RCU Forums - View Single Post - FAA says 400 class G is NOT waiverable
View Single Post
Old 07-10-2021, 03:18 AM
  #15  
franklin_m
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 4,561
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by aymodeler
Again, I am no expert on legal language, but it is my understanding is that you can never simply "waive" a law, so the FAA's answer is technically correct and not at all surprising. However, 44809 only defines the requirements by which recreational flyers can operate "without specific certification or operating authority from the Federal Aviation Administration" (as was pointed out by PopeyeCharlotte). There is nothing here that prevents the FAA from granting such "certification or operating authority" in situations which do not conform to the criteria spelled out, including the altitude limit specified for class G airspace. And based on the current draft of AC 91-57C it appears as though there will be such processes in place. Here are two excerpts from this draft:
.
"3.5.2 A CBO does not have to request the establishment of a fixed flying site as part of the CBO recognition process. However, a CBO may submit a request to the FAA for the authorization of a fixed flying site. At a fixed flying site, CBO members have the opportunity to conduct recreational flights in controlled airspace without additional airspace authorizations or operate UA weighing more than 55 pounds. Note: FAA-authorized fixed sites are the only means by which recreational flyers can fly UA that weigh more than 55 pounds, conduct recreational flying in uncontrolled airspace higher than 400 feet above ground level (AGL), or conduct recreational flying in controlled airspace higher than UAS Facility Map altitude limits."

and

"4.1.1 If a planned, UAS-only event will occur in Class B, C, D, or E2 airspace or in uncontrolled airspace above 400 feet AGL, the organizer of the event must request an authorization for the time and place of the event. Refer to 49 U.S.C. §§ 44809(a)(5) and (6). Requesters should submit all of the site-specific information in paragraph 3.5 and the dates and duration of the event via the FAADroneZone website (https://faadronezone.faa.gov/) at least 90 days in advance of the event for authorization."

The language does seem to indicate that the FAA will have a process in place to grant limited operating authority for recreational flights above 400 feet at fixed flying sites in uncontrolled airspace (presumably using a risk review process like the one that has already been used to grant such authorization at fixed flying sites in controlled airspace). Similarly, it seems like there will be a process for temporary events held in in uncontrolled airspace.

All of this hoop jumping seems to be a consequence of a the specific language used in 44809, where it specifically called out the 400 foot limit in class G airspace uniquely as opposed to controlled airspace where no such call out is necessary as the limit would be defined based on the airspace class and location as defined on the UAS Facility Maps. It makes no sense to have a law which intentionally has a process for allowing exceptions to be granted in controlled airspace (where the risks are higher) but not allowing for a similar process in uncontrolled airspace.

As these details continue to be worked out, there seems to be a bit of wink-wink "don't ask - don't tell" going on between the FAA and recreational flyers. In other words, the FAA seems to be choosing to simply not enforce the law at this time. This goes on all the time with certain federal laws. Of course, all of that will come crashing down (pardon the pun) if something bad happens, so everyone is rolling the dice here a bit.
Yep, saw that. It'll be fascinating, as I don't see blanket exceptions for all sites. What I'm happy to see is that the FAA is most definitely formalizing the process. That means the AMA and clubs are going to need to be a lot more professional ... which ought to be interesting. Why? Because you see AMA commenting all the time about difficulties with clubs getting paperwork complete and submitted on time. Not their strength. Furthermore, all those "wink-wink" clubs that just pretend not to notice are one pi**ed off neighbor complaint away from being shut down.

Point being, the regulatory noose is tightening. There's vast groups of people in the hobby (witness flite test) who are perfectly happy to operate below 400 feet. Which means AMA will increasingly become the group that serves those with "need" to fly above 400 feet. Not hard to imagine that some will tire of driving long distances to the one site in the area that has formal authority to exceed that limit. The AMA is already facing a demographic problem. There just aren't that many young people entering this side of the hobby to replace those lost. Additional regulations and requirements will only accelerate that. I suspect those groups looking to drive the hobby in one direction (out of 400 foot and above space) are playing the long game. Death of a thousand cuts, and all the AMA types that openly ignore the rules are just playing into their hands.

Last edited by franklin_m; 07-10-2021 at 03:21 AM.