H.R.302, Section 349 (US)

[flockshot]

At least we now have a single point of reference as to the rules.
I know the AMA spoke loudly against the bill, but I don't see them taking a big hit, other than, they can no longer claim that you must be an AMA member to use CBO rules. The bill clearly offers drone driver the option of operating "in accordance with or within" a CBO developed set of rules.

 

[Cheesehead_Droner]

Has it passed?

 

[Cheesehead_Droner]

If the legislation is overreaching and limits what we can or cannot do with our drones I'll probably just sell mine. So frustrating considering I just purchased a P4P.

 

[MapMaker53]

Has it passed?

Yes.

 

[BigAl07]

If the legislation is overreaching and limits what we can or cannot do with our drones I'll probably just sell mine. So frustrating considering I just purchased a P4P.

It's not overreaching at all. Many of us have been flying under those rules for years with no problems.

 

[Cheesehead_Droner]

I was reading and the new law requires remote detection/identification, privacy policies, etc. We (drone pilots) have not had to comply with such rules/regulations. Additionally, there appear to be additional tests and or certifications to fly? Ugh....

 

[flockshot]

Perhaps some learning will be required, but asking someone to demonstrate that they understand the rules, is not a high bar.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

TRUMP JUST SIGNED FAA REAUTHORIZATION ACT

 

[howieb38]

I know most people here are drone pilots only, but some of us fly other RC aircraft also. Flying a winch launched glider (without a motor) and looking for thermals to stay aloft, during a contest we often exceed 400'AGL. I've seen some flights go up to 1000'AGL. These flights are held at sanctioned AMA fields and this type of flying has been going on for many decades. I only hope that the new rules will not stop this type of recreational flying.

 

[flockshot]

I know most people here are drone pilots only, but some of us fly other RC aircraft also. Flying a winch launched glider (without a motor) and looking for thermals to stay aloft, during a contest we often exceed 400'AGL. I've seen some flights go up to 1000'AGL. These flights are held at sanctioned AMA fields and this type of flying has been going on for many decades. I only hope that the new rules will not stop this type of recreational flying.

I am confident that those events will go on as always. Just me say'n.

 

[BigAl07]

I know most people here are drone pilots only, but some of us fly other RC aircraft also. Flying a winch launched glider (without a motor) and looking for thermals to stay aloft, during a contest we often exceed 400'AGL. I've seen some flights go up to 1000'AGL. These flights are held at sanctioned AMA fields and this type of flying has been going on for many decades. I only hope that the new rules will not stop this type of recreational flying.

Yes some of us fly many different aircraft ( sUAS for 4 decades here and manned for 2 decades). As it's written there are currently no exceptions but with almost every aspect of AVIATION there are pathways for variations called "Waivers". I'm confident that at some point this will come to light and a process for glider operators flying within CBO rules can get approval.

 

[Russ43Phantom]

I am a 107 licensed pilot who does mostly recreational drone flying. I've had a P4P, a Mavic Air, and now a Mavic 2 Pro. I do mostly photography. The issue we are trying to deal with is building a regulatory environment in lock-step with the changes in technology. Technology is changing exponentially. So the process of developing regulations will be a significant challenge, especially in seeking the balance between doing what is necessary and fair. For one, I am happy an effort is being made to do so. I personally feel all drones should be registered and ALL drone pilots should have a "driver's license", just as they do when they drive a car (recreationally or professionally), so that they must exhibit a minimum level of knowledge about drone rules and safety guidelines. I applaud the government's desire to be able to track ALL drones to assess, in real time, whether drone pilots are flying within the regulations. What I do propose is a "three strikes and you are out" approach to fines or other penalties. This will give a mechanism for more interaction between pilots and regulators so both sides get educated as to the regulations and to what degree they are reasonable. There will be many swings back-and-forth as to the definition of "over regulation" and "needed regulation" as the regulations are developed.

 

[MrMcfly]

As this is now passed, LOTS of variables have to be addressed by the 'Administrator'.

