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

[MavicCF]

Just curious, can one have LOS without it being VLOS? "Visual" seems redundant to me, not sure what distinction people try to make with it, rather than just typing LOS.

I believe that LOS is just a straight line extending from your eye into the distance, so if it was just LOS it could be out of sight due to distance but still in your "line of sight." As an example, a distant mountain is in your line of sight but if you flew your Mavic to it you would no longer have VLOS.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

I guess I must be wrong tcope. I found the site that said that the Federal court took out the FAA rules/guidlines but it appears to be an unreliable source. However, I am curious, how can the FAA make rules like VLOS if they aren't supposed to make rules about model AC?

Here is how.

This didn't come from the FAA. It came from congress' special rule for model aircraft which the FAA simply included in their interpretation:

Straight from congress... (2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft;

Like tcope has stated several times if you want to qualify as a model aircraft, you must comply with this.

So, that much isn't debatable. What has been debated at length is the FAAs interpretation that this means NO GOGGLES, as they go on to say corrective lenses only.

Well, since this interpretation was codified by part 107, I guess it is law also.

 

[MavicCF]

Here is how.

This didn't come from the FAA. It came from congress' special rule for model aircraft which the FAA simply included in their interpretation:

Straight from congress... (2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft;

Like tcope has stated several times if you want to qualify as a model aircraft, you must comply with this.

Thanks for clarifying that for me!

 

[jwblair]

Check out this thread:
Congress Updating 336

 

[Flash-Phil]

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?

First, the FAA is a federal org and local police have no jurisdiction over FAA flight rules. If you were over a crowd and endangering them, that might be a civil matter he has some say in. However saying that, it's not to say he could not file a complaint with the FAA and they could pull you in for an answer under the FARs.

 

[tcope]

First, the FAA is a federal org and local police have no jurisdiction over FAA flight rules. If you were over a crowd and endangering them, that might be a civil matter he has some say in. However saying that, it's not to say he could not file a complaint with the FAA and they could pull you in for an answer under the FARs.

This thread has been dead for 3 years.

 

[dirkclod]

​