How to modify FAA policy, anyone?

[wa5tef]

I believe that FAA's policy of not flying beyond VLOS was meant for time when the video and mapping capabilities were far inferior to what we have available today. I know that I can see my Phantom 4 out to 1,500 feet in clear air but being able to do anything about it as far as control or flying capabilities is difficult or impossible at that distance. I cannot even tell which way it is flying other than watching it for a few seconds to see which way, if any, it has moved. However, by using the video feed and the GPS inputs on the maps, it is extremely easy to fly to a desired location at a known altitude and get the video or photograph wanted. I think most drone pilots would agree to these examples.

So, what process, if any, is involved in getting a bureaucracy like the FAA to consider a rule change? Does anyone know, or have any contacts to find out? I firmly believe we need this change in policy to allow more freedom in flying at a time when some of our freedoms may be in jeopardy.

Comments or ideas anyone?

Thanks for reading,
Jim
WA5TEF

 

[barefootbeachcombing]

Start here. Petition for Exemption or Rulemaking

Also, you could apply for a waiver. Request a Part 107 Waiver or Operation in Controlled Airspace

 

[wa5tef]

Barefootbeachcombing: Thank you very much! That’s exactly the info I need but I didn’t expect it on the first posting. I am going to see if I can file a change to that outdated policy

 

[sar104]

I believe that FAA's policy of not flying beyond VLOS was meant for time when the video and mapping capabilities were far inferior to what we have available today. I know that I can see my Phantom 4 out to 1,500 feet in clear air but being able to do anything about it as far as control or flying capabilities is difficult or impossible at that distance. I cannot even tell which way it is flying other than watching it for a few seconds to see which way, if any, it has moved. However, by using the video feed and the GPS inputs on the maps, it is extremely easy to fly to a desired location at a known altitude and get the video or photograph wanted. I think most drone pilots would agree to these examples.

So, what process, if any, is involved in getting a bureaucracy like the FAA to consider a rule change? Does anyone know, or have any contacts to find out? I firmly believe we need this change in policy to allow more freedom in flying at a time when some of our freedoms may be in jeopardy.

Comments or ideas anyone?

Thanks for reading,
Jim
WA5TEF

I think you have misunderstood the purpose of VLOS - it is in order to be able to maintain situational awareness around the aircraft, particularly in order to be able to see/hear and avoid other aircraft. The video feed provides only a very limited view and the maps are useless for that purpose.

 

[wa5tef]

Situational awareness is not the problem unless you can also be aware of exactly where the drone is, it’s speed, it’s direction of travel and altitude. I cannot do that by just relying on VLOS and I seriously doubt many with the FFA realize that. I believe it should be brought to their for consideration at least.
Jim
WA5TEF

 

[sar104]

Situational awareness is not the problem unless you can also be aware of exactly where the drone is, it’s speed, it’s direction of travel and altitude. I cannot do that by just relying on VLOS and I seriously doubt many with the FFA realize that. I believe it should be brought to their for consideration at least.
Jim
WA5TEF

VLOS may not provide perfect situational awareness but, without it, you have none at all. If you are now, as you appear to be, proposing that you know better than the FAA about flight safety, then good luck with your quest.

 

[N017RW]

Situational awareness is not the problem unless you can also be aware of exactly where the drone is, it’s speed, it’s direction of travel and altitude. I cannot do that by just relying on VLOS and I seriously doubt many with the FFA realize that. I believe it should be brought to their for consideration at least.
Jim
WA5TEF

Hard to take that seriously.
It borders on delusional.

 

[barefootbeachcombing]

Barefootbeachcombing: Thank you very much! That’s exactly the info I need but I didn’t expect it on the first posting. I am going to see if I can file a change to that outdated policy

Good luck. Don't expect to be successful, however.

 

[joeyjan19]

I think you have misunderstood the purpose of VLOS - it is in order to be able to maintain situational awareness around the aircraft, particularly in order to be able to see/hear and avoid other aircraft. The video feed provides only a very limited view and the maps are useless for that purpose.

