Definition of Airport and Source of Law

[BHRC4556]

Is any airstrip an airport? In other words, private airstrips at a person's home. Most places I will fly are within 5 miles of these.
Air Map shows all of these as Airports with a 5 mile radius'. The FAA app shows some with 5 miles radius' and some just the location of the private strip with no radius around it.

Does anyone know where the laws pertaining to drones can be found in the U.S. Code or Code of Federal Regulations?

If anyone here is an attorney, I'm trying to learn the laws. I'm a 2L at Maine Law and am taking Legislative and Administrative Law this semester.

 

[tcope]

You can do a Google search and find the definition pretty easy.I looked it up a few months ago and it was very broad. Pretty much anywhere an aircraft can take off and land.

Personally, I ignore the helipads and very small airports and only call the ones that show up on DJI's map. Is this technically following the law? No.

 

[jdharrin]

As a hobbyist, I notify every public and private airport and helipad identified in every app possible (b4uFly, AirMap, Hover, etc.) just to make sure I have my bases covered. Although I have my Part 107 certificate, I haven't flown under it yet...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

As far as I know if its not on a sectional or on the FAA airport directory (which usually means it has an airport identifier) it is not an "official" airstrip.

As far as flying as a hobbyist/107. I have my 107 license (I'm also a commercial pilot). Every time I fly I consider myself under Part 107 (I have a large lot behind my house and am within 5 miles of 3 helipads) whether I'm doing an actual paying job or going out "testing" my aircraft or flying "107 proficiency," in conjunction with my business. There is not a "Part 107 monitor" who is going to police when a 107 operator is flying recreationally or conducting an operation pertaining to the certificate. In other words you could fly "recreartionally" under the guise of part 107 and there is little argument to say otherwise. To cover myself I maintain a logbook and log all my flight time as I would when flying a manned fixed wing aircraft.

My 2 cents...

 

[jdharrin]

Hi Flyboyj. I understand what you're saying about their being very little oversight. I'm still reading up on all of this but I'm sure it won't be the FAA you need to worry about but your local police. The general population only knows to call the police if they want to complain about drones flying in the area.

I found a document outlining the FAA's Guidance for Law Enforcement (see the link below) that explains what they need to do when investigating drone complaints. The first thing is to determine the type of flight (hobbyist or Part 107). The second is to see if the pilot notified the local airports. Stating you are flying as a hobbyist and that you didn't notify the airports is grounds for losing your Part 107 certificate.

Like you, I maintain a detailed Flight log on all my hardware, maintenance records and flight logs. I recommend you add this PDF to the back of the book (as I did) so you can show any officer that shows up that you know as much (or more) than he/she does about flying your drone...

https://www.faa.gov/uas/resources/law_enforcement/media/FAA_UAS-PO_LEA_Guidance.pdf

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The first thing is to determine the type of flight (hobbyist or Part 107). The second is to see if the pilot notified the local airports. Stating you are flying as a hobbyist and that you didn't notify the airports is grounds for losing your Part 107 certificate.

So you maintain your flight is under Part 107, end of story. If a local police officer wants to argue that fact (which I doubt will ever happen) you pull up the airman's bill of rights, tell him this is an FAA issue and call the local FSDO to determine if enforcement action is warranted. Unless you're violating a local ordinance, there's little that can be done by local LE with regards to FAR 101 or 107 enforcement at a local level (unless you've been doing something incredibly stupid), BUT if asked to terminate a flight by LE, I would do so as the cop has the gun and will win in the short term. Bottom line, the only person who can "spill the beans" regarding if your flight is a 107 vs. 101 flight is YOU! That's why every time I fly, even if its in the open lot behind my house, "flying proficiency", "testing my camera," or "verifying telemetry," it's a Part 107 flight. My story and I'm sticking to it and I'd bet my 107 as well as my commercial pilot's license on this as well.

BTW - well aware of that PDF, version 4 will be out soon. Its also "guidance" not "regulatory".

 

[rvrrat14]

....My personal logbook states when I"m flying RECREATIONAL.

 

[jdharrin]

Wow, somewhat unbelievable how much you can read into other's people's posts. As I said earlier, I have a Part 107 certificate, but thus far, I haven't and probably won't ever, fly under that banner. There's no money to be made in Northern Virginia that's worth the time and effort to get flight clearance.

Concerning the police, them visiting will probably never be an issue unless they get a complaint about your drone flight. When they show up, they don't argue as stated in your post, they will investigate by asking questions. My comment about adding the material to your log book wasn't to flash it and fight with the police, but to demonstrate you have some background on what you're doing. I assure you, if someone called the police to complain, the police will tell you to recall your bird and stop flying. They won't give a crap why you're flying...

