FAA Regulations--Please Read

[davemex]

Geez, whether or not that guy is actually with the FAA he's not threatening anyone, he's just trying to point out some basic regulations before someone gets themselves in trouble. As someone who's received flight training (I stopped just shy of my PPL) I can speak from experience that 99% of what the FAA is trying to do is just to protect life and property. Even the one time I messed up and ended up in the wrong airspace at the wrong time in a plane, I was just coached as to what not to do and told to have a nice day. not fined. There's a reason air travel is a lot safer than driving. If we had to go through 20% of the training to drive a car that you need before you can fly, I bet we'd see a lot less accidents.

So enjoy your hobby, be SAFE and educated, defend yourself in cases where someone is just trying to bully you because they don't understand anything about UAVs, but don't #$@ this up for the rest of us.

I know this will fall on deaf ears of people that take a complete "don't tread on me" attitude because "all laws are bad" but it saddens me that some stubborn ox is going to make us all look bad when they clip a jet or get fined for violating regulations just because they don't like them. I'd like to keep that from happening as long as possible so I can enjoy my P3 in peace.

 

[Govman]

Sorry for being a little "cheeky" about this matter... If you're an inspector for the FAA and you're here on company business, you will have our undivided attention. There are a number of very creative trolls who walk the aisles of this forum. Sorry if we can't take your claims seriously, but... in truth... we can't...

Why does it matter if I am a government employee or an internet troll? It is WHAT I have been saying that is relevant: the FAA's UAS website, the Model A/C Advisory Circular and the NTSB's decision on the Pirker case. Everyone is too busy slamming me instead of seriously addressing those issues.

 

[Buzz313th]

I agree: Only aircraft taking off or landing fly from 400-1000 feet. But do you know how many reports this office receives every week of drones being spotted by airline pilots as they ARE taking off and landing? Don't you all agree this is a hazard? Why are some drone operators operating near airports and airliners?

Govman, I appreciate your Involvment here in the forum. I am a current commercial pilot and Drone enthusiast.

Certain helicopter operators are cleared to routinely work down to 500 agl regardless of the airspace they are working in. And in certain areas fixed wing are clear to operate down to 500agl.

The FARs regarding lower altitude limit for VFR flights is...

1. Anywhere: an altitude allowing a safe emergency landing without undue hazard to person or property on the ground;
2. Over Congested Areas: an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of less than 2,000 feet;
3. Over Populated Areas: an altitude of 500 feet AGL;
4. Over Open Water or Sparsely Populated Areas: an altitude allowing for a linear distance greater than 500 feet from any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure;
5. Helicopters: If without hazard to persons or property on the surface, an altitude lower than in definitions 2, 3, and 4 above, provided in compliance with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA.

In a nutshell aircraft Can fly as low as 500/1000 ft AGL depending on where they are.

The FAA advisory of 400ft AGL for UASs is to maintain 100 ft separation from manned aircraft.

Class E airspace (Controlled Airspace) in terminal areas extend from the surface upward (For approach and departure paths) and from 700agl upwards everywhere else in the terminal area.

I think it's important that the drone community understand this.

Edited to not paraphrase the Law.

 

[Govman]

Ok... Here's my well thought out response.



Ok... Under MODEL AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS, I see:
Individuals flying for hobby or recreation are strongly encouraged to follow safety guidelines, which include:

• Fly below 400 feet and remain clear of surrounding obstacles

Same stuff as we've all been 'advised to follow'. NOT 'required'.



Done. The Pirker case you speak of was SETTLED, not ruled on in court and also relates to COMMERCIAL DRONE USE. NOT Hobby use.



Based on your #3 Can you please site specific cases numbers we can review?



How did someone complain about an elevation so far beyond the human eye no one could possibly see it? Are FAA complaints public domain? Who was the complaint against? How did the complainant know who the person was and how did the FAA know he was a member of phantompilots? More importantly, how do you know? If you know, tell us who? Surely this type of complaint to our government is public domain information. Police logs are published in the new papers... this should be public domain as well.

