Public Law 112-95, Section 336 – Special Rule for Model Aircraft

[Falcon1az]

Haven't seen specific discussion regarding the specific rules of flying in the national airspace system here in the US. Wanted to open the topic up to discuss.

From the reading I've found (AMA model aviation and FAA) - you are not allowed, prohibited from flying beyond line-of-sight of your machine. Regardless if you are Part 107 operator or a recreational or hobby UAS flier.

Furthermore, you cannot fly FPV without a spotter. The spotter is required to maintain line-of-sight of your machine and be prepared to take control of the machine.

It is hard to see a Mavic at 400'... never mind a mile away (5280') or more.

What kind of problems (legal problems) are we skirting if we are flying these machines beyond line-of-sight?

Wonder what impact these restrictions will have on flying drones. I have enjoyed flying my machine some distance away to make a video and fly it back. I think thats a fun part of having the machine to begin with.

 

[Falcon1az]

A member from our flying club raised concern over flying drones beyond line of sight. This is where the beginning of this came from.

 

[Mavman]

IMO we should be conscientious, considerate, and safe while flying - but sometimes rules are meant to be broken. Civil disobedience is a thing, and it does encourage the adoption of more reasonable rules. Flying out of LOS is 90% of the thrill of flying.

Again, we should be safe and considerate, and that has NOTHING to do with the regulation flavor of the week.

Cue the rule fascists.

 

[TheWolfen]

Sadly... The Mavic would be practically useless to me if I stayed within LOS. I can lose sight of it at times at under 500 ft and always at around 800-1000 ft. However, I also fly extremely safely, have never crashed and have never put anyone or anything in danger due to my flying.

This is a rule that needs to change to take into account modern technologies and systems.

 

[geardaddys]

In reading the FAA material as closely as I'm able... It appears to me that most of the "regulations" are actually "recommendations" for hobbyists.. If you're flying for $$, then it's a whole different ballgame.. It says "we'd appreciate if you would.." not "you must"...

Safety Guidelines

• Fly at or below 400 feet
• Keep your UAS within sight
• Never fly near other aircraft, especially near airports
• Never fly over groups of people
• Never fly over stadiums or sports events
• Never fly near emergency response efforts such as fires
• Never fly under the influence
• Be aware of airspace requirements

 

[tcope]

Haven't seen specific discussion regarding the specific rules of flying in the national airspace system here in the US. Wanted to open the topic up to discuss.

Huh? This is discussed a weekly basis, almost always resulting in pages of posts about the correct FAA regulations.

You may want to use the search feature instead of starting up yet another thread on this same old subject.

 

[Falcon1az]

In reading the FAA material as closely as I'm able... It appears to me that most of the "regulations" are actually "recommendations" for hobbyists.. If you're flying for $$, then it's a whole different ballgame.. It says "we'd appreciate if you would.." not "you must"...

Safety Guidelines

• Fly at or below 400 feet
• Keep your UAS within sight
• Never fly near other aircraft, especially near airports
• Never fly over groups of people
• Never fly over stadiums or sports events
• Never fly near emergency response efforts such as fires
• Never fly under the influence
• Be aware of airspace requirements

No these are not recommendation these are rules. In the FAA language it's very specific about being a part 107 operator and keeping your machine in line of sight. Furthermore it is also very specific that community-based organizations like the AMA provide guidance to hobby or recreational users. In both cases the FAA and the AMA States beside their rules are keep your machine in line of sight. My question is if police officer walks up on you and talks to you about your machine and ask you where it is and he can't see it does that mean you get cited? Can your flight profile be downloaded and reviewed by the FAA and if it's determined you fall in the machine out of line of sight are you now under investigation by the FAA?

 

[Falcon1az]

Huh? This is discussed a weekly basis, almost always resulting in pages of posts about the correct FAA regulations.

You may want to use the search feature instead of starting up yet another thread on this same old subject.

Sorry I posted on something that I hadn't seen in a discussion topic. I didn't mean to trouble or burden you with your input on all these posts that I haven't been able to find yet.

 

[Falcon1az]

Is anyone under investigation by the FAA for flying out of a line of sight? Has anyone been cited by local police or other authorities for flying air machine without a spotter or be on line of sight? Is anybody had problems with members after flying field for flying out of line of sight or without a spotter?

 

[Michael Ainsworth]

If you do a search such as FAA regulations you will get about ten pages of discussions, there are many more around.
It opens up a whole can of worms.

 

[wayy510]

Haven't seen specific discussion regarding the specific rules of flying in the national airspace system here in the US. Wanted to open the topic up to discuss.

