AMA rules when do they HAVE to be obeyed?

[Cafguy]

It just makes it easier for them. Why separate the two hobbies when you can just base the two at the same place, after all the AMA fields are ready to go as far as safety goes and My planes have to have RID also BUT We will see

 

[Torque]

Non AMA CBO: FPV Freedom Coalition

Non AMA CBO: Welcome - Flite Test Community Association

Non AMA CBO: https://stemplusc.org/stemc-cbo/

 

[Meta4]

Sooner than later unless you are a Part 107 pilot with some sort of paperwork, Your choices of flying areas are going to start shrinking smaller and smaller until we all meet at the Fria or AMA airfield for our weekly flying.

Why such a gloomy attitude?
You don't live in North Korea.
There's no indication any of this would ever happen.

 

[BigAl07]

Unfortunately this is more confusion BS from the FAA where you probably need to comply or risk major violations. I am a recreational flyer and currently I declare the AMA as the CBO that I follow. I never