RCU Forums - View Single Post - Does "purpose" determine the required regulations?
Old 06-02-2011 | 08:42 PM
  #34  
littlecrankshaf's Avatar
littlecrankshaf
My Feedback: (58)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: here
Default RE: Does


ORIGINAL: bradpaul

New UPDATE:

Here is an interesting and recent FAA notice:

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m.../N7210.766.pdf


Please note under hobbyist it states that you must fly in compliance with FAA 91-57 or be subject to very restrictive requirements.

Quote:
7. Operations.

a. Types and Authority. Current FAA policy for UAS operations is that no person may operate a UAS in the NAS without specific authority.

(1) Public.

(a) FAA policy restricts COAs to public operations as defined in title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 1, Definitions & Abbreviations.

(b) For UAS operating as public aircraft, the authority is the COA.

(2) Civil.

(a) Civil applicants must apply for a Special Airworthiness Certificate–Experimental Category.

(b) For UAS operating as civil aircraft, the authority is special airworthiness certificates.

(3) Hobbyist.

(a) Hobbyists should follow the guidance contained in Advisory Circular (AC) 91-57.

(b) For model aircraft, the authority is AC 91-57.

NOTE
The FAA recognizes that people and companies other than modelers might be flying UAS with the mistaken
understanding they are legally operating under the authority of AC 91–57. AC 91–57 only applies to modelers and
specifically excludes its use by persons or companies for business purposes.

Now FAA AC 91-57 says voluntary...... but this NOTICE says either comply with AC 91-57 or be subject to stringent restrictions
.
Now AC 91-57 has this provision:

Quote:
3. Operating Standards

d. Give right of way to, and avoid flying in the proximity of, full-scale aircraft. Use observers to help if possible.
The definition of ''business purpose'' is now a FAA issue.

I see no way that UNDER CURRENT FAA REGULATIONS, that BLOS FPV flight can comply with AC 91-57 and is therefore illegal per current regulation without a COA and other FAA requirements.

AC 91-57 also does not have the ''infamous'' comma....... is 400' AGL a hard cap, or not?

To be sure I have asked the AMA to clarify if my interpretation is correct.

Brad (changed to FAA from FCC, my typo)
Brad,

hmmm...Now FAA AC 91-57 says voluntary...... but this NOTICE says either comply with AC 91-57 or be subject to stringent restrictions
Putting the above sentence (apparently your interpretation) in your post's quote box is very bad form IMO and your interpretation is certainly confusing.