Airport Contact Question

Newbe question. Im flying recreationally and an area I want to fly in is about 4.5 miles from a local airport. So do i just need to contact them and let them know i will be flying in this area or do i need to get their approval as well?
be a are there are rules about flying your drone. Download any app from Applestore or Android who tells you if you are in a "no fly zone" or not. And if you can/might fly there. Most of the DJI models warning you if you are in a critical area and you have to agree if you take the risk to fly there. Rgrds. driverseat
 
I’ve often wondered what the ATC does with the notification. Is it recorded (written down) in some fashion? Is the information “broadcast” to manned aircraft? Traffic rerouted? Is the ATC proactive, or is the notification just used retroactively to pursue the UAV operator following an incident?

I’ve had ATC not even ask my name or my FAA issued number, why no interest in that information?
 
I’ve often wondered what the ATC does with the notification. Is it recorded (written down) in some fashion? Is the information “broadcast” to manned aircraft? Traffic rerouted? Is the ATC proactive, or is the notification just used retroactively to pursue the UAV operator following an incident?

I’ve had ATC not even ask my name or my FAA issued number, why no interest in that information?
If you are not on file with a waiver, we have a questionnaire that we use and log the information and we also note it in our tower logs. The individual is the encouraged to obtain a waiver from the FAA to streamline the process of notification. Once we are aware of the activity we notify any air traffic that it may affect. We do not normally reroute any air traffic, we just notify them drone activity is taking place, based on the information give. It is the responsibility of the drone operator to avoid any potential conflicts. If it appears that the drone operation will impact flight safety or become an unnecessary burden on the controller, it will most likely be denied. But as I said in an earlier post that is rarely the case.
 
Email I received:

Thank you for notifying us of your drone flight.
For additional information and a map of airspace at Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport, reference our Gateway Airport airspace map.
The following information was recorded
...
 
Sorry but when you state only the following, Class BRAVO requires approval not just notification, it seems like you are stating this as fact. No other context was given as to it only being what you were told or what was on the FAA website... just the single statement.

I don't doubt for a moment that someone at the FAA told you this. I also doubt they really understood the issue and it is a fact that people at the FAA lie and that the FAA as a whole has lied. I'm sure you recall all of the lies the FAA put out about a 400' rule. They then confirmed that there was no such restriction. They have lied about many other UAV related things as well. So forgive me if I doubt things that the FAA states as a whole and certainly what one unknown person happens to mention in passing.



Actually I'm going by your words:

Recreational Operation in Class B Airspace

"Class Bravo carries it's own set of rules (some are the same as other classes but some are not) and this one is for ALL aircraft (which UAS are indeed now aircraft):
§ 91.131 Operations in Class B airspace.
(a)Operating rules. No person may operate an aircraft within a Class B airspace area except in compliance with § 91.129 and the following rules:
(1) The operator must receive an ATC clearance from the ATC facility having jurisdiction for that area before operating an aircraft in that area."


I'm just trying to let people know _all_ of the facts. If someone only states, "you need permission not just notification to fly in Class B airspace", I'm going to point out that the facts don't seem to support this (and give examples of why). THEN people can make their own decisions.
[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

It's too bad you have had reason to call FAA personnel liars. I have found they are more than willing to work with drone pilots in a way that respects safety, uses common sense, and tries, when possible, to work out a plan that accommodates the drone pilot.
 
If you are not on file with a waiver, we have a questionnaire that we use and log the information and we also note it in our tower logs. The individual is the encouraged to obtain a waiver from the FAA to streamline the process of notification. Once we are aware of the activity we notify any air traffic that it may affect. We do not normally reroute any air traffic, we just notify them drone activity is taking place, based on the information give. It is the responsibility of the drone operator to avoid any potential conflicts. If it appears that the drone operation will impact flight safety or become an unnecessary burden on the controller, it will most likely be denied. But as I said in an earlier post that is rarely the case.

Thank you for being a proactive controller on the job and for commenting here. I appreciate receiving the info.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cajuncontroller
It's too bad you have had reason to call FAA personnel liars. I have found they are more than willing to work with drone pilots in a way that respects safety, uses common sense, and tries, when possible, to work out a plan that accommodates the drone pilot.

I did not call anyone person in the FAA a liar, I stated that the FAA as a whole has lied (many times about drone related issues). That is simply a known fact.
 