Now comes the determination of recreational UAV flying as being within reach to
the general public, or a more critically regulated activity that will push away the
public. Here inlies the fate of an entire industry. Make flying recreationally too
difficult or 'cumbersome', and the industry will suffer.

Among my concerns here are FAA demands on manufacturers going to balloon prices
of aircraft, and make flying financially less feasible? Will the Certification for
SUAV pilots be too extensive, and push interested people away? Two very
easy ways for the FAA to ground an activity perceived as dangerous to an
uninformed public and a 'potential nuisance' to general aviation.

Yes, further regulation is necessary, but at what cost? I'm sure
a good first indicator will be sUAV sales over the holidays... I
hope for an amicable solution from the FAA.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

As this is now passed, LOTS of variables have to be addressed by the 'Administrator'.

Now comes the determination of recreational UAV flying as being within reach to
the general public, or a more critically regulated activity that will push away the
public. Here inlies the fate of an entire industry. Make flying recreationally too
difficult or 'cumbersome', and the industry will suffer.

Among my concerns here are FAA demands on manufacturers going to balloon prices
of aircraft, and make flying financially less feasible? Will the Certification for
SUAV pilots be too extensive, and push interested people away? Two very
easy ways for the FAA to ground an activity perceived as dangerous to an
uninformed public and a 'potential nuisance' to general aviation.

Yes, further regulation is necessary, but at what cost? I'm sure
a good first indicator will be sUAV sales over the holidays... I
hope for an amicable solution from the FAA.

Good points but I think section 349 is very reasonable. Its what 336 should have been to begin with but it was quite evident that the people who put together 336 knew little to nothing about drones let alone aviation.

It's simple:

1. Pass a safety test
2. Stay below 400'
3. Stay out of controlled airspace unless you have authorization.

#3 is already in place with LAANC.

Will this curtail all drone stupidity? No, but it's a step in the right direction.

I'm more concerned about the authority given to homeland security to shoot down any drone seen as a "viable threat."

 

[SilentAV8R]

It might be worth a look at what the FAA itself is saying about Section 349:

FAA Reauthorization Bill Establishes New Conditions for Recreational Use of Drones

 

[tcope]

It might be worth a look at what the FAA itself is saying about Section 349:

FAA Reauthorization Bill Establishes New Conditions for Recreational Use of Drones

• Fly for hobby or recreation only
• Register your model aircraft
• Fly within visual line-of-sight
• Follow community-based safety guidelines and fly within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization
• Fly a drone under 55 lbs. unless certified by a community-based organization
• Never fly near other aircraft
• Never fly near emergency response efforts

It did not take the FAA long at all to get it wrong. But it is the FAA, I expected no less. I just expected them to take a little long before they got the new requires incorrect.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

It might be worth a look at what the FAA itself is saying about Section 349:

FAA Reauthorization Bill Establishes New Conditions for Recreational Use of Drones

• Fly for hobby or recreation only
• Register your model aircraft
• Fly within visual line-of-sight
• Follow community-based safety guidelines and fly within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization
• Fly a drone under 55 lbs. unless certified by a community-based organization
• Never fly near other aircraft
• Never fly near emergency response efforts

It did not take the FAA long at all to get it wrong. But it is the FAA, I expected no less. I just expected them to take a little long before they got the new requires incorrect.

That page is just an overview - it isn't regulation. It could take months or years to put everything in that bill into the FARs, but many parts of 349 could happen within the next 180 days.

 

[SilentAV8R]

Yes, I realize that. But what it does is states clearly that FAA intends to allow us to operate as we currently do until they work out the final implementation of 349.

 

[JethroXP]

Has Visual Line of Sight been defined? If that really means you can still see your drone, how is that enforced? Give you an eye test then arrest you? Also I occasionally hear (non drone pilots) mention that I can't fly over people, I haven't seen that in 336 or the new 349.

 

[Russ43Phantom]

FYI ... this seems very clear when it comes to flying over people. For VLOS, you need to be able to avoid manned aircraft. Obviously, if you can’t see your drone, you can’t establish if you are in a manned aircraft’s flight path. The VLOS rule also seems to be both clear and reasonable.