The reason we're ganging up is because many of your points, as I point out, do not hold water or are unrelated. If you care to comment on my responses, it might help your cause. None of the content relates to our use or is backed by any evidence or examples of how and where this mystery law has been enforced or even tried.

Well, thank you for at least being civil, and not going after me personally. While it is true that Advisory circulars are "Advisory," if you act in a way contrary to one and are caught, you can face a civil fine.

I think someone looked at one of the forum's members' flight log and photographs, which is how he determined the location and altitude of the drone. I have no idea why he contacted us, other than being a concerned citizen. This individual sent an email to our office.

If you want to find out who is winnig these cases against drone operators, contact the legal department of the Eastern Region of the FAA. I don't have case numbers. I personally have prepared cases aganist drone operators who were caught by the police, but I have not followed up to see who won.

 

[Govman]

Govman, I appreciate your Involvment here in the forum. I am a current commercial pilot and Drone enthusiast.

Certain helicopter operators are cleared to routinely work down to 500 agl. The lower altitude limit for VFR flights is...

1. Anywhere: an altitude allowing a safe emergency landing without undue hazard to person or property on the ground;
2. Over Congested Areas: an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of less than 2,000 feet;
3. Over Populated Areas: an altitude of 500 feet AGL;
4. Over Open Water or Sparsely Populated Areas: an altitude allowing for a linear distance greater than 500 feet from any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure;
5. Helicopters: If without hazard to persons or property on the surface, an altitude lower than in definitions 2, 3, and 4 above, provided in compliance with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA.

In a nutshell aircraft are clear down to 1000agl. Yes it's still not within 400 to 1000 agl, but not everyone has a correct altimeter setting. Class E airspace (Controlled Airspace) in terminal areas extend from the surface upward (For approach and departure paths) and from 700agl upwards everywhere else in the terminal area.

I think it's important that the drone community understand this.

Thanks for your support. Many drone operators don't realize they are operating in "Class B" airspace when they operate next to a busy airport. This in itself IS a violation of a Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR). Please do an internet search for "Class B airspace" for those of you who do fly near big city airports. The class B airspace starts at the ground!

 

[Adam Kontras]

Why does it matter if I am a government employee or an internet troll? It is WHAT I have been saying that is relevant: the FAA's UAS website, the Model A/C Advisory Circular and the NTSB's decision on the Pirker case. Everyone is too busy slamming me instead of seriously addressing those issues.

Brother, we are actually on the same side - but one of us decided to spout credentials anonymously on an internet forum and has been rightfully called out for that. You did it to make yourself look more important than others with opposing views. Probably not a smart move. Because instead of talking about licensing, regulations and the very real issue of irresponsible pilots (conversations that ARE going on in other threads), everyone is pointing out your anonymous credentials.

 

[Govman]

Geez, whether or not that guy is actually with the FAA he's not threatening anyone, he's just trying to point out some basic regulations before someone gets themselves in trouble. As someone who's received flight training (I stopped just shy of my PPL) I can speak from experience that 99% of what the FAA is trying to do is just to protect life and property. Even the one time I messed up and ended up in the wrong airspace at the wrong time in a plane, I was just coached as to what not to do and told to have a nice day. not fined. There's a reason air travel is a lot safer than driving. If we had to go through 20% of the training to drive a car that you need before you can fly, I bet we'd see a lot less accidents.

So enjoy your hobby, be SAFE and educated, defend yourself in cases where someone is just trying to bully you because they don't understand anything about UAVs, but don't #$@ this up for the rest of us.

I know this will fall on deaf ears of people that take a complete "don't tread on me" attitude because "all laws are bad" but it saddens me that some stubborn ox is going to make us all look bad when they clip a jet or get fined for violating regulations just because they don't like them. I'd like to keep that from happening as long as possible so I can enjoy my P3 in peace.