I did not call anyone person in the FAA a liar, I stated that the FAA as a whole has lied (many times about drone related issues). That is simply a known fact.
I'm not sure what you mean by the FAA lying about drone related issues. This is something fairly new to the FAA. I like to think that they got caught off guard and are scrambling to regulate something that has become extremely popular and accessible in a very short time. It seems like the regulations we as controllers must implement and follow change as quickly as the are written. It is just as confusing for us at times as it is for drone operators. And I do both. The best advice I can give anyone is use common sense safety, if you think its unsafe then it probably is. Just try and imagine if you were the pilot of an aircraft or a passenger in a aircraft would you want an unmanned done operating in close proximity to the aircraft you were on, especially if it were some kid who was trying to get a cool video for their YouTube or other social media channel?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigAl07
I'm not sure what you mean by the FAA lying about drone related issues. This is something fairly new to the FAA. I like to think that they got caught off guard and are scrambling to regulate something that has become extremely popular and accessible in a very short time. It seems like the regulations we as controllers must implement and follow change as quickly as the are written. It is just as confusing for us at times as it is for drone operators. And I do both. The best advice I can give anyone is use common sense safety, if you think its unsafe then it probably is. Just try and imagine if you were the pilot of an aircraft or a passenger in a aircraft would you want an unmanned done operating in close proximity to the aircraft you were on, especially if it were some kid who was trying to get a cool video for their YouTube or other social media channel?

They told everyone that they could not fly over 400'. It was not until the AMA called them on this that they corrected themselves (Section 336 is not very long... they knew it was not a regulation). The FAA claimed xxx number of near misses were reported and put out propaganda showing tons of drone flying around planes. They refused to release the list of these "near misses". When they finally did, we saw the _real_ truth. The FAA and DOT stood in front of everyone when they created the registration and when asked how they would get the drone in order to read the registration number, they said the problem was not getting the drone... it was matching the drone to the person. How many drones have they gotten over the years? How many times have the used the registration to match an illegal flight with a person? Now they want people to put the registration on the exterior of the drone. Why?

If you think the FAA was "caught off guard" it was only because they refused to do anything meaningful. They dragged their feet and were years late in doing anything. They came up with this "registration" which was meaningless. Now they think putting a registration number on the exterior of a drone will solve some problem? Seriously?

DJI has done more to promote safe drone flights then the FAA.
 
They told everyone that they could not fly over 400'.

They indicated on their website not to fly over 400' but never quoted regulation, later their publications put this out as a "recommendation."

How many drones have they gotten over the years?

I know they've gotten others but they needed only one "silver bullet" and they didn't even need the owner registration number!

<img src="https://cdnews-pull2-mvaqgu6sx.netd...ads/2017/09/Drone-hits-helicopter-590x332.jpg" alt="Image result for Drone hits helicopter"/>
 
They indicated on their website not to fly over 400' but never quoted regulation, later their publications put this out as a "recommendation."
That was only after the AMA called them out. Until then, they claimed it was a regulation. This is the whole reason why they had to correct themselves.
 
That was only after the AMA called them out. Until then, they claimed it was a regulation. This is the whole reason why they had to correct themselves.
Show us where they "stated" it was regulation. I could agree they "implied it" and co-mingled verbiage with 107 requirements, but they never put out a 400' limit as regulation to hobbyists.
 
This was copied from an old post on this site:

From the AMA

Dear Members,

Our hobby has faced many challenges this year as we address an increase in government intervention and proposed regulations. AMA has been aggressively advocating for our hobby, and during the past few weeks, we've been happy to report successful progress.

Today, our members have yet another AMA government advocacy victory to celebrate.

There has been confusion among our members as to whether operations above 400 feet are permitted by the FAA. AMA has remained steadfast that the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (Section 336 of the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act) permits operations above 400 feet if conducted within our safety program requiring the pilot to be an AMA member, to avoid and not interfere with manned aircraft, and to keep the model in visual line of sight of the pilot/observer.

In January of this year, the AMA requested that the FAA clarify the 400-foot issue in writing. We are happy to share that in a recent letter to the AMA, the FAA recognized AMA's role as a community-based organization and acknowledged our safety program, including allowing flight above 400 feet under appropriate circumstances.

In this letter, dated July 7, 2016, the FAA states:

"...model aircraft may be flow consistently with Section 336 and agency guidelines at altitudes above 400 feet when following a community-based organization's safety guidelines."

"Community-based organizations, such as the Academy of Model Aeronautics, may establish altitude limitations in their safety guidelines that exceed the FAA's 400 AGL altitude recommendation."

Essentially, this letter confirms that sailplanes, large model aircraft, turbines, and other disciplines can responsibly operate above 400 feet if the AMA member is operating within our safety programming. Equally important, the FAA again acknowledges AMA as a community-based organization.

This victory falls on the heels of other successful AMA efforts, including an AMA member exemption from the FAA's Final sUAS Rule (Part 107), the removal of problematic text in the 2016 FAA Reauthorization Bill, and preserving the Special Rule for Model Aircraft through 2017.

These successes do not transpire easily and our advocacy efforts are not over. We will continue to work with the FAA toward reducing the burden of registration requirements on AMA members. Throughout the next 14 months, we will continue to work with Congress toward a long-term reauthorization bill that will further strengthen the Special Rule for Model Aircraft.

