I Day Of Due Diligence

[Drone Ace]

You're right -- the AMA does have such a rule. However, the FAA does not require you to follow the AMA's rules. If you choose to do so anyhow (for whatever reason), then you should definitely abide and not fly over occupied structures.

FAA rule, Follow the safety guidelines of a community based organization. This to me sounds mandatory not voluntary according to the FSDO. I still think this is a work in progress between the FAA and the AMA.

 

[msinger]

FAA rule, Follow the safety guidelines of a community based organization. This to me sounds mandatory not voluntary according to the FSDO. I still think this is a work in progress between the FAA and the AMA.

Did you fail to read the text below that header on purpose? I'm confused as to why you're acting confused.

 

[Propsontop]

Calling the FSDO is always your best course of action if the rules aren't clear to you. Each FSDO has a person (or group) that is specifically trained in the UAS category. Rather than struggle trying to understand the intention behind the written regulations, talk to an expert and voice not only what you're confused about, but what you would like to see as a drone pilot. These guys listen, and are your best resource to help you promote safe flying.

 

[msinger]

Calling the FSDO is always your best course of action if the rules aren't clear to you

According to the OP, that's where this conflicting information came from. If that's truly the case, it would be better to follow this advisory circular released by the FAA.

 

[BigAl07]

Ok gang let's get a couple of things out in the open...

• A) The FAA are actually Humans and they do make mistakes
• B) Contrary to popular belief and counter-productive to what we are trying to do, not everyone in the FAA has the exact same interpretation of the rules. (Shocking I know.... insert sarcasm smiley here)
• C) It's getting better every day but the FAA is far from perfect so when you hear something from them that seems off-the-wall it's possible they misspoke to you.
• D) Unless you have something very specific in writing from the FSDO it's nothing more than heresay just like everything I'm typing right now. Don't expect it to stand up in court . . . .

We were recently in a very involved Conference Call with our local FSDO and our sUAS liaison with the FAA in Oklahoma and there were "deviations" even on that phone call. A FSDO in another district had given out some partially incorrect advice/guidance and it was later determined that the person answering the questions was fairly new to sUAS operations and still learning.

While your FSDO is in fact where you need to get your facts (redundant typing Allen?) keep in mind they are human and can occasionally misquote and do make mistakes. I make more than my share on a daily basis.

For the record, Mr Moss, @mossphotography is a true subject matter expert. He kind knows his stuff on these topics... kinda similar to the saying, "When EF Hutton talks... people listen.". Mr Moss is very in-touch with our industry and more involved in it than many of us know. We are fortunate to have him come through here and give input and guidance when he's able.

 

[Propsontop]

I don't doubt that at all Al. You know a lot of people and your insights about them and these subjects are as close to spot on as anyone I know. My reason for asserting the FSDO as a source was for legal reasons. If I bust a regulation (or even bend it) and my source that caused me to do so is the FAA, then I have mitigating circumstance through the very agency that is enforcing that regulation. Which I wouldn't have quoting a civilian, no matter if they are right or wrong about the subject matter. But point taken, people make mistakes no matter who they work for. No amount of "Fred said it was okay" is a substitute for good common sense and investigating the regulations ahead of flying anywhere.

 

[solentlife]

I don't doubt that at all Al. You know a lot of people and your insights about them and these subjects are as close to spot on as anyone I know. My reason for asserting the FSDO as a source was for legal reasons. If I bust a regulation (or even bend it) and my source that caused me to do so is the FAA, then I have mitigating circumstance through the very agency that is enforcing that regulation. Which I wouldn't have quoting a civilian, no matter if they are right or wrong about the subject matter. But point taken, people make mistakes no matter who they work for. No amount of "Fred said it was okay" is a substitute for good common sense and investigating the regulations ahead of flying anywhere.

"My reason for asserting the FSDO as a source was for legal reasons."

No good to you whatsoever unless in writing and signed ...

Different item but to illustrate the point.

Back until the early 1970's in UK ... motorcycles could be ridden at 16yrs old. They then made it 17. 16yr olds were restricted to 49cc and only Mopeds that had also pedals as means of propulsion.

There were numerous cases of 16'rs caught riding Honda C50's ... a 49cc 'bike' that many Police when questioned believed was accepted for 16'rs. When more knowledgable police caught such riders - they were prosecuted despite claims that Police had told parents / 16 yr old - it was allowed. Why ? The C50 did not have pedals and was not part of the 16yr persons exemption.

