UAS America Files FAA Petition Rulemaking for microdrones

[knuckles]

http://dronelife.com/2014/12/22/uas-ame ... ro-drones/

 

[ianwood]

Re: UAS America Files FAA Petition Rulemaking for microdrone

I found these two sections to be very interesting:

The FAA has suggested in various recent exemption documents that 49 U.S.C. § 44711 requires UAS operators (other than hobbyists) to obtain a pilot’s certificate. UAS Fund disagrees that the existing types of pilot certificates are a legally mandated requirement for future UAS regulation or that such a requirement is a sound policy position for either the Department of
Transportation or the United States as a whole, for a variety of reasons. First, the statute only requires certificates for “air commerce” which has a specific definition that does not apply to UAS operations conducted under the parameters in this Petition.4

If the FAA is correct that no aircraft may be operated for a business purpose without a private or commercial pilot certificate, the decades-long license-free operation of devices listed in Part 101 is incomprehensible. The better explanation is that not every operation of an “aircraft” requires a pilot certificate and that the FAA is not mandated by statute to impose a pilot “certificate” requirement for the new category of devices known as unmanned aircraft systems, but is free to waive the requirement.

 

[SilentAV8R]

Re: UAS America Files FAA Petition Rulemaking for microdrone

My only concern about this is that the long awaited sUAS Rule NPRM is allegedly going to drop any day now. I hope this does not cause that to be delayed again!! But the petition makes some very good points. The FAA's lack of understanding of sUAS and the differences in size and capabilities is going to result in a sledge hammer approach rather than a more refined rule.

 

[msinger]

Re: UAS America Files FAA Petition Rulemaking for microdrone

49 USC§ 44711 states the following:

A person may not serve in any capacity as an airman with respect to a civil aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance used, or
intended for use, in air commerce without an airman certificate authorizing the airman to serve in the capacity for which the certificate was issued

The problem with the FAA's argument is that there is no airman certificate authorized for flying a UAV. Requiring a private pilot license does not seem like a reasonable solution.

 

[SilentAV8R]

Re: UAS America Files FAA Petition Rulemaking for microdrone

Here's two guys that did not get the memo:

http://www.suasnews.com/2014/12/33490/d ... s-stadium/

 

[msinger]

Re: UAS America Files FAA Petition Rulemaking for microdrone

Sadly, this is going to continue to happen since people either don't care to learn the rules or think they are above them. It's the hobbyists the FAA should be cracking down on -- not the minority that wants to commercially shoot photos/videos on private property owned by the person paying to have the work done.

 

[SteveMann]

Re: UAS America Files FAA Petition Rulemaking for microdrone

I see two significant problems with the proposed Part 107.

There is a problem with 107.13(h) "No person may operate a micro unmanned aircraft over privately-owned property without the express or implied permission from the property owner, tenant in possession, or an authorized representative thereof." It is illogical and likely unenforceable. In the 1946 case U.S. vs. Causby, the Supreme Court said landowners have exclusive right of airspace surrounding their property. In part, the decision says “The landowner owns at least as much of the space above the ground as the can occupy or use in connection with the land”. Overflight above 100 ft AGL is completely acceptable as it is not always possible to reach the intended location without some overflight. ( I was once threatened with a lawsuit for flying a helicopter over private property to take aerial photos of an inaccessible property that was completely surrounded by private properties.)

107.19(d) conflicts with the proposed Pilot Qualification and Certification. "UAS Fund proposes that no medical certificate be required for operation of this category of UAS." but 107.19 says: "Any other FAA pilot certificate that has as a requisite a written airman knowledge test may, if said certificate is current and in good standing, serve as a micro unmanned aircraft pilot certificate under subsection (b)". The conflict is that a Pilot Certificate does not expire, but a recurring flight review (the BFR) is required to be current. Therefore I am required by 107.19 to have a current medical and BFR. Since it is impossible to receive a pilot certificate (except for the Student Pilot) without passing a written exam, then currency is not required.

I also have a problem with codifying an insurance requirement in FAR 107. This has never been done before in federal regulations because tort insurance is the exclusive domain of the states. (Don't argue about Obamacare because health insurance is not tort insurance).

Silent is concerned that this may further delay the pending NPRM, but more likely, if this Petition for Rulemaking is similar to what the proposed NPRM also says, the FAA would more likely dismiss the petition without prejudice because of the duplication.

 

[SteveMann]

Re: UAS America Files FAA Petition Rulemaking for microdrone

Sadly, this is going to continue to happen since people either don't care to learn the rules or think they are above them. It's the hobbyists the FAA should be cracking down on -- not the minority that wants to commercially shoot photos/videos on private property owned by the person paying to have the work done.

It is a lot more likely that they don't even know that there are rules.
So, you would like to fine people into bankruptcy or throw them in jail when education would likely solve the issue?

 

[Happyflyer]

Re: UAS America Files FAA Petition Rulemaking for microdrone

1st Violation=Stiff warning and records kept on event. Warning on what next violation will cost you.
2nd Violation=A few hundred dollars. Warning on what next violation will cost you.
3rd Violation=Device is confiscated. A few thousand dollars fine and possible jail time.
All of these would not apply if you injured or even killed some one.
And no "plea bargaining" to get fine down to "spitting on the sidewalk" that happens so often in todays courts.

 

[msinger]

Re: UAS America Files FAA Petition Rulemaking for microdrone

Sadly, this is going to continue to happen since people either don't care to learn the rules or think they are above them. It's the hobbyists the FAA should be cracking down on -- not the minority that wants to commercially shoot photos/videos on private property owned by the person paying to have the work done.

It is a lot more likely that they don't even know that there are rules.
So, you would like to fine people into bankruptcy or throw them in jail when education would likely solve the issue?

We should execute them. Let's make an example out of them. Other people will catch the viral news and learn quickly then.

(I can jump to unreasonable conclusions too )