From the reading I've found (AMA model aviation and FAA) - you are not allowed, prohibited from flying beyond line-of-sight of your machine. Regardless if you are Part 107 operator or a recreational or hobby UAS flier.

Furthermore, you cannot fly FPV without a spotter. The spotter is required to maintain line-of-sight of your machine and be prepared to take control of the machine.

It is hard to see a Mavic at 400'... never mind a mile away (5280') or more.

What kind of problems (legal problems) are we skirting if we are flying these machines beyond line-of-sight?

Wonder what impact these restrictions will have on flying drones. I have enjoyed flying my machine some distance away to make a video and fly it back. I think thats a fun part of having the machine to begin with.

None. FAA and AMA "guidelines" are not law. Furthermore, both entities are not law makers or law enforcement and cannot create or pass laws.

Tell me, what State or Federal statutes would you be breaking of you didn't follow their self-imposed "guidelines"?

I can tell you as a Police Officer in my jurisdiction, I better be applying law that is on the books before I cuff and stuff someone. Believe me, I would love to apply my own "guidelines" to my AO/patrol sometimes.

Guidelines would be questioned by even a ****** lawyer and laughed right out of court without citing established law. I'm just a dumb cop and not a lawyer but some **** is basic.

 

[Falcon1az]

None. FAA and AMA "guidelines" are not law. Furthermore, both entities are not law makers or law enforcement and cannot create or pass laws.

Tell me, what State or Federal statutes would you be breaking of you didn't follow their self-imposed "guidelines"?

I believe your breaking this law - (Public Law 112-95, Section 331(8). No?

 

[geardaddys]

No these are not recommendation these are rules. In the FAA language it's very specific about being a part 107 operator and keeping your machine in line of sight. Furthermore it is also very specific that community-based organizations like the AMA provide guidance to hobby or recreational users. In both cases the FAA and the AMA States beside their rules are keep your machine in line of sight. My question is if police officer walks up on you and talks to you about your machine and ask you where it is and he can't see it does that mean you get cited? Can your flight profile be downloaded and reviewed by the FAA and if it's determined you fall in the machine out of line of sight are you now under investigation by the FAA?

I believe your breaking this law - (Public Law 112-95, Section 331(8). No?

Falcon... please reference in the above "Public Law" where it states a hobbyist is restricted to line of site, or 400 feet.. It's not in there.. the current guidance from the FAA, as it relates to hobbyists is a "recommendation".. go to the FAA website and look it up.. then look up the definition of "guidelines".. not to sound disagreeable but the difference between hobbyists
Operating rules and "for hire" rules are pretty stark.. it's a suggestion, and perhaps one with merit, but let's not call this something it isn't, which is a limitation.

 

[Falcon1az]

No... its there. Specifically states "must keep the aircraft in sight (visual line-of-sight). See attached.
The rules between the hobbyist and the guys for hire are not stark at all. They almost mirror each other.

Oh... the FAA source.
Getting Started

 

[Falcon1az]

This is from the FAA web site too.
Source: Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Frequently Asked Questions

 

[Falcon1az]

They (FAA) talk about community based organizations (AMA model aviation) developing rules and guidelines. The "Administrator" won't pursue legal action if the guidelines are followed developed by the community based organization. Thats my read.

 

[geardaddys]

Part 107 does not apply to hobbyists.. neither does a "law" restricting your drone to 400 feet... I've read everything you've submitted.. none of which mention a "limitation" of 400 feet for a hobbyist.. please cite specifically where the 400 foot limitation is referenced.. as a law...

 

[Falcon1az]

Furthermore, if the "Administrator" can assess civil penalties (in the case of registration -- and we all know that has been overturned) up to $27,500... and fines of $250,000 and 3 years in jail for failure to register... it makes me wonder what kind of trouble the FAA or other authorities can make.

 

[Falcon1az]

Part 107 does not apply to hobbyists.. neither does a "law" restricting your drone to 400 feet... I've read everything you've submitted.. none of which mention a "limitation" of 400 feet for a hobbyist.. please cite specifically where the 400 foot limitation is referenced.. as a law...

The AMA, as the community based organization, has a safety code stating the 400' guideline. I believe the "Administrator" (FAA Administrator uses that as their reference for hobbyists. No?
Are you stating then no restrictions?
No 400' ceiling?
No line-of-sight requirement?

This is why I bring it up. A club member states 'you can't fly your drone... 400'... line-of-sight'... and my response to him was there are no laws I'm breaking. So I'm digging.

 

[geardaddys]

The AMA "guideline" is 400 feet within 3 miles of an airport... Not 400 feet within the entire United States.. read what you just posted..