Thanks, you bring up a interesting point, that being “right of way” in a see and be seen situation. A hot air balloon has the right of way over a rotorcraft and it has right of way over an powered aircraft and the glider is somewhere in that mix. This is somewhere in the FARS.My point is,my reading of the regs on drones gives us no priority in the air. This may be the basis for the FAA requirement to see and avoid and not fly beyond visual contact with the drone. I’m not sure I understand what the FAA considers us.

 

[sar104]

Thanks, you bring up a interesting point, that being “right of way” in a see and be seen situation. A hot air balloon has the right of way over a rotorcraft and it has right of way over an powered aircraft and the glider is somewhere in that mix. This is somewhere in the FARS.My point is,my reading of the regs on drones gives us no priority in the air. This may be the basis for the FAA requirement to see and avoid and not fly beyond visual contact with the drone. I’m not sure I understand what the FAA considers us.

I don't think there is any ambiguity on status in terms of FAA regulation under Part 101 or Part 107:

§101.41 Applicability.
This subpart prescribes rules governing the operation of a model aircraft (or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft) that meets all of the following conditions as set forth in section 336 of Public Law 112-95:

(a) The aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;

(b) The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;

(c) The aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered by a community-based organization;

(d) The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and

(e) When flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport) with prior notice of the operation.

§107.37 Operation near aircraft; right-of-way rules.
(a) Each small unmanned aircraft must yield the right of way to all aircraft, airborne vehicles, and launch and reentry vehicles. Yielding the right of way means that the small unmanned aircraft must give way to the aircraft or vehicle and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless well clear.

(b) No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft so close to another aircraft as to create a collision hazard.

 

[joeyjan19]

I don't think there is any ambiguity on status in terms of FAA regulation under Part 101 or Part 107:

§101.41 Applicability.
This subpart prescribes rules governing the operation of a model aircraft (or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft) that meets all of the following conditions as set forth in section 336 of Public Law 112-95:

(a) The aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;

(b) The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;

(c) The aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered by a community-based organization;

(d) The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and

(e) When flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport) with prior notice of the operation.

§107.37 Operation near aircraft; right-of-way rules.
(a) Each small unmanned aircraft must yield the right of way to all aircraft, airborne vehicles, and launch and reentry vehicles. Yielding the right of way means that the small unmanned aircraft must give way to the aircraft or vehicle and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless well clear.

(b) No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft so close to another aircraft as to create a collision hazard.

Thanks, a far better explanation than mine.

 

[BigAl07]

@wa5tef while I don't doubt there may be a time where (§ 107.31) is modified and becomes less restrictive in some situations i seriously doubt it will apply to anything you're trying to do. If you can't see the aircraft and are relying solely on video feed how will you see an approaching aircraft? what happens if you're at 4000' out and a MediVac helo is inbound?

Even though we think/feel like we have massive numbers and power on our side (millions of sUAS have been sold right?) in the real world our numbers pale in comparison to those who are against us.

In regards to getting a waiver for Flying beyond the pilot's visual line-of-sight (§ 107.31) realize less than a handful have been issued and they are for very specific aircraft in very controlled instances. I wouldn't spend a lot of time and effort on trying to get that one unless I had deep pockets.

 

[tcope]

The FAA wants VLOS so that you can know where the drone is in relationship to other aircraft and objects. So yes, situational awareness.

VLOS is something that the FAA put into regulation illegally (IMHO). It's additional regulation under the guise of "safety". They also _hid_ it within the registration.

How do you get this changed? You come up with a few million to buy the people off (sorry, "lobby") in Congress or be important enough to warrant a voice. However, at this time it's a done deal and won't change.

One thing you have wrong is that the registration is no longer coming from the FAA (courts ruled that the FAA did not have this power). It comes direct from Congress now.

