This was forwarded onto me from a friend. If you read it all the way through, we are really screwed. 
http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/ua ... c_rule.pdf
sorry
http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/ua ... c_rule.pdf
sorry
Bad news.. FAA slams the door
- Thread starter reginarh
- Start date
reginarh said:This was forwarded onto me from a friend. If you read it all the way through, we are really screwed.
http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/ua ... c_rule.pdf
sorry
Not really...and we've been talking about this now for quite some time.
Meh.... Wouldn't pay it any mind. With tens of thousands of 'model aircraft' in the air across the country, how are they going to police it? Unless you're being stupid and attracting undue attention to yourself which may cause a member of the public to 'rat' you out, I think you're safe....
Phantom_Menace66 said:
I think enforcement is an issue, but if I were them I'd just use licenses as my method of control. That would cut down on a lot of shenanigans, but without doubt the fools out there would still implicate themselves by way of youtube...making their job that much easier. I can't really see them (the FAA) gaining more funding for enforcement in the current political climate.
I think the FAA's (and it wouldn't matter which party held power) real goal here is to limit competition through regulation. Look at any emerging technology or industry and insert whatever regulatory body, and the same thing is occurring. Lobbyist have the access and the money to get what they want.
We on the other hand have the AMA, a weak and feckless organization too blind to see they're making deals with a devil, and the devil just keeps screwing them.
Money and power will win the day in this fight, which means we've already lost.
I don't understand this panic!!??
I just completely read through the referenced and see nothing to become panicked over? All the document is doing is re-defining the term 'model aircraft' and puts no more restrictions on us other that a demand that we use common sense in flying our quadcopters.
ChesterT :shock:
I just completely read through the referenced and see nothing to become panicked over? All the document is doing is re-defining the term 'model aircraft' and puts no more restrictions on us other that a demand that we use common sense in flying our quadcopters.
ChesterT :shock:
This is just one small part of the FAA order and I'm not even going into commercial uses. (not allowed)
By definition, a model aircraft must be “flown within visual line of sight of the
person operating the aircraft.” P.L. 112-95, section 336(c)(2).
1
Based on the plain
language of the statute, the FAA interprets this requirement to mean that: (1) the aircraft
must be visible at all times to the operator; (2) that the operator must use his or her own
natural vision (which includes vision corrected by standard eyeglasses or contact lenses)
to observe the aircraft; and (3) people other than the operator may not be used in lieu of
the operator for maintaining visual line of sight. Under the criteria above, visual line of
sight would mean that the operator has an unobstructed view of the model aircraft. To
ensure that the operator has the best view of the aircraft, the statutory requirement would
preclude the use of vision-enhancing devices, such as binoculars, night vision goggles,
powered vision magnifying devices, and goggles designed to provide a “first-person
I don't know about you, but my bird gets more than 300' away from me, I have to rely on FPV/GS to figure out where it is.
Talk about a wet blanket.......
By definition, a model aircraft must be “flown within visual line of sight of the
person operating the aircraft.” P.L. 112-95, section 336(c)(2).
1
Based on the plain
language of the statute, the FAA interprets this requirement to mean that: (1) the aircraft
must be visible at all times to the operator; (2) that the operator must use his or her own
natural vision (which includes vision corrected by standard eyeglasses or contact lenses)
to observe the aircraft; and (3) people other than the operator may not be used in lieu of
the operator for maintaining visual line of sight. Under the criteria above, visual line of
sight would mean that the operator has an unobstructed view of the model aircraft. To
ensure that the operator has the best view of the aircraft, the statutory requirement would
preclude the use of vision-enhancing devices, such as binoculars, night vision goggles,
powered vision magnifying devices, and goggles designed to provide a “first-person
I don't know about you, but my bird gets more than 300' away from me, I have to rely on FPV/GS to figure out where it is.
Talk about a wet blanket.......
reginarh said:
I'm not the type of person to follow guidelines that aren't regulations or laws. But by all means don't do commercial. Less competition out there for the rest of us.
ianwood
Taco Wrangler
And when pigs fly, they are considered aircraft too!
It's another attempt to ground any and all commercial operation. It's utter horse sh**. Pretty sure the NTSB judge already ruled on exactly this assertion. Funny that they reference NTSB decisions several times but not the Pirker decision. It is a request for comments, so I suggest we make some. A lot!
EDIT: You can officially make comments on this and the FAA is obligated to review those comments: http://www.regulations.gov/#!submitComm ... -0396-0001
You'll need to make them in a professional manner to be taken seriously. There's a guideline for comments here: http://www.regulations.gov/docs/Tips_Fo ... mments.pdf
If someone wants to write up a template or paragraph or two that succinctly explains why commercial use of UAV should not be treated as aircraft, we can all cut and paste it and get everyone else to do the same.
Thankfully for us the UK has a much more supportive attitude :
British Model Flying Association development officer Manny Williamson told the BBC: "The BMFA is monitoring the developing situation in the United States regarding the FAA's stance on the operation of first-person-view model aircraft with considerable interest.
"First-person-view flight is permitted in the UK under the terms of an exemption from certain provisions of the Air Navigation Order issued annually by the CAA [Civil Aviation Authority].
"The current exemption was issued in May 2014, and there are no indications that the current permissions will be revoked or altered in any way.
"In the UK, first-person-view flight is a recognised and valid aspect of recreational model flying and the BMFA is keen to maintain and support this position for the benefit of all UK model flyers."
British Model Flying Association development officer Manny Williamson told the BBC: "The BMFA is monitoring the developing situation in the United States regarding the FAA's stance on the operation of first-person-view model aircraft with considerable interest.
"First-person-view flight is permitted in the UK under the terms of an exemption from certain provisions of the Air Navigation Order issued annually by the CAA [Civil Aviation Authority].
"The current exemption was issued in May 2014, and there are no indications that the current permissions will be revoked or altered in any way.
"In the UK, first-person-view flight is a recognised and valid aspect of recreational model flying and the BMFA is keen to maintain and support this position for the benefit of all UK model flyers."
Similar threads
