astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

That's a funny way to admit you can't have a civil discussion if someone disagrees with you!

Astro

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Its’s pathetic that you think that.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

Proof's in the pudding! You proved it again in this thread. Your words, not mine. You are fooling exactly nobody.

Have a nice weekend!

Astro

init4fun

Hi Mongo, Thank You for asking, this here is the basis for my assertion that the FAA screwed the pooch on this one.....

https://rollcall.com/2022/04/21/capi...-at-nats-park/

franklin_m

FAA does not require one to "get" notifications from the AMA.

As you know or should know from completing your TRUST test, it is the recreational operator's responsibility to check for a variety of things, including TFRs. And in the list of locations where the test lists as authoritative sources, "notifications from the AMA" are not one of them. In fact, one could make an argument that an individual who operates their recreational sUAS without checking LAANC, FAA's NOTAMs and TFR lists directly are not in compliance with what they were told is required on the TRUST test.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

How exactly does this change the fact that AMA is being proactive and informing members of TFRs and FAA is not?

franklin_m

Except that AMA's 'system' for notifying members of TFRs is based on one thing: Is the zip code on file for their account within the geographic boundries of the TFR? Incomplete, lots of people omitted .. in short typical AMA implementation. Half a.... well you know the rest. In that system, there's a whole host of members that won't be captured in AMA's "proactive" efforts. For one, all those folks who live outside a TFR but fly within one.

And nothing requires FAA to give push notifications for reasons like those above. You talk about it like it's a good thing, despite the obvious problems of not notifying the right people (as AMA's system clearly suffers). Which is why even the AMA's own TRUST materials (I know because I looked) require the operator to check the authoritative sources (LAANC, etc.). And, by the way, that's how it works for all of manned aviation. It's the pilot in command's responsibility to check all information about the flight. It's a pull system, because only the pilot in command (or recreational drone operator) knows where they will actually fly.

AMA's "proactive" effort is, at best, providing a false sense of security. Worse yet, AMA's efforts may be conditioning members to rely on their notifications instead of building the positive habits that FAA really wants recreational users to develop - checking authoritative sources (i.e. what's in the TRUST test materials).

That goes to show you just how little AMA knows about building effective aviation safety programs.

franklin_m

Public service announcement here.

Recommend you DO NOT rely on AMA's "proactive" notification of TFRs etc. before deciding it's safe to fly at any location. AMA's method is simplistic and deeply flawed. . It is based on whether your membership zip code is inside the TFR boundries. It not only creates a false sense of safety - i.e. "I didn't get a notification so it must be ok" - it also build bad habits in that doesn't reinforce the FAA's expectation you check authoritative sources first based on your ACTUAL flight location (as noted in the TRUST exam materials).

FAA requires you to comply with TFRs based on where you actually fly, not where your AMA membership account is listed. In short, stick with the methods & sources mentioned in the TRUST exam materials.

init4fun

https://thehill.com/policy/transport...ol-evacuation/

In this different article I found it appears the FAA admitted to the notification lapse......

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

Ok, I will concede that you seem to have some valid points here. That said placing manned aircraft requirements onto model pilots is just not going to work. I’m not claiming right or wrong here, just that most traditional guys are going to “ head out to the field “ as normal. However I did receive the same notice from club officers in two of the clubs I have membership in. I still believe that the AMA notification plus the associated cross talk in different media outlets still has value. IMO it would have even greater value if it was done by the FAA and sent out to all registered UAS pilots. The zip code location identification still has value, as you frequently point out there are many more registered UAS pilots then there are AMA members who don’t want to travel very far from home to fly.

init4fun

This is good advice, I NEVER rely on third party information regarding government agencies and their operations, preferring to get my info "Straight from the Horse's mouth", as it were ....

Cue the "Mr. Ed" memes......

init4fun

Of interesting note in both of the articles I posted links to, the Wicked Witch of the East (Pelosi) appears quite focused on punishing someone, anyone, in the FAA for the oversight, VS ensuring the mechanism for such notifications is not in itself flawed in some way which could have contributed to the lapse. It's just so nice to see the speaker of the house and the FAA work so well together, isn't it (Cue the HUGE sarcasm smiley here)

franklin_m

Naval Aviation Safety School Graduate (Safety Management System), Aviation Mishap Investigator, & a couple decades managing aviation safety programs as the one accountable to Navy, DoD, and FAA for their effectiveness.