We want to extend our appreciation to all of our members and donors for your support throughout this process. To read the letter from the FAA clarifying the 400-foot guidance, visit www.modelaircraft.org/gov.

Thank you,

AMA Government Relations Team
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cajuncontroller
I have a small airport about 4 3/4 miles away from my neighborhood they want a 24 hour notice from me when I fly... Ok look if I'm working on some camera settings I'll take my bird up couple hundred feet and do what I need to do. There are never low flying aircraft here. I don't bother with that 24 hour crap unless I'm planning on using a few battery's. Common sence if you hear something like a helicopter coming look around for it drop your altitude if you're up around 400 foot and bring it home no big deal.
 
I have a small airport about 4 3/4 miles away from my neighborhood they want a 24 hour notice from me when I fly... Ok look if I'm working on some camera settings I'll take my bird up couple hundred feet and do what I need to do. There are never low flying aircraft here. I don't bother with that 24 hour crap unless I'm planning on using a few battery's. Common sence if you hear something like a helicopter coming look around for it drop your altitude if you're up around 400 foot and bring it home no big deal.
Do you know the class of airspace of the airport? If its Class D then most likely no notification is required. But without knowing the specifications of the airport I couldn't say for sure. I assume it has a control tower since you mentioned they require 24 hour notification. Honestly if it is in the U.S. that is just an arbitrary requirement from the airport. I don't know of any FAA requirement for 24 hour notification unless it's something I have yet to hear about.
 
Do you know the class of airspace of the airport? If its Class D then most likely no notification is required. But without knowing the specifications of the airport I couldn't say for sure. I assume it has a control tower since you mentioned they require 24 hour notification. Honestly if it is in the U.S. that is just an arbitrary requirement from the airport. I don't know of any FAA requirement for 24 hour notification unless it's something I have yet to hear about.
No tower.. But the one in Frederick md does have a tower and I do call them if I'm flying by there.
 
Does no one make software for the 336 hobbyist to notify the airports? Seems it would make life easier for both the pilot and the airports. I'm new so please be gentle.
 
Does no one make software for the 336 hobbyist to notify the airports? Seems it would make life easier for both the pilot and the airports. I'm new so please be gentle.
The Airmap app is pretty good . They have phone #'s of airports where your flying. I haven't tried to call because there's only 2 I have to worry about where I fly. Some say they work some say there numbers for the airports not the towers. I'm sure they can put you in touch with the tower's. It's a good app for checkin out no fly zones
 
I have a small airport about 4 3/4 miles away from my neighborhood they want a 24 hour notice from me when I fly... Ok look if I'm working on some camera settings I'll take my bird up couple hundred feet and do what I need to do. There are never low flying aircraft here. I don't bother with that 24 hour crap unless I'm planning on using a few battery's. Common sence if you hear something like a helicopter coming look around for it drop your altitude if you're up around 400 foot and bring it home no big deal.


While I do think that a 24hr notice is over-the-top and over reach, keep in mind that FARs are not negotiable in terms of contacting the airport prior to a flight (assuming we are speaking as a hobbyist here). If the law is contact the airport to make notification prior to flight that goes for ANY hobby flight.

Even though you "intend" to keep the aircraft low and safe what happens if you have a Tx/Rx malfunction and the automatic RTH function kicks in. The aircraft is going to ascend (without user intervention) to a preset altitude and head home (hopefully to the home-point where it took off from).

Just because you only intend to fly for a check of this & that doesn't give you free reign to ignore any regulations/laws.
 
While I do think that a 24hr notice is over-the-top and over reach, keep in mind that FARs are not negotiable in terms of contacting the airport prior to a flight (assuming we are speaking as a hobbyist here). If the law is contact the airport to make notification prior to flight that goes for ANY hobby flight.

Even though you "intend" to keep the aircraft low and safe what happens if you have a Tx/Rx malfunction and the automatic RTH function kicks in. The aircraft is going to ascend (without user intervention) to a preset altitude and head home (hopefully to the home-point where it took off from).

Just because you only intend to fly for a check of this & that doesn't give you free reign to ignore any regulations/laws.
Lol really? I kinda knew there'd be a you on here sayin something like this.Nothing fly's over my house lower than 4 to 5000 feet. My RTL is 200 feet. I know some of you are Joe pro pilots that just happen to only fly drones! I live in the country. Like I said before COMMON SENCE.If your particular circumstances are not like mine then don't do it. There's no such thing as the drone cops that will send black opps helicopters after you unless you're really stupid and flying where you have no business flying then you deserve what comes your way. You do what you do and I'll be a big boy and do what I do...
 

Recent Posts

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,105
Messages
1,467,679
Members
104,992
Latest member
Johnboy94