Originally Posted by
porcia83
If the call is to go forward and fight fight fight, then be prepared to pay for that right by way of additional membership dues. Fighting the govt isn't cheap or easy. I think the AMA needs to be thinking about compromise right now.
Sadly, I think it's not a matter of IF we're stuck with a 400' AGL limit, but rather it's a matter of WHEN. Commercial drones will happen, and FAA has been directed by Congress to find a way to integrate them safely. I think it's a fairly safe assumption that that public isn't going to want them flying in the same airspace as they fly in airliners. Most manned aircraft operate between 500' AGL and 50,000. Helos operating SVFR, military training flights, and VFR over remote areas is stuff down low, then airways start at around 1200 or so and go up to 17,999, and then flight levels are full of airliners above that. So if you want to keep commercial UAS away from manned stuff, then you have to either put them very high or below manned aircraft. High isn't practical, so that leaves one choice...low.
If they're going to make big $$ interest fly low, where do you think that leaves non-commercial users and the AMA's 130,000 or so paying members? Yep. Down low. And our voice is going to be limited against Amazon and Walmart and their armies of lawyers.
Altitude separation is probably the most reliable way to keep sUAS/UAS apart from manned aircraft, and I cannot see how FAA does not use that tool. I think FAA is trying to show us the future, with the acknowledgement to stay below 400 as part of the registration process. It's just a matter of time before they formally codify it.