. Shouldn't the club be allowed at least 900 feet not 400 feet?
Clearly answered in Post #63. Please read the first sentence again. I am not clear what is confusing about what I wrote.
#73
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
SUAS's are almost all autonomous for their mission, not manually flown except for perhaps the launch and recovery.
#74
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
ORIGINAL: Sport_Pilot
The problem is that our club field is in compliance, no problem with populated areas. Outside of the yellow areas, but too many structures for planes to be 500 feet over. Why don't you get the fact that populated areas is subjective.
The problem is that our club field is in compliance, no problem with populated areas. Outside of the yellow areas, but too many structures for planes to be 500 feet over. Why don't you get the fact that populated areas is subjective.
#75
My Feedback: (92)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rosamond, CA
Posts: 2,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: FAA ceiling on R/C
I don't know of a single commercial SUAS that does not get flown for most of it's mission autonomously. I'd like to see some that are manually flown during it's entire flight.