End of hobby flying in USA?

[dangerd]

This committee is going to be the death of hobby flying if not stopped. Where is the AMA at this table? I don't really fly under 336 since getting my 107 but I would like to think that 336 will not be killed off for hobbyist in the future.
If you are a hobby flyer, I would be very concerned, and if you are an AMA member I would make sure that they are at the table next time this committee meets.

Xjet

Here is a link to the full video of the house committee hearing

 

[teccer]

This committee is going to be the death of hobby flying if not stopped. Where is the AMA at this table? I don't really fly under 336 since getting my 107 but I would like to think that 336 will not be killed off for hobbyist in the future.
If you are a hobby flyer, I would be very concerned, and if you are an AMA member I would make sure that they are at the table next time this committee meets.

Xjet
you mentioned that in the UK the height limit was 1000ft but as from 30th of June this year (8 days time) it will be 400ft the same as you and more to follow, at the end of the year>>>>>>> registration and exam

 

[N017RW]

Another ‘The Sky is Falling’ report.

I have no worries that the model aircraft I have been flying since the ‘70s will become illegal.

 

[umanbean]

I don't think there will be an end to hobby flying any more than I think bicycles will be outlawed.

But I would bet my house the FAA is working hard to make changes to regulations that will safely incorporate all these new types of flying machines into the NAS... and is doing their best to take into account all future use cases. Hobby Flyers will always have their niche, but that doesn't mean the regs won't change.

Required education and a license for hobbyists would not be a bad thing anyway... think of it as getting a learner's permit or license to drive a car.

Edit: when I say 'license for hobbyists', I'm not talking about backyard flyers of the palm-sized quads or something like a Syma x5c... they won't go far enough, fast enough, or high enough to endanger manned aircraft. I'm referring to something in the class of a Phantom or better - with big batteries, powerful motors, and a long-range.

 

[flockshot]

Hobby flying is here to stay. Nobody, and I mean nobody, wants hobby model aircraft flying to go away.

What they want, is for the FAA to be able to make the 'rules of the air' without half the world crying 336 at the top of their lungs every time it conflicts. So, the logical response is to kill 336, and they will do so at some point.

 

[dangerd]

I mostly agree that hobby flying will not completely disappear but there is big money from "flying uber" like taxi services and delivery like Amazon etc., that want to clear out the sky so they can have exclusive use and hobbyists are in the way! They will say that having other fliers in the sky inhibits safety to their new business ( and by say I mean pour millions into lobbying and donations to politicians).
Without ANY representation at the table I.e. Someone like the AMA, the hobby is screwed. And small operators like myself who shoot for photography are going to have a hard time too, as the "big money" will want to establish routes more similar to IFR than VFR and they will pay to clear out the VFR operations. Nobody is looking out for the little guys. Don't be surprised if one day you are confined to the AMA field ONLY.

 

[Meta4]

there is big money from "flying uber" like taxi services and delivery like Amazon etc., that want to clear out the sky so they can have exclusive use and hobbyists are in the way! They will say that having other fliers in the sky inhibits safety to their new business ( and by say I mean pour millions into lobbying and donations to politicians).

No-one is making big money with drone taxis or drone delivery.
Mostly because no-one has worked out how they could make it work.

 

[AeroStadt Aviation]

No need for hysterics on this. We fly our drones, hobby and otherwise, in uncontrolled airspace. There are very few rules, even for aircraft, in uncontrolled airspace. The FAA will no more restrict drones to AMA fields than they will restrict VFR aircraft to the airfield itself. Stop the panic, before someone panics.

If you really want to get to know how it’s all going, show up at your state’s next Business Aviation meeting. I haven’t heard of a single state that is anti-drone, and actually quite the contrary. State Business Aviation Associations have a lot of power with the FAA. I’m a member of Virginia’s Business Aviation Association. They are very active in promoting drones. Why? Huge revenue potential. Just as we have state registration and property taxes on aircraft, sales tax on services, and licensing for companies, etc for aircraft, I can guarantee the states will eventually require registration and other fees for larger drones. It’s big money, and the FAA is on board with it.

As the owner of a turbine aircraft management and pilot services company and a UAS services company, I don’t find any current rules to be unnecessary, nor overreaching.

30-years in the air with one close encounter with a commercial drone close to Pittsburgh while flying a jet with 6 people on board. The FAA isn’t out to terminate our hobby, nor our living.

 

[Tagmaster]

What seems a little unfair is that a lot of fun can be had under 100 to150 ft. where no other aircraft should normally be but the same rules apply if your 10 ft off the ground or up to 400ft.
I guess it has to be that way because with a lot of people it like the old saying "give them an inch they will take a mile" it is also understood that a low flying helicopter or sometimes even a prop plane can sneak up on you in a hurry. It really takes a lot of observation to be safe and if your not in an open area it is much harder.

 

[SRJ_Phantom_4_Pro]

Following...

 

[AeroStadt Aviation]

Read this, and you will understand the 400 ft cap and why it will never need to be lower.

Federal Aviation Regulation Part 91 Subsection 119

§ 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.
Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(a)Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

(b)Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.