It's not me placing manned aircraft requirements onto model operators, it's the FAA doing it. Remember, it's the FAA that set the content for TRUST. And shock of shocks, they're putting in place the same process and expectations they make of manned aircraft pilots: that it's the one flying the thing who is expected to check authoritative sources- not rely on some deeply flawed third party process. The fact that traditional guys are just going to "head out to the field as normal" demonstrates their lack of compliance with what they were taught to do in the TRUST test. And the AMA is looking the other way. Golf clap.

Except that method removes the operator's sense of responsibility for checking sources himself - as required in the TRUST materials. It builds bad habit patterns. Effective aviation safety management systems (programs), manned or unmanned, pay attention to those things. Which is why I've repeatedly said the AMA's "Safety Management System" is a joke.

Decades of aviation safety, mishap investigations, and lessons learned shows this is precisely what NOT to do. The FAA does not push notifications of every TFR to every registered pilot even when not scheduled to fly. And why? Because it creates the bad habit of ignoring them. Some TFRs last days. What are you going to do expect an operator to "remember" the ones they've read already or send the entire list every day? Time after time after time of getting notifications for things that don't apply creates the very same behavior that causes people to hit the delete button in their inbox. Only to find out they inadvertently deleted something important.

And you know what has more value? Building the very habits and behaviors the FAA told you they wanted in the TRUST materials. The operator checks authoritative sources themselves each and every time. Not just the ones the AMA happens to think apply.

franklin_m

Excellent point. AMA also does NOT notify members of TFRs unless it specifically mentions "model aircraft." I asked the FAA if the absence of "model aircraft" means that recreational sUAS do not need to comply, and they said it does not. Put another way, in all the TFRs issued that apply to "All Aircraft," that means they also apply to "model aircraft" even though not specifically noted. They put it this way as I recall: The definition of "aircraft" includes manned and unmanned aircraft. "Unmanned aircraft" includes "model aircraft." Therefore, when some FAA rule or order or notification is applicable to "All Aircraft" is applies, by definition, to "model aircraft."

I'd also note that NOTHING in the TRUST materials tells operators of recreational sUAS that a TFR does not apply unless it says "model aircraft."

Yet another way the AMA's process is deeply flawed and, arguably, creates dangerous habits.

astrohog

My Feedback: (1)

First, I'd like to offer up some props to speed for not doubling-down on his narrative and acquiescing a bit! Credit where credit is due!

Some interesting points in this discussion. One thing that was made clear to me as a student pilot working towards my ticket was how little interaction a pilot actually has with the FAA and how much responsibility is given to PP by the FAA. The FAA assumes that PP will follow ALL the rules set forth by them, period, full-stop. To hear and see what speedy has mentioned, AMA folks IGNORING the rules, "Because the FAA is not enforcing them" is a HUGE issue and speaks to what I think Franklin meant when he stated that the FAA may, "Be giving the AMA enough rope to hang themselves with". I don't think Franklin meant that there was some sort of evil conspiracy by the FAA, but rather, the FAA respects and expects all users of the NAS will comply on their own.

Astro

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

init,
from what i have been able to read here in the hinterlands, these jumpers were the US Army "Golden Knights" display team.
i would have expected them to be operating with DOD permissions and from DOD owned and operated aircraft and under DOD air traffic control, not FAA control.
i also would have expected that several folk involved in the planning/execution of this event would be experienced enough to be aware of the notification requirements for ops in the capital area.

kinda surprising that no one remembered to make the notification attempt.

franklin_m

I can lend a bit of insight, as I did a flyover event of a "major public event" some years ago. That said, it was NOT in the Capitol region, so take below as general info only.

(1) Flyovers of public events require explicit DoD approval.

(2) The event requests DoD assets (overflight, Golden Knights, Blues, T-Birds, etc.). Typically DoD gets way more than they're willing to support. DoD books the major acts (GN, BA, TB) and then puts out a list of other approved events. Then units decide if they want to support or not. Just because DoD says an event CAN have a flyover does not mean they GET a flyover.

(3) Assuming the flyover is approved and is going to be supported, then the unit coordinates with the event and FAA on execution. Flight routes, altitudes, holding areas, coordination frequencies, weather minimums, lost comms procedures, safe areas (in event of lost comm / emergencies), clearances, etc. There's a lot of work goes into it. Also, a member of the supporting units is on the ground at the event with w/ aircraft radio to communicate, but that is solely for timing the national anthem. Who else the FAA notifies, or not, is their business.

