Our concerns are going... mainstream? Article in Reason.

[madkiwi]

This popped up in my feeds today.

Hit me in the feels.

Does Uncle Sam consider your backyard restricted airspace?

The areas where you need FAA approval to fly a model plane or drone are surprisingly large.

reason.com

 

[mavic3usa]

This popped up in my feeds today.

Hit me in the feels.

Does Uncle Sam consider your backyard restricted airspace?

The areas where you need FAA approval to fly a model plane or drone are surprisingly large.

reason.com

To be honest, I'm mostly ok with this. I'd rather have the FAA own it all than divide up among the greedy private property owners and the state/local government entities. My only concern would be the FAA not doing enough to enforce their turf. As the article said about controlling the national airspace ".....though some have come up with creative ways around that...." I cannot risk having another process in place (such as 150 feet and lower for example) because anything else will just get abused IMO. That being said, as long as everything is safety-related, I can understand what we have now although I'm not happy about even the smallest of safety violations being equal to potential huge fines and penalties. One of these days, we're going to need a "schedule" or else the legal system will establish the rules. We cannot continue with a million dollar fine for everything but we'll let you off with a slap on the wrist....until we don't.

Finally I think the article misses the point when it describes restrictions outside of DC or special areas like NYC. Makes it seem like there are these huge pockets of controlled airspace (misconstrued as no fly zones) because they are near important places like airports or military places. I know it's like that in some places but in many places....it isn't. Restricted airspace doesn't mean "no drones" it just means you need authorization and with LAANC in place to provide automatic authorization if you [easily] qualify, these grids are mostly inconsequential to your recreational drone flying. The layperson who wants to buy their first drone and fly it near home often believes there's nowhere reasonable to fly.

Generally, I'm not happy with less than half of us following *all* the rules and the vast majority of us following *none* of the rules. Still no one is getting hurt or killed and the property damage is minimal but there has to be some incentive for following the rules else the entire hobby suffers because there is no distinction being made. Imagine if every time there was a car accident, the entire automotive driving community was thrown under the bus. But it isn't because people are able easily point to "he was speeding" or "he ran a red light" or "he got a ticket" so that's on him, the rest of us are fine. This will never happen as long as a guy with a drone was caught flying near the nfl game and they had to hunt him down and arrest him for it. A $500 ticket would send a better message IMO.

 

[Cafguy]

Interesting- They show Hollywood and Burbank as controlled zones I am not sure what that means- In the city of Hollywood and most parts of Burbank, You Cannot fly a drone, they are not allowed to be flown anywhere in the town of Hollywood not even the Parks. . Anaheim is Disney, SO unless you want to end up in a prison Don't fly within 3 Miles of Disney!! NO JOKE! There are A LOT of places here in L.A. you can fly BUT you must do your Homework Here in California Having a Trust card will keep you out of trouble The police Know to check for it and if you dont have one you are packing it up for the Day. Any place with lots of tourism you can go ahead and count as a no fly zone.

 

[Vic Moss]

This popped up in my feeds today.

Hit me in the feels.

Does Uncle Sam consider your backyard restricted airspace?

The areas where you need FAA approval to fly a model plane or drone are surprisingly large.

reason.com

Reactionary article full of inflammatory wording with inaccurate descriptions of controlled airspace. Definitely an opinion piece, and not a news article. They should state as much.

Read the "About" section, and you'll understand the reasons for their inaccuracies.

 

[MS Coast]

I'm amused by the way they claim credit for mapping controlled airspace instead of pointing out that the FAA provides readily accessible and free online sources for that information and several private companies have incorporated it into free apps.

"Reason has compiled a map of cities across America where the skies ain't free."

This looks like another situation where so-called content creators are paid by volume rather than quality.

 

[Vic Moss]

I'm amused by the way they claim credit for mapping controlled airspace instead of pointing out that the FAA provides readily accessible and free online sources for that information and several private companies have incorporated it into free apps.

"Reason has compiled a map of cities across America where the skies ain't free."

That is one of their more egregious statements.

This looks like another situation where so-called content creators are paid by volume rather than quality.

 

[TonyPHX]

Every time I see these types of articles it makes me appreciate more what you @Vic Moss and DSPA do. Keep up the truth telling and help set things right.

 

[Vic Moss]

Every time I see these types of articles it makes me appreciate more what you @Vic Moss and DSPA do. Keep up the truth telling and help set things right.

Thank you!!!!

 

[Dbez1]

Every time I see these types of articles it makes me appreciate more what you @Vic Moss and DSPA do. Keep up the truth telling and help set things right.

