Let me add to my last post...
The FAA regulations are confusing and lacking in the least. Here is information _directly_ from the FAA:
Do I need permission from the FAA to fly a UAS for recreation or as a hobby?
There are two ways for recreational or hobby UAS fliers to operate in the national airspace system in accordance with the law and/or FAA regulations. Each of the two options has specific requirements that the UAS operator must follow. The decision as to which option to follow is up to the individual operator.
Option #1. Fly in accordance with the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (Public Law 112-95 Section 336). Under this rule, operators must:
- Fly for hobby or recreational purposes only
- Follow a community-based set of safety guidelines
- Fly the UAS within visual line-of-sight
- Give way to manned aircraft
- Provide prior notification to the airport and air traffic control tower, if one is present, when flying within 5 miles of an airport
- Fly UAS that weigh no more than 55 lbs. unless certified by a community-based organization
- Register the aircraft (UAS over 0.55 lbs. and less than 55 lbs. can be registered online at registermyuas.faa.gov; UAS 55 lbs. or greater must be registered through the FAA's paper-based process)
So the FAA is really stating that a hobby flyer needs to abide by Section 336 in order to fly. In the section listed above they _attempt_ to outline those requirements. But lets actually take a look at the section specifically to see how it reads:
SEC. 336. SPECIAL RULE FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law
relating to the incorporation of unmanned aircraft systems into
Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, including this
subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model
aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if—
(1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational
use;
(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community based
set of safety guidelines and within the programming
of a nationwide community-based organization;
(3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds
unless otherwise certified through a design, construction,
inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered
by a community-based organization;
(4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not
interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and
(5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator
of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport
air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located
at the airport) with prior notice of the operation (model aircraft
operators flying from a permanent location within 5 miles of
an airport should establish a mutually-agreed upon operating
procedure with the airport operator and the airport air traffic
control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the
airport)).
(b) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing 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.
(c) MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘model
aircraft’’ means an unmanned aircraft that is—
(1) capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;
(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating
the aircraft; and
(3) flown for hobby or recreational purposes.
The big issue with this is that flying VLOS is not mention as a limitation, it's contained in the definition of "model aircraft". So if a person does not fly VLOS then what they are using is not a "model aircraft" under this Section. IMHO, someone screwed this up. If they wanted to make it part of the limitations/regulations, they should have included it in that section and not part of a definition. If you look elsewhere (you included a link) the FAA considers flying VLOS as a "guideline"... as it does for flying 400' or less. So is it part of the regulation, is it a definition of model aircraft, is it a "guideline" same as 400', some or all three?
Now back to your question about why some people ignore the VLOS "rule" and not the 400' recommendation. You wanted to know why some people ignore VLOS and recommend against 400'.
You wanted facts... it may be because some people don't think flying VLOS is part of the actual restrictions. I'd certainly argue that. I'd also say that flying beyond VLOS poses very little threat of harm to anyone.
If you want to accomplish something by bring this up... you won't. Not knocking your post. Just saying people are still going to preach 400' every chance they get. I just skip those threads/posts these days.
