Recreational Operation in Class B Airspace

I want to respond to this thread because it came up while I was doing some searches on a related topic and it doesn't appear that anyone was satisfied with a particular answer. My credentials are CFI/CFII, Remote Pilot Certificate, airplane owner and operator, drone owner and operator and Juris Doctor Candidate (graduating this May). Note: I cannot provide legal advice, and this should not be construed as such.

TL;DR - The statute that you would be violating if you are operating a model aircraft for recreational purposes beyond 5 miles from the primary airport associated with Class B airspace yet within the Class B airspace itself without authorization to do so would indeed be 14 C.F.R. § 91.131 (or, as has been said, through § 101.43 utilizing § 91.131 as indicia of endangering the NAS).

The following is from the FAA's "Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft" which is located here: https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/model_aircraft_spec_rule.pdf

As discussed above, if a model aircraft is operated consistently with the terms of section 336(a) and (c), then it would not be subject to future FAA regulations regarding model aircraft. However, Congress also recognized the potential for such operations to endanger other aircraft and systems of the NAS. Therefore, it specifically stated that “[n]othing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the Administrator to pursue enforcement action against persons operating model aircraft who endanger the safety of the national airspace system.” P.L. 112-95, section 336(b).
...
Reading the broad reference to the NAS, along with Congress’ clear interest in ensuring that model aircraft are safely operated, we conclude that Congress intended for the FAA to be able to rely on a range of our existing regulations to protect users of the airspace and people and property on the ground. Therefore, regardless of whether a model aircraft satisfies the statutory definition and operational requirements described above, if the model aircraft is operated in such a manner that endangers the safety of the NAS, the FAA may take enforcement action consistent with Congress’ mandate.

IV. Examples of Regulations That Apply to Model Aircraft

The FAA could apply several regulations in part 91 when determining whether to take enforcement action against a model aircraft operator for endangering the NAS. The FAA's general operating and flight rules are housed in part 91 of the FAA's regulations. These rules are the baseline rules that apply to all aircraft operated in the United States with limited exceptions, and are the appropriate rules to apply when evaluating model aircraft operations.
...
Rules governing operations in designated airspace are found in §§ 91.126 through 91.135. In general, those rules establish requirements for operating in the various classes of airspace, and near airports in non-designated airspace to minimize risk of collision in higher traffic airspace. Generally, if an operator is unable to comply with the regulatory requirements for operating in a particular class of airspace, the operator would need authorization from air traffic control to operate in that area.

Very well said sir. It's refreshing to see someone who truly understands and "Gets it" from a manned aviation and unmanned aviation point of view.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doogagoodooga
Steven Graham: I would say that your unique situation is an example of having, at the very least, implied authorization to operate in Class B airspace, but I caution others thinking of extrapolating your situation to their own without taking the steps that you and your clubs took to ensure that you are not endangering the NAS.

I agree. Ours is indeed an unusual situation and that someone without operational history at a fixed/controlled location would face an uphill struggle. We even brought it up in our conversations that while ATC could declare us a "threat" and shut us down we were respectfully asking for due consideration based on a history of non interference as well as ongoing processes to ensure this continues to be the case. One of the things we hoped to achieve is to be able to give the AMA and other interested parties a reference for other locations that have similar circumstances. Where we are located it was fortunate that both fields are well off established flight paths for both arrivals and departures.

Still, I maintain my position that notification meets the requirements of part 101.41 even in class B airspace. Getting ATC to a point they don't declare your operation in violation of 101.43 will be the larger challenge.
 
I agree. Ours is indeed an unusual situation and that someone without operational history at a fixed/controlled location would face an uphill struggle. We even brought it up in our conversations that while ATC could declare us a "threat" and shut us down we were respectfully asking for due consideration based on a history of non interference as well as ongoing processes to ensure this continues to be the case. One of the things we hoped to achieve is to be able to give the AMA and other interested parties a reference for other locations that have similar circumstances. Where we are located it was fortunate that both fields are well off established flight paths for both arrivals and departures.

Still, I maintain my position that notification meets the requirements of part 101.41 even in class B airspace. Getting ATC to a point they don't declare your operation in violation of 101.43 will be the larger challenge.

In relation to the FAA position that recreational flights in Class B require "specific air traffic permission and coordination", which is their only specific statement on this issue, I would argue that you have met that requirement in your discussions with Denver ATC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigAl07
In relation to the FAA position that recreational flights in Class B require "specific air traffic permission and coordination", which is their only specific statement on this issue, I would argue that you have met that requirement in your discussions with Denver ATC.




^^^^ Bingo!
 

Recent Posts

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,094
Messages
1,467,590
Members
104,979
Latest member
jrl