(c)Over other than congested areas.An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

(d)Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface -

(1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and

(2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.



Also.....


§ 91.13 Careless or reckless operation.
(a)Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No personmay operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

 

[AeroStadt Aviation]

Part of the reasoning behind Line Of Sight drone operation is that it keeps the drone and person relatively close together so there is an association between the object and the operator apparent to others, including aircraft pilots.

e.g. If I’m flying my aircraft below 500 ft in an uncongested and sparsely populated area, and I see a person, I may not fly near them without violating FAR PART 91.13 Careless or Reckless Operation. As long as the drone is LOS and 400 ft or less, the aircraft pilot is at fault for any mishap.

 

[AeroStadt Aviation]

I foresee ADS-B tech being implemented within the drone industry. Simplified, ADS-B sends and receives accurate position data to other aircraft and air traffic control. Filters allow what traffic is displayed.

So, our drones have GPS. Our drones communicate with the controller. Our controllers are interfaced with a tablet device. Tablet devices have the ability to connect to WiFi or cellular. WiFi and cellular can connect to the internet. The internet can feed and receive ADS-B. Our app can display traffic on a map. The app can give audio and visual alerts.

For those operating a drone with a connected tablet, sending and receiving ADS-B position of traffic would greatly reduce the chance of mishap.

ADS-B is required in most aircraft by the end of 2020. We already have it in both of our aircraft.

 

[JoeNewbe]

So if Amazon or who ever wants to clear class G airspace for thier vision of pacage delivery they will also have to have change the FAA safty rules as they will nees to fly over groups of people and beyond line of site. So is the FAA is going to say the rules really didnt matter? Under equall applicaton of the law as a part 107 operator, will I be able to do same. Will children flying kites need a transponder.as a kite can take down a drone.

 

[BigAl07]

Your question has a couple of parts.

So if Amazon or who ever wants to clear class G airspace for thier vision of pacage delivery they will also have to have change the FAA safty rules as they will nees to fly over groups of people and beyond line of site.

If AMAZON and the other big hitters get their way they will be afforded a "section of airspace" that they and only they can operate in. I haven't seen the request lately but at one time they requested to carve out all airspace from 200'-400' and designate it as "Delivery UAS only". That would seriously put a cramp on our industry.

They would have to make provisions to attempt to avoid flying over large crowds/groups and I can fully see that being "Waiverable" in the future with the right technology etc.

Will children flying kites need a transponder.as a kite can take down a drone.

That's a bit of a stretch wouldn't you say?

 

[TheKestrel]

“This committee is going to be the death of hobby flying if not stopped.”

It’s the same every time. Whether it’s gun-nuts starting huge fires shooting illegal tracer rounds in Nat’l forests, or drone “pilots” flying over those fires (interfering with slurry drops); idiots will effect everyone else.

Point of clarification, the highest likelihood is that the actual activity of “hobby flying” will be utterly uneffected. What could happen is that hobby pilots may have to prove (via testing) that they know the law, and commit to not breaking it. Personally, I fully support that given that there really are way too many idiots.

 

[bsartist]

e.g. If I’m flying my aircraft below 500 ft in an uncongested and sparsely populated area, and I see a person, I may not fly near them without violating FAR PART 91.13 Careless or Reckless Operation. As long as the drone is LOS and 400 ft or less, the aircraft pilot is at fault for any mishap.

Not true. UAS must always yield to manned aircraft. Always.

 

[NM_Quad]

Indeed, our hobby is being threatened by the handful of morons that fly near airports, forest fires, over sports stadiums, the peeping toms, etc. The rest of us are quite mindful of safe flying and the FAA guidelines. One of the test of any law or policy is ... "is it enforceable?" An outright ban on UAVs just won't happen. With who knows how many millions of UAVs are out there these days, a ban would be a totally unenforceable law (P.S. only congress can make LAWS, everything else are agency policies which may or may not be upheld in court). Rumors of an outright ban are premature and misleading. Just fly properly and politely express your compliance should you be confronted by law enforcement, and preserve the hobby by self-policing if illegal activity is witnessed. Otherwise, good and happy flying to all.

 

[900Fusion]

I agree totally, I recently flew over a completely empty sports stadium, is that OK?

 

[NM_Quad]

The just released (July 23, 2018) FAA regulations are here:
Fact Sheet – Small Unmanned Aircraft Regulations (Part 107)
No major changes, just worded in common-sense plain language. Note it says "You currently cannot fly a small UAS over anyone not directly participating in the operation ..." That would include over populated beaches and parks, and sports stadiums with people in it, but empty stadiums would be allowed. However, stadiums are private or municipal property and if the owner asks you not to fly over their property, you should comply. In short, don't fly over or around people that could potential be harmed if something goes wrong, or who could complain about your presence. There's plenty of open spaces, landscapes, abandoned buildings, etc. to enjoy your bird and obtain wonderful photos and videos, though may require a bit of drive in urban areas. There's also places you could fly by trying not to be so conspicuous, like standing in the middle of a city park holding your control unit for all to see!