(4) FAA controllers throughout, unless the event happens to be at a DoD facility with DoD air traffic control (I've done a couple of those too). In the latter, those DoD controllers operate per FAA rules, are fully integrated into FAA's ATC systems, etc. Only unique things they'd be able to do would be for specific waivers granted to DoD. What are those? Things like reduced runway separation, formation takeoffs, exceeding 250 KIAS below 10K MSL under certain circumstances (in formation for example), etc. Of note, FAA controllers grant those same waivers as well. I routinely took formations through airspace below 10k with FAA controllers. Which included a flight of 6 through the DC airspace for the overhead at Andrews.

(5) There's probably a written policy that governs unique procedures necessary for Capitol region. I doubt we'll ever get our hands on it, as I could see DHS considering that sensitive. Obviously the ball got dropped somewhere. But the Golden Knights (and Blues and T-Birds) do this stuff all the time, so I suspect they did all they're required to do. What happened from there is going to prove interesting.

Hope this helps.

init4fun

Thank You Franklin, I truly appreciate you sharing your experience with us about the logistics involved with such flyovers. I'm sure we average citizens will not be let in on the inner workings, but I'd really be curious to know what will change in the notification process with the FAA to insure there are no repeat incidents of this same nature.

franklin_m

Like most things, it'll likely turn out to be human error at some step in the chain. I really hope they don't "change the process," as a way to keep from holding an individual accountable for doing their job correctly.

mongo

My Feedback: (15)

kinda figured that the whole process to get a display team event was going to be rather involved, and a LOT of folks that know what to do and when to do it would be doing their thing.

that is why it is so strange that it appears that there is only one link in the chain that is supposed to inform the capital police about what is about to happen. most DOD stuff has 3 or more check offs.

Hydro Junkie

I don't know all of the protocols involved but I do know, when the Blue Angels come to Seattle in August, the FAA is heavily involved. What I also do know is:

1. Certain airports and airfields are closed for specific hours starting on Thursday so the Blue Angels can get practice and landmark acquisition flights in
2. The area over and around the south end of Lake Washington is closed to all aircraft not participating in the Sea Fair Air Show starting at approximately 8:00 in the morning until after the Blue Angels land, approximately 3:00 in the afternoon
3. Commercial flights into and out of Boeing Field(AKA King County International Airport) and Seattle-Tacoma International Airport are rerouted to avoid the closed areas to the greatest extent possible
4. Boaters that come onto the lake for the events are not allowed in specific areas until after the air show in completed.
5. There are Navy and FAA reps on the ground coordinating the planes involved with the air show to minimize risk to the aircraft, air crews AND SPECTATORS
6. LAANC, FAA's NOTAMs and TFRs are all active from 12:01 Thursday morning until Midnight Sunday. The Blue Angels leave on Monday morning using standard operational processes, not formation types that require the special FAA clearances

franklin_m

Actually, AMA is NOT sending members a true representation of the TFR; DO NOT RELY ON AMA's "version."

Note the side by side comparison below. At left is the exact text of the FAA's TFR for this event as issued. Note that para C on second page details operations that are NOT permitted. Note that it says "model aircraft." Note that it DOES NOT include any qualifying statements, no "except for...", or anything else. That means ALL model aircraft operations are prohibited. Now look at the version of the same TFR sent to members, where AMA edited it to allow activities NOT allowed under the actual FAA text. AMA is setting up members to violate the law.

As noted above. DO NOT TRUST AMA TFR notifications for this reason. ALWAYS go to the source document issued by the FAA and read the actual words. If you rely on AMA's "edits," you may find yourself on the wrong side of the law.

speedracerntrixie

My Feedback: (29)

LOL, short post as I’m headed out to a fly in. IMO that’s a pretty weak distinction. It’s my understanding that CL and FF are excepted from this regulation. To follow EXACTLY as you seem to interpret the FAA TFR would mean that it would have been illegal for my 2/12 year old granddaughter to toss her foam airplane around in the front yard.

scale only 4 me

My Feedback: (158)

Black Suburbans are on the way,, burn the evidence Shawn,, LOL,, was thinking the same thing,, Controline covered under a TFR? c'mon man

franklin_m

Does the FAA says that control line and free flight are permitted? They do not.