 

[wa5tef]

From what I have read and seen posted on forums, if we stay at 400 feet or below, we would have no issue beyond VLOS. By using the data from the drone, we can track exactly where it is, direction of travel, speed and location. Out at my VLOS limit of 1,500 feet, I would definitely trust the drone's data rather than my vision. If no other aircraft are in this area below 400 feet there is no problem.
Thanks for all the input I'm getting!
Jim
WA5TEF

 

[sar104]

From what I have read and seen posted on forums, if we stay at 400 feet or below, we would have no issue beyond VLOS. By using the data from the drone, we can track exactly where it is, direction of travel, speed and location. Out at my VLOS limit of 1,500 feet, I would definitely trust the drone's data rather than my vision. If no other aircraft are in this area below 400 feet there is no problem.
Thanks for all the input I'm getting!
Jim
WA5TEF

But you cannot assume that there will be no aircraft below 400 ft. Is that the basis for your suggestion?

 

[Cajuncontroller]

Depending on your location aircraft (mainly helicoptors) routinely fly below 400ft AGL

 

[N017RW]

From what I have read and seen posted on forums, if we stay at 400 feet or below, we would have no issue beyond VLOS. By using the data from the drone, we can track exactly where it is, direction of travel, speed and location. Out at my VLOS limit of 1,500 feet, I would definitely trust the drone's data rather than my vision. If no other aircraft are in this area below 400 feet there is no problem.
Thanks for all the input I'm getting!
Jim
WA5TEF

But you have no first hand general aviation experience (i.e. read & forums)???

Relying on a data stream from a Chinese toy on unlicensed radio bands (something you should appreciate)??? I'm glad I'm no longer flying and in your neck-of-the-woods.

 

[BigAl07]

By using the data from the drone, we can track exactly where it is, direction of travel, speed and location. Out at my VLOS limit of 1,500 feet, I would definitely trust the drone's data rather than my vision. If no other aircraft are in this area below 400 feet there is no problem.

With all due respect that's absolutely horrible information.

A) What if a MedicVac Helo is approaching an accident scene at 350' AGL and you're flying in a similar direction on a collision course? The FPV aspect of our aircraft have a limited viewing angle and you could easily be overtaken and struck by someone approaching from the side or behind your aircraft.

B) What happens if you lost video link to your aircraft? How do you See & Avoid?

C) Happens of your lose all link to the aircraft and it begins a RTH right directly into the path of manned aircraft? Let's look how this could "and in fact DID" happen last year and the sUAS collided with a Blackhawk Helo: Drone far beyond sight during Black Hawk collision - AOPA

In fact if the FAA were considering allowing BVLOS operations on a large scale I highly suspect the above incident really didn't help that cause at all.

From what I have read and seen posted on forums, if we stay at 400 feet or below, we would have no issue beyond VLOS.

Be very careful basing or justifying your opposition to regulations etc from reading on forums, blogs, vlogs and such on the internet. You can find plenty of posts supporting any point of view regardless of what it is. I know it sounds ironic for me to say the above post considering I work for and support this forum for hours each and every day. I've said several times to not take my advice as legal advice because I'm just a random person on the internet giving my own personal opinion. This is true for each and everyone one of us unless you happen to be an experienced Aviation Attorney and willing to support someone who takes your online advice and it happens to be wrong.

 

[hit-n-run]

I believe that FAA's policy of not flying beyond VLOS was meant for time when the video and mapping capabilities were far inferior to what we have available today. I know that I can see my Phantom 4 out to 1,500 feet in clear air but being able to do anything about it as far as control or flying capabilities is difficult or impossible at that distance. I cannot even tell which way it is flying other than watching it for a few seconds to see which way, if any, it has moved. However, by using the video feed and the GPS inputs on the maps, it is extremely easy to fly to a desired location at a known altitude and get the video or photograph wanted. I think most drone pilots would agree to these examples.

So, what process, if any, is involved in getting a bureaucracy like the FAA to consider a rule change? Does anyone know, or have any contacts to find out? I firmly believe we need this change in policy to allow more freedom in flying at a time when some of our freedoms may be in jeopardy.

Comments or ideas anyone?

Thanks for reading,
Jim
WA5TEF

I find that at that range I can probably see it, but if i take my eyes off of the quad to adjust something, I have a hard time acquiring it visually again. If I need to go farther than 1500ft I'll move my location and launch again

 

[BigAl07]

I find that at that range I can probably see it, but if i take my eyes off of the quad to adjust something, I have a hard time acquiring it visually again. If I need to go farther than 1500ft I'll move my location and launch again

Very well said.