Thank you. Look, let's all be realistic:say you are operating in rural Montana at 500 feet. Technically that's illegal--despite what most of you believe.I agree, while illegal, it's not much of a hazard. But, many operators operate near Laguardia airport in NYC at 500 feet. That is very dangerous. We get many reports from airline pilots every day who spot drones when taking off and landing. I know that none of you want a midair collision on your conscience. We don't know what the outcome of a collision would be between a drone and an aircraft. Why chance it?

 

[Govman]

Brother, we are actually on the same side - but one of us decided to spout credentials anonymously on an internet forum and has been rightfully called out for that. You did it to make yourself look more important than others with opposing views. Probably not a smart move. Because instead of talking about licensing, regulations and the very real issue of irresponsible pilots (conversations that ARE going on in other threads), everyone is pointing out your anonymous credentials.

Why would I give out my real name in this day and age of idenitiy theft--especially since I've gotten so many angry with me? How does my remaining anonyomous detract from my message? I'm flattered that you think a government employee is "more important than others." Nothing could be further from the truth. I am neither rich nor successful. But I do work for the FAA. Why would I lie about that?

 

[Govman]

Please visit this webpage:

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/

Find a FSDO (Flight Standards District Office) near you. Call them, and ask to speak to an Operations Inspector about current drone regulations. They will repeat what I have said.

 

[bbfpv]

Please visit this webpage:

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/field_offices/fsdo/

Find a FSDO (Flight Standards District Office) near you. Call them, and ask to speak to an Operations Inspector about current drone regulations. They will repeat what I have said.

No one is disputing what you've said. But it's all readily available information. Whether one chooses to abide by it is up to them. If you search these forums for "FAA" or "regulations", you'll see we do a pretty good job telling dummies to fly safe already...

 

[Adam Kontras]

Why would I give out my real name in this day and age of idenitiy theft--especially since I've gotten so many angry with me? How does my remaining anonyomous detract from my message? I'm flattered that you think a government employee is "more important than others." Nothing could be further from the truth. I am neither rich nor successful. But I do work for the FAA. Why would I lie about that?

I just think you're naive as to what type of foolios jump on here and say all sorts of things as if they're some type of official. And citing identity theft!??!!? No one asked for your social security number for crying out loud.

 

[jadebox]

We get many reports from airline pilots every day who spot drones when taking off and landing.

I know some pilots have reported seeing "drones" (which have replaced UFOs as the subjects of such reports). But "many reports ... everyday?" No.

I respect the FAA and follow the guidelines when flying my radio controlled helicopter. I hope others will also. I think the way to get people to do so is through education not hyperbole.

- - Roger

 

[Govman]

No one is disputing what you've said. But it's all readily available information. Whether one chooses to abide by it is up to them. If you search these forums for "FAA" or "regulations", you'll see we do a pretty good job telling dummies to fly safe already...

Great. Good to hear.

 

[damitjim]

Thank you. Look, let's all be realistic:say you are operating in rural Montana at 500 feet. Technically that's illegal--despite what most of you believe.I agree, while illegal, it's not much of a hazard. But, many operators operate near Laguardia airport in NYC at 500 feet. That is very dangerous. We get many reports from airline pilots every day who spot drones when taking off and landing. I know that none of you want a midair collision on your conscience. We don't know what the outcome of a collision would be between a drone and an aircraft. Why chance it?

Maybe the FAA should spend their time and attention in doing a study on the impact of a quad copter/airplane collision, like they do with birds, instead of wasting taxpayer money on prosecuting people for flying in a federal park. Just an idea.

 

[ianwood]

Maybe the FAA should spend their time and attention in doing a study on the impact of a quad copter/airplane collision, like they do with birds, instead of wasting taxpayer money on prosecuting people for flying in a federal park. Just an idea.

OR, maybe we ALL spend our time and attention doing everything we can to avoid that happening in the first place!

 

[damitjim]

OR, maybe we ALL spend our time and attention doing everything we can to avoid that happening in the first place!

Responsible people will, but there are always morons and criminals that won't. Don't you think we should know what would happen? It could be an entire over reaction. There is hype with zero facts or research.

A long time ago, instead of having facts, people said, don't go out to the edge of the ocean, you'll fall off. Once someone finally did, we found nothing happened.

