Contacted by FAA !

[BigAl07]

Fact Sheet – Small Unmanned Aircraft Regulations (Part 107)

• Print
• Share

For Immediate Release
June 21, 2016
Contact: Les Dorr or Alison Duquette
Phone: 202-267-3883

The new rules for non-hobbyist small unmanned aircraft (UAS) operations – Part 107 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (PDF) – cover a broad spectrum of commercial uses for drones weighing less than 55 pounds. Here are the highlights of the new rule.

How does this apply to this thread? I've missed something.

 

[Deleted member 56578]

the thread was to educate what and about the FAA and their relentless pursuit and contact means, another gentleman said that anyone can say anything, and unless theirs credible sources, they wont listen, so we were polite enough to post them WITH their links seeing as how these do relate to both instances, in such that the Agent from the FAA was pursuing a possible 107 violation and a current violation that was cited above. We understand they have to educate, but we are supplying the additional info to back said claim of the original op and for the education of any further readers.

 

[Deleted member 56578]

Now, what I am wondering is, is when the FCC gets involved with a confiscated drone that have antenna mods on it as well as boosted base stations that goes beyond their rules...that would be a REAL mess. As such, i know I am not going to post in my signature the antenna mods i have on mine, if any. Only a matter of time till the FCC gets involved with videos that have proof of how far their drones fly, basically tattling on yourself.

So i thank you OP for posting this, now we are aware that they are going through extreme measures just to catch, educate and document a simple youtubber that was in violation. We know their serious now, and soon most likely the FCC

 

[Comte de Bleuville]

This area is part of the National Park Service (NPS) and since 2014 all unmanned aircraft have been banned from launching/landing in any NPS managed properties. It's not mysterious or secret it's just NPS and as such flights from it are not allowed.

Does anyone else think that this rule just creates more problems? It forces pilots to launch outside of the park and fly their UAV almost out of sight in the park.

 

[DroneGuy2016]

So i thank you OP for posting this, now we are aware that they are going through extreme measures just to catch, educate and document a simple youtubber that was in violation. We know their serious now, and soon most likely the FCC

I'm not so sure they are actively watching YouTube videos and things of that nature. In my case, they specifically told me that somebody reported me. Somebody complained to the FAA that I was breaking the rules and it wasn't fair and that we all needed to obey the rules. Although the video was on YouTube, I also posted it on this forum asking for peoples opinion. I believe somebody from this forum actually reported me, not somebody who just randomly came across it on YouTube.




Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[N017RW]

Does anyone else think that this rule just creates more problems? It forces pilots to launch outside of the park and fly their UAV almost out of sight in the park.

Even in the face of the restriction(s) some folks just don't get it.
The intention is to prevent flying in the park(s) and disturbing wildlife and presenting safety hazards.

 

[Comte de Bleuville]

Right, but the end result is a flight that is more dangerous because the pilot will just launch from outside of the park further away. I know that for manned aircraft you must fly at least 2,000 ft agl over national parks; is it the same for UAVs? If so you would think that they would publish that next to the rule stating that UAV pilots can't launch or land in national parks.

 

[BigAl07]

Does anyone else think that this rule just creates more problems? It forces pilots to launch outside of the park and fly their UAV almost out of sight in the park.

Not at all. The rule doesn't "force" a UAS operator to do anything. The UAS operator makes the decision to try and circumvent the rules in an attempt to fly over and area they shouldn't. The ONLY reason this rule isn't more restrictive is because Congress's 2012 Act "Special Rules for Model Aircraft" tied the FAA's hands. I have to think that if Congress would have had a crystal ball and could have seen the huge proliferation of UAS flying so recklessly in so many areas they would not have made that act. We can thank the AMA for the rules being as slack as they are right now. If they had not thrown lots of $$ at it via lobbyist the FAA would already be "controlling" pretty much our action in terms of UAS.

I've said it before but I'll go out there again.. the very first time there is any type of UAS to manned aircraft incident (even if it's not a loss of life event) we are going to pay dearly. When John Q. Public becomes "afraid" to fly in manned aircraft and it causes the Commercial Aircraft industry to start losing money we will be faced with a new batch of regulations and stiff enforcement that will make today's regulations seem like the Wild Wild West.