Moral of the story is : get it sorted and verified before getting into trouble. Word of mouth is often liable to errors.

 

[BigAl07]

I don't doubt that at all Al. You know a lot of people and your insights about them and these subjects are as close to spot on as anyone I know. My reason for asserting the FSDO as a source was for legal reasons. If I bust a regulation (or even bend it) and my source that caused me to do so is the FAA, then I have mitigating circumstance through the very agency that is enforcing that regulation. Which I wouldn't have quoting a civilian, no matter if they are right or wrong about the subject matter. But point taken, people make mistakes no matter who they work for. No amount of "Fred said it was okay" is a substitute for good common sense and investigating the regulations ahead of flying anywhere.

No I think your post was SPOT ON. I was trying to reference several other posts to make people understand that even the FAA can make mistakes.

Thank you for your kind words.

Safe Flights,
Allen

 

[Drone Ace]

Did you fail to read the text below that header on purpose? I'm confused as to why you're acting confused.

Because I am stupid,
Are you happy now.

 

[msinger]

Because I am stupid,
Are you happy now.

I was not trying to imply that you are stupid. If that's how it seemed, then I apologize. I'm just trying to understand where you're seeing that as an official FAA requirement.

 

[Drone Ace]

I was not trying to imply that you are stupid. If that's how it seemed, then I apologize. I'm just trying to understand where you're seeing that as an official FAA requirement.

I am just frustrated listening to the FAA and the AMA.
You sound very knowledgable.
Please do me a favor call the FSDO in my area 1-(954) 641-6000 and hear what they have to say and post me back.
Best Regards.

 

[msinger]

Please do me a favor call the FSDO in my area 1-(954) 641-6000 and hear what they have to say and post me back

I don't have time to educate the FSDO in your area (or other areas). From contacting the FAA many times about other issues, I already know it's not uncommon to get incorrect/vague information from them. I've learned it's best to rely on official FAA documentation when it's available.

 

[bsartist]

What is "Do Diligence" please ?

I understand the term "Due Diligence" .... something that I have paid for when taking over Company's.

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve wanted to comment on / correct people’s spelling errors in posts. But I hold my tongue thinking I might be reprimanded for being discourteous. Glad to know that I now can. ;-))

 

[bsartist]

There were slumberous cases of 16'rs caught riding Honda C50's ... a 49cc 'bike' ...

Must have put a lot of people to sleep in those court rooms. LOL.

 

[Drone Ace]

Calling the FSDO is always your best course of action if the rules aren't clear to you. Each FSDO has a person (or group) that is specifically trained in the UAS category. Rather than struggle trying to understand the intention behind the written regulations, talk to an expert and voice not only what you're confused about, but what you would like to see as a drone pilot. These guys listen, and are your best resource to help you promote safe flying.

Some people think it is a waste of time to call the FSDO,. (Quote "it's not uncommon to get incorrect/vague information").
I aways call to get clarity or to get pointed in the right direction within the FAA website.
Their first priority is to keep people out of trouble and to educate.
I think they are a great resource.

 

[msinger]

Some people think it is a waste of time to call the FSDO,. (Quote "it's not uncommon to get incorrect/vague information")

That was a reference to working with FAA employees in general -- not about working with FSDOs. And it looks like you confirmed my point. Your FSDO either gave you incorrect information or you did not understand what he was trying to say.

 

[solentlife]

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve wanted to comment on / correct people’s spelling errors in posts. But I hold my tongue thinking I might be reprimanded for being discourteous. Glad to know that I now can. ;-))

I too normally keep quiet especially that I follow Queens English and not Bill Gates version. But that was too good an opportunity to miss !!

 

[solentlife]

Must have put a lot of people to sleep in those court rooms. LOL.

OOOP's .... how did that get in !! Corrected now !

 

[THA]

Never forget the FAA's motto and operating directive_____"We are not happy until you are not happy"

 

[msinger]

Never forget the FAA's motto and operating directive_____"We are not happy until you are not happy"

I've been pretty happy overall with what they've been doing over the past year. They've taken the time to document their hobby flying rules (and in a way that most people can understand) and have created new rules that are actually useful (like being able to fly FPV with a spotter).