 

[blade strike]

Why would I give out my real name in this day and age of idenitiy theft--especially since I've gotten so many angry with me? How does my remaining anonyomous detract from my message? I'm flattered that you think a government employee is "more important than others." Nothing could be further from the truth. I am neither rich nor successful. But I do work for the FAA. Why would I lie about that?

I work for a government agency and give out my name all the time. Its actually public knowledge since you are a civil servant.

Just a picture of your business card would be efficient

 

[Adam Kontras]

Responsible people will, but there are always morons and criminals that won't. Don't you think we should know what would happen? It could be an entire over reaction. There is hype with zero facts or research.

A long time ago, instead of having facts, people said, don't go out to the edge of the ocean, you'll fall off. Once someone finally did, we found nothing happened.

Why is this always the argument against ANY regulations, laws or guidelines? Just because criminals will break laws, doesn't mean we shouldn't HAVE ANY. And by actively fighting AGAINST having regulations - you're all but assuring they will be overreaching! Support sensible regulations, limits and even certification and we can all get ahead of what is most assuredly coming in the next couple of years.

 

[pterrill]

After reading the above posts, I think it is abundantly clear that all of us truly love this hobby and would like to continue flying our aircraft with as few mandated rules and restrictions as possible. That being said there is a lot of scrutiny on our hobby by uninformed people. Take for example when some idiot(s) flying near the White House or some National Park that has been designated as an area prohibited for Unmanned Aircraft, and something happens that catches the eye of the lame stream media, it is portrayed to masses as a major event with negative connotations. This has caused the general public to form negative unfair and uninformed opinions of our hobby. And the one thing we have to remember is there are a lot more of them than there are of us. If some point in the future a serious incident is caused by a Unmanned Aircraft involving the loss of life, you mark my words some unqualified Politician trying to make a name for themselves is going spearhead rules and regulations that will possibly strangle our hobby because they will have the public support. And if you think those supposed violations couldn't be enforced think of all those citizens with eyes and ears ready to report us if we considered villainous in the court of public opinion.
My reason for voicing my opinion is that with the multitude of Pilots that are entering this hobby with different intents it is getting to be like the old West.
I propose we be proactive and lobby for licensing and Pilot proficiency before it is rammed down our throats. Don't get me wrong I'm not a fan of government bureaucracy but the only way we can legitimize our hobby is to show outsiders that we have some organization and that we would be willing to police ourselves if the errant actions of a few will have a detreamental affect us all.
Thanks for reading this and Happy landings everybody

 

[Adam Kontras]

After reading the above posts, I think it is abundantly clear that all of us truly love this hobby and would like to continue flying our aircraft with as few mandated rules and restrictions as possible. That being said there is a lot of scrutiny on our hobby by uninformed people. Take for example when some idiot(s) flying near the White House or some National Park that has been designated as an area prohibited for Unmanned Aircraft, and something happens that catches the eye of the lame stream media, it is portrayed to masses as a major event with negative connotations. This has caused the general public to form negative unfair and uninformed opinions of our hobby. And the one thing we have to remember is there are a lot more of them than there are of us. If some point in the future a serious incident is caused by a Unmanned Aircraft involving the loss of life, you mark my words some unqualified Politician trying to make a name for themselves is going spearhead rules and regulations that will possibly strangle our hobby because they will have the public support. And if you think those supposed violations couldn't be enforced think of all those citizens with eyes and ears ready to report us if we considered villainous in the court of public opinion.
My reason for voicing my opinion is that with the multitude of Pilots that are entering this hobby with different intents it is getting to be like the old West.
I propose we be proactive and lobby for licensing and Pilot proficiency before it is rammed down our throats. Don't get me wrong I'm not a fan of government bureaucracy but the only way we can legitimize our hobby is to show outsiders that we have some organization and that we would be willing to police ourselves if the errant actions of a few will have a detreamental affect us all.
Thanks for reading this and Happy landings everybody

Common. Sense.

Thank you.