- Joined
- Apr 4, 2019
- Messages
- 52
- Reaction score
- 30
- Age
- 69
Hey doods;
Per this article:
It seems the FAA is digging their craws deeper and deeper into the drone community. Every extra step of regulation is one more step toward legitimization. As the FAA creeps toward total and complete regulation of the UAV community, they will eventually have to delineate airspace for the monster they created.
I have published my ideas on Class H airspace in this forum and it's been met with a lot of resistance from the manned aviation community. My position is simply this; You can't have your cake and eat it, too. You can't force drones and their operators into all kinds certification, regulation and compliance, and NOT provide UAV's with their own safe air space. If you're going to take the gloves off and assert that UAV's are essentially "just the same" as aviation from a regulation point of view, that point of view must ALSO carry over to RIGHTS of these UAV's and their operators. The only way to respond to the Need For Rights (NFR), is to provide an airspace that regulates ALL aviation regardless of size. The sole purpose of Class H is to insure safety for all.
To be clear, Class H airspace is NOT for the "convenience" of UAV pilots. It is designed for the SAFETY of full scale aviation, pilots and passengers. Class H insures that UAV operators won't be blind-sided by fast moving (125 knots), low flying (under 400' AGL) aviation. It simply tells full scale aviation, "If you're going to fly low, fly slow."
After several conversations with helicopter pilots, I've yet to hear a single reasonable argument against my Class H airspace idea. Even arguments for "emergency situations" have been weak. My points have not been addressed, but are, instead, dismissed. Dismissal does NOT a good argument make.
My proposal for Class H:
* All aviation must adhere to strict air speed limits of < 65 knots 150' AGL to 400' AGL.
* All aviation must adhere to strict air speed limits of < 50 knots from ground to 150' AGL.
* No flying below 100' AGL unless you are on landing approach or there is an emergency that requires it.
This allows helicopters to remain well within safety margins of the Helicopter Height Velocity Diagram for auto rotation:
View attachment 116131
* Class B, C and D airspace takes precedence over Class H, which makes sense because UAV's should NOT be in the flight path or glide slope of any runway, and should not be flying within 4 miles of Class B, C or D anyway.
Exceptions:
* Waterway landing fields for both fixed wing and helicopters.
* Agriculture.
These areas should be marked with the same signage the government uses to forbid UAV activity in local parks.
Keep in mind that this is a first draft of my Class H idea. Like all regulation, open discussion and consultation from experts is required before committing to a final draft.
I'm open to any arguments against Class H. But as of this writing, I've yet to hear even a single reasonable argument against it.
Discuss.
D
An interesting concept, but I Don’t know that there is a need for a “Class H” airspace. However, I would not be opposed to it if it made sense. However...
The FAA, and the regulators that grant them their power, already regulate all airspace.
The FAA already has minimum safe altitudes for manned aircraft operations and maximum safe altitude limits for UAVs. The problem is getting manned and UAV pilots to respect current airspace limits.
A Class H airspace won’t “insure” anything.
If any pilot has a need to exceed the altitude limits or any other rule, there is a process currently in place to apply to the FAA for a waiver and the FAA grants such waivers all the time for safe operations.
The FAA already considers UAVs that weigh over 0.55-lbs “aircraft,” while those that weigh less than 0.55-lbs, currently of no concern to safety. So UAVs that weigh more than 0.55-lbs enjoy almost the same legal status as manned aircraft, which is why folks can’t shoot UAVs out of the sky. I say almost the same because UAVs are expected to stay clear of manned aircraft since they are more maneuverable and don’t have people in them.
It seems that the UAV market has evolved faster than regulators have been able to respond, so there is currently a deficiency of UAV regulations. Consequently, there is an intense focus on UAV regulation and education that some misinterpret as over-regulation. It’s not.
No one has a “right to fly” unregulated in the national airspace. It’s a privilege granted to those who follow the rules, and denied to those who don’t.
