Originally Posted by Top_Gunn

(Quoting JohnShe)

This is just plain wrong. The FAA's interpretation says that if an airport operator objects to model flying within five miles of the airport, the FAA would consider that flying there despite the objection would endanger the NAS. All that counts is the airport operator's (or ATC's) objection: the interpretation does not call for any actual determination by the FAA that there is a danger. So if Old MacDonald, who has a backyard airstrip on his farm, from which he flies maybe three times a year, wants to shut down model aviation in the 78-square-mile circle around his "airport," he can do it just by saying he objects to model flying. (This assumes that all the airports listed in the FAA's listing of airport contact information will count as "airports" for purposes of the five-mile rule. Some people insist that they won't, but they have given no reasons, so there's no reason to be particularly hopeful).

Here is the relevant language from the FAA's "interpretation":

"...the FAA would consider flying model aircraft over the objections of FAA air traffic or airport operators to be endangering the safety of the NAS."

Notice the complete absence of any need for a factual determination that there is some danger. An airport operator's objection is enough.

And, in response to the latest bit of wisdom on this, the fact that one club has gotten an OK from one airport operator does not guarantee that the 17,000 other airport operators in the US will be equally reasonable. This may seem obvious to most people, but it keep coming up, so maybe it isn't.