 

[anotherlab]

Wow, somewhat unbelievable how much you can read into other's people's posts. As I said earlier, I have a Part 107 certificate, but thus far, I haven't and probably won't ever, fly under that banner. There's no money to be made in Northern Virginia that's worth the time and effort to get flight clearance.

Concerning the police, them visiting will probably never be an issue unless they get a complaint about your drone flight. When they show up, they don't argue as stated in your post, they will investigate by asking questions. My comment about adding the material to your log book wasn't to flash it and fight with the police, but to demonstrate you have some background on what you're doing. I assure you, if someone called the police to complain, the police will tell you to recall your bird and stop flying. They won't give a crap why you're flying...

Sometimes the police will stop to check out what you are doing in response to complaint and it ends there. That's been my experience.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

JD - appreciate your comments but if I'm understanding your posts, again, I think you're over thinking this. FAR 101 and 107 have their loopholes as I tried to show. Interpret my message as you will but I'm trying to show the quagmire that currently exists.

I've been in aviation for 40 years, flying airplanes for over 20 and the current FAR 101/ 107 regs as they sit now are the most screwed up FARs I've ever seen.

Too bad you don't see any market for your certificate in your part of the country. I've been flying independently (part time of course) and with Drone Base and have done pretty well this summer - a good source of "beer money," but I sure as heck won't quit my day job.

 

[jc15]

I've been in aviation for 40 years, flying airplanes for over 20 and the current FAR 101/ 107 regs as they sit now are the most screwed up FARs I've ever seen.

"Screwed up" how?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

"Screwed up" how?

While 107 imposes enforceable restrictions (and IMO reasonable) on licensed drone pilots, 101 does not and 101 is basically non-enforceable, particularly FAR 101.41(e), the infamous 5 mile rule. It is an open-ended regulation written by politicians who knew little about aviation or model aircraft.

I just showed what I call the 101/107 loophole here. A licensed 107 pilot could call every one of his/her flights a 107 flight even though they may be actually flying recreationally.

 

[jc15]

A licensed 107 pilot could call every one of his/her flights a 107 flight even though they may be actually flying recreationally.

I do, for the same reasons I fly IFR in VFR conditions under part 91.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I do, for the same reasons I fly IFR in VFR conditions under part 91.

Excellent analogy!!!!

 

[jdharrin]

Personal opinion here. I don't believe the FAA has had the slightest idea over the last few years on how to deal with regulating millions of drones impeding on the national airspace. I think the only reason they passed Part 107 last August was, some big money players (ie Google, Amazon, the pizza shops, etc.) pressured Congress, who then forced the FAA's hand to get something out there resembling initial drone flight guidance. Now, with the FAA making everyone submit waiver applications with justification for approval, what they're really doing is gathering information from Part 107 pilots on what to put into the next set of UAS regulations. The input from a few thousand applicants will basically determine what this budding industry is willing to "put up with" or tolerate to enjoy their craft, so to speak. In my view, the FAA has things turned around. The general hobbyist should face more restrictions and pilots that take the time to study and pass an FAA certification exam should have many of those restrictions lifted. Of course, the FAA had all those AMA lobbyists up in arms...

 

[rvrrat14]

I've spoken with some rec/modelers and nice as they can be and skilled. But not all know the rules they're supposed to be regulated by. I could see where 107 grows in mandatory membership in the future.

 

[Just Mark]

I've spoken with some rec/modelers and nice as they can be and skilled. But not all know the rules they're supposed to be regulated by. I could see where 107 grows in mandatory membership in the future.

It could, but as far as I know, that would take an act of congress, since it was there direction to the FAA (through legislation) to provide special status for model aircraft flying.

No one has ever confused me for a political scientist, so if my limited understanding of the FAA and Congress is mixed up, i apologize in advance.

 

[jdharrin]

I just renewed my lapsed AMA membership a few days ago, primarily for the liability insurance they offer their hobbyists. $2.5M is well worth the $75 a year. It doesn't cover Part 107 flights, but... Since the AMA received the recognition as a CBO (community based organization), they've added quite a bit of drone material to their website. It appears the National level wants to engage and represent the drone community, yet few, if any, of their clubs support drones. I called four local clubs within 75 miles of Northern Virginia and none let drones fly on their campus. It seems stand-alone drone clubs will need to start up...

 

[Just Mark]

I called four local clubs within 75 miles of Northern Virginia and none let drones fly on their campus. It seems stand-alone drone clubs will need to start up...

That really sucks. Hopefully they will change their policy.

Thanks for the info about the liability insurance. Too bad they don't insure for part 107 flights.

 

[Rcave]

As a hobbyist, I notify every public and private airport and helipad identified in every app possible (b4uFly, AirMap, Hover, etc.) just to make sure I have my bases covered. Although I have my Part 107 certificate, I haven't flown under it yet...