FAA asking for input....

[Fat Albert]

The FAA is asking for input for its recreational drone test

Recently, the FAA granted recreational drone pilots access to LAANC. Now, they want to administer a test and are seeking the public's input.

m.dpreview.com

 

[umanbean]

Interesting, and IMO a well-written article. Good to know, thanks for the link.

 

[N017RW]

Whaaaat????

I thought the FAA was trying to kill the hobby. At least that’s what some have been saying here for years.

 

[N017RW]

Not gonna argue about your misconceptions of the FAA as I’m convinced you have no aviation experience based on your perceptions.
.......

 

[BigAl07]

*** Thread cleaned and, at least for now, OPEN to posting. Let's NOT make this a personal attack. We are better than this.

Allen

***

 

[BigAl07]

The FAA (BIG Brother) is indirectly trying to kill the hobby! They will do it with so many requirements, that you won't be able to carry your Drone out of your house without asking permission! Thus, Dead Hobby.

Drone pilots around the US only have themselves to blame, due to the many STUPID acts and simply not wanting to follow some very simple basic rules! Like: Stay below 400 ft., keep the aircraft in sight at all times, never fly around major airports or controlled airspace.

If the FAA wants to test recreational pilots, they currently have a huge database with our names all over it to send out information!

This RFI GIMMICK, is just an act for someone in the FAA to justify their job!

That's a mighty harsh assumption you're making. Actually it's a series of assumptions.

A) The FAA is trying to kill the hobby
B) Drone Pilots are to blame for the above statement

I do NOT think the FAA is trying to kill the hobby but rather trying to get some degree of EDUCATION instated and some degree of CONTROL. How can an entity be in charge of keeping the NAS safe and NOT be able to regulate a participant in the NAS? If they don't regulate drones how can they even remotely maintain the high degree of safety in the NAS?

I do think that "Rogue Drone Operators" are very much to blame for the new crop of regulations and rightfully so. I've been preaching this for years now....

If we can't police ourselves then we are going to force the FAA to police us!!

And that's exactly where we are today. Not because the FAA wants to remove our hobby from the NAS but because they need to create stiffer rules, better education, and ENFORCE the rules better.

 

[SeattleDrone]

I believe in the test, I think the test should written for drone pilots and not treat you like you are going after your private pilot license. I also think the test should be free. Most of us I believe save up just to buy a good drone and then have to pay again just to be able to fly it legally.

 

[NM_Quad]

Usually, government agencies (including Congress) pass legislation with very little knowledge of the "real world" issues. I'm somewhat impressed that the FAA is reaching out to get "real world" comments from the community it serves before enacting new requirements. Not sure a written test is the answer ... on the other hand, we read almost daily on this forum of those crashing their drones because they don't use properly charged batteries, fly to battery exhaustion, fly past the point of no return or LOS, don't understand GPS vs. ATTI, fly where they shouldn't (like near airports and over people), and the like. Since they don't read the manual or bother to know the FAA rules, perhaps a test is the only way to drum basic pilot knowledge into their heads. Our hobby is threatened by those rule-breaking 1% of pilots that cause all the bad publicity. I think the FAA recognizes that.

 

[N017RW]

How do you assure a test was taken? Dealers have to see a certificate?
Not impossible but who then is responsible for putting a drone in the hands of a ignorant person?

 

[Shoot4fun]

How do you assure a test was taken? Dealers have to see a certificate?
Not impossible but who then is responsible for putting a drone in the hands of a ignorant person?

No different than a car dealer. How many ignorant, irresponsible people buy a car every year and kill someone with it? No one blames the car dealer. That only seems to work in the case of firearms dealers, for some reason...

 

[N017RW]

No different than a car dealer. How many ignorant, irresponsible people buy a car every year and kill someone with it? No one blames the car dealer. That only seems to work in the case of firearms dealers, for some reason...

Sure, no prob there.

So a test does nothing to prevent ignorant pilots from doing what they do which I thought was the purpose @SeattleDrone was suggesting.

I may have misunderstood the sentiment but was just wondering how it would help.

 

[NM_Quad]

One of the tests for any "law" is enforcement. An FAA test would be completely unenforceable. A good idea in theory, but not in practice. Buy a drone - ignore the test - what stops you from flying your drone? Only the good pilots would do the test, not the bad ones. I doubt the FAA has the resources to administer such test to the hundreds of drones sold monthly. They could put the test online to get your magic permit number. But, the answers to the test would be online elsewhere within 24 hours. There are very few incidences of the FAA nailing a bad pilot. If they don't have the resources to enforce existing laws, how will the enforce this?

 

[EdM]

Look at it from a different view. You take and pass the test and go out and do something stupid and someone is hurt or property is damaged. You have to go to court........proof you knew before hand you were doing wrong.

You ignore taking the test and go out and do something stupid and someone is hurt or property is damaged. You have to go to court........you were flying illegally so it's just another nail in your coffin.

 

[NM_Quad]

I think you hit it on the head, EdM. My thoughts exactly. It's strictly for litigation purposes. In court, "Ignorance of the Law" seldom holds water, especially when you intentionally neglected to follow the rules or laws well followed by others.

 

[dkeberhardt]

No different than a car dealer. How many ignorant, irresponsible people buy a car every year and kill someone with it? No one blames the car dealer. That only seems to work in the case of firearms dealers, for some reason...

Yes, so true. And I'm FAR more likely to be injured or killed in a car accident than by a firearm. There are many other causes of death that are more likely than being shot.

 

[MPPilot]

At least the FAA is not trying to get draconian like Canada's CAA. That is a great example of trying to kill a hobby. The restrictions and licensing requirements to the north made the 107 testing look tame.

 

[PhoenixOne]

The FAA is asking for input for its recreational drone test

Recently, the FAA granted recreational drone pilots access to LAANC. Now, they want to administer a test and are seeking the public's input.

m.dpreview.com

Yeah i got one too

 

[Russ43Phantom]

I am very encouraged that the FAA is working to design a test for recreational drone pilot. As indicated earlier, I strongly believe that there should be multiple levels of drone pilot certification and with each level increase, more freedoms with respect airspace boundaries. Recreational pilots with NO certification could be permitted to fly with an electronic fence of, say, 100 feet vertically and 100 yards horizontally. Those with a basic Recreational Pilot license can fly with an electronic fence of, say, 200 feet vertically and 300 yards horizontally. Finally with a Part 107 certificate, drone pilots should be free to fly within the full allowance under FAA rules.

Regarding the testing, I don’t see why a recreational pilot limited to 200 feet vertically and 300 yards horizontally needs to know weather forecasting or how to read pilot weather information ... if they see bad weather, they fly their drone back to “home” and land. In a similar way, there are MANY sections of the Part 107 Pilot test that are just not necessary for recreational pilots to know. On the other hand knowledge of basic rules such as no flying over stadiums or people, no flying in National Parks or Wildlife Preserves should be tested. Knowledge of modified flight restrictions that pertain to their level of testing, in the examples above, such as limits to altitude and distance from the pilot should also be tested. I don’t believe recreational pilots need much detail on airport operations or communications. There should be some further tool like AIRMAP that lets recreational pilots know where they CAN fly vs. where the CAN’T fly.

 

[AntDX316]

People Will fly anyway and if the testings are way too long and too complicated they won't do it. The best thing you can do is for people to learn through App simulation. Have people pass an FAA-certified app game practical test than an academic test saying things like so you are in this condition now what do you do? A, B, C, or D? Instead you make them pass a game so they can understand w/o getting Bored and heading out with No knowledge which leads them into crashing into something causing damage. If people don't have access to a smartphone capable of running basic 3D-rendering they shouldn't be flying.

 

[Fat Albert]

I am very encouraged that the FAA is working to design a test for recreational drone pilot. As indicated earlier, I strongly believe that there should be multiple levels of drone pilot certification and with each level increase, more freedoms with respect airspace boundaries. Recreational pilots with NO certification could be permitted to fly with an electronic fence of, say, 100 feet vertically and 100 yards horizontally. Those with a basic Recreational Pilot license can fly with an electronic fence of, say, 200 feet vertically and 300 yards horizontally. Finally with a Part 107 certificate, drone pilots should be free to fly within the full allowance under FAA rules.

Regarding the testing, I don’t see why a recreational pilot limited to 200 feet vertically and 300 yards horizontally needs to know weather forecasting or how to read pilot weather information ... if they see bad weather, they fly their drone back to “home” and land. In a similar way, there are MANY sections of the Part 107 Pilot test that are just not necessary for recreational pilots to know. On the other hand knowledge of basic rules such as no flying over stadiums or people, no flying in National Parks or Wildlife Preserves should be tested. Knowledge of modified flight restrictions that pertain to their level of testing, in the examples above, such as limits to altitude and distance from the pilot should also be tested. I don’t believe recreational pilots need much detail on airport operations or communications. There should be some further tool like AIRMAP that lets recreational pilots know where they CAN fly vs. where the CAN’T fly.

I’m glad you’re not involved in making the test a reality....