Amen to that! Hat’s off to Vic and others that are fighting to keep the drone industry alive and well.

 

[Hermey]

This post just led me to do some checking on controlled airspace around airports, to look at the size of these regions of controlled airspace, and compare that size to what seems realistically needed to protect manned aircraft from possible collisions with drones. How much space is realistically needed? I don't know how FAA measures it but if we allowed 3 times the max height at which drones are permitted to fly, eg a manned aircraft at 1200 feet, that seems it would suffice to me.

As an example, I looked at San Francisco International Airport,

I noticed from the B4UFLY app, that the controlled airspace around SFO extends 4.5 miles north of the airport. Using the flight app ADS-B Exchange - track aircraft live I checked the altitude of arriving and departing flights from that airport, and it seems that airplanes are higher than 1200 ft if they are 3.3 miles from the airport. So that in itself suggests that the controlled airspace around SFO is about 1 mile more in diameter than my theory would indicate it needs to be.

 

[mavic3usa]

This post just led me to do some checking on controlled airspace around airports, to look at the size of these regions of controlled airspace, and compare that size to what seems realistically needed to protect manned aircraft from possible collisions with drones. How much space is realistically needed? I don't know how FAA measures it but if we allowed 3 times the max height at which drones are permitted to fly, eg a manned aircraft at 1200 feet, that seems it would suffice to me.

As an example, I looked at San Francisco International Airport,

I noticed from the B4UFLY app, that the controlled airspace around SFO extends 4.5 miles north of the airport. Using the flight app ADS-B Exchange - track aircraft live I checked the altitude of arriving and departing flights from that airport, and it seems that airplanes are higher than 1200 ft if they are 3.3 miles from the airport. So that in itself suggests that the controlled airspace around SFO is about 1 mile more in diameter than my theory would indicate it needs to be.

I don't know much about the process for assigning controlled airspace but SFO does appear to be overly large especially for the abundance of 50' and 100' grid that far from the airport. I'm more used to seeing 400' grids all around the edges outside the approaches but I understand if over the water is limited in light of the numerous emergencies that airport is known for.

 

[Vic Moss]

This post just led me to do some checking on controlled airspace around airports, to look at the size of these regions of controlled airspace, and compare that size to what seems realistically needed to protect manned aircraft from possible collisions with drones. How much space is realistically needed? I don't know how FAA measures it but if we allowed 3 times the max height at which drones are permitted to fly, eg a manned aircraft at 1200 feet, that seems it would suffice to me.

Controlled airspace has been around a lot longer than UAS. That airspace is designed with manned flight paths in mind, not unmanned. So our introduction into controlled airspace doesn't change where it's actually needed. The UASFMs are what we need to concern ourselves with.

Where controlled airspace is literally has nothing to do with drones.

UASFMs are based on all of controlled airspace, not just UAS distance from aircraft. The FAA told ATC managers to choose a UAS Point of Contact (POC) and decide where drones can fly without "further coordination" with ATC. The grids with lower AGL limits are there to maintain separation between manned and unmanned. Once they get to 400', that's the limit we're allowed to fly w/o the 400' "bubble" exception.

According to 107.41, we need permission from ATC to fly in controlled airspace, so the UASFMs give that to use without needing to contact ATC up to that AGL ATC has set. 107.41(b) sets our limit at 400' and it also gives us the 400' bubble exception. While there is no actual language in 107 stating we can't use the 400' bubble in controlled airspace, the current policy is that we can't. There is a chance at some point we could see the UASFMs changed to allow the 400' bubble in certain areas, but there isn't any talk of that now, and we'd have to get a bunch of FAA divisions (& ATC UAS POCs) to sign off on something like that.

And that's a huge ask.

As an example, I looked at San Francisco International Airport,

I noticed from the B4UFLY app, that the controlled airspace around SFO extends 4.5 miles north of the airport. Using the flight app ADS-B Exchange - track aircraft live I checked the altitude of arriving and departing flights from that airport, and it seems that airplanes are higher than 1200 ft if they are 3.3 miles from the airport. So that in itself suggests that the controlled airspace around SFO is about 1 mile more in diameter than my theory would indicate it needs to be.

Again, drones are not what determine where controlled airspace exists. It's all based on ATC services provided to manned aviation. Drones are not part of that equation at all.

 

[MS Coast]

Again, drones are what determine where controlled airspace exists. It's all based on ATC services provided to manned aviation. Drones are part of that equation at all.

Are there a couple of "nots" missing?