So no not in any way do existing regulations force the UAS operator to do anything, not even follow the rules.

 

[BigAl07]

Right, but the end result is a flight that is more dangerous because the pilot will just launch from outside of the park further away. I know that for manned aircraft you must fly at least 2,000 ft agl over national parks; is it the same for UAVs? If so you would think that they would publish that next to the rule stating that UAV pilots can't launch or land in national parks.

Again the "Special Rules for Model Aircraft" provision protects hobbyists. I suspect that will change shortly.

 

[Comte de Bleuville]

Force was a poor word choice. What I meant is that it is going to lead some pilots to circumvent that rule and their new flight will be more dangerous than if they had launched from the park.

 

[davoud]

Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems and the National Park Service
Current Status
On June 19, 2014, National Park Service Director Jonathon B. Jarvis signed Policy Memorandum 14–05, Unmanned Aircraft – Interim Policy. Its purpose was “to ensure that the use of unmanned aircraft is addressed in a consistent manner by the NPS before a significant level of such use occurs within the National Park System.” Each superintendent was directed “to use the authority under 36 CFR 1.5 to close units of the National Park System to launching, landing, or operating unmanned aircraft…” This policy is still in place and the public may not use unmanned aircraft in the national parks.
Aviation: Unmanned Aerial Systems | U.S. National Park Service

OK, seems authoritative. What I read in that is "Let's ban UAV's before we learn anything about their use in parks."

 

[biggles2b]

From what I understand, you have a camera on every street corner and within every one block or so. It is quite easy for them to identify you on the spot. AmiRight?

Hahaha you're right about the cameras. But not in small communities (villages) and the countryside. We do have in this country the largest amount of CCTV per head of capita, Big Brother is definitely watching us, the politicians are afraid of the people, what more can I say.

Good luck with the FAA, I know the CAA here have guidelines but they, at the moment, do not hassle us!

 

[NRJ]

I just spoke with the FAA. There were two or three guys on the phone and they were all pretty cool about it actually. It turns out I posted some videos flying near the Blue Ridge Parkway which is off-limits and I was not aware of that. Somebody got mad and reported me because I was not playing by the rules but I honestly did not even know the entire blue ridge parkway was off-limits.


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

How did you confirm they were from the FAA?

 

[angeloneemt]

I would contact your local Flight Standards District Office or FSDO which is usually located at larger airports. Explain to them about the notification that you received. They can verify if it is legit or not. You wont get in trouble for questioning if it is real or not. But if they have to hunt you down, and they will, it will be a LOT worse. My local FSDO has been extremely helpful and most are and they are all usually level headed. I am a licensed private pilot so I have gone to FSDO's for many questions and answers regarding both drones and real aircraft. They are good people and they want to help!!

 

[dgd3]

Yesterday I received a message on Facebook from someone claiming to be from the FAA. Looking at his profile it seems legit and he actually wants me to call him at his office. He says my videos concern him and there is an allegation of me flying commercially which I have not done. He wants my name and my FAA registration number and to discuss this. I don't mind discussing this with him but I do not feel comfortable just giving him my information especially when I have not done anything wrong. I have no idea what could be concerning in my videos either. Should I call the guy or does this sound like something I should avoid? It seems like a strange way for the FAA to conduct business in my opinion. But I guess he doesn't know who I am so this is the only way they can contact me.

Ignore.

 

[Deleted member 56578]

Ignore.

turned out to be real.

 

[DroneGuy2016]

Apparently nobody reads any of the messages in this thread. This was in fact the FAA. They gave me their phone number and I called them. The phone number is exactly what is on their website and the guys name is also on the website. 100% real.


Sent from my iPhone using PhantomPilots mobile app

 

[Deleted member 56578]

Mods, can this please be stickies and locked?

 

[Geoffrey Goeggel]

You have a few FAA bureaucrats responding to a 3rd party complaint. I recommend you comply fully and do pretty much everything they want. Apologize, take down the video, promise to never do it again, ... . They are as anxious as you to close this case, and the you both can move on.

 

[GadgetGuy]

turned out to be real.

You still had no legal obligation to respond to a posting to you on FB, whether from the FAA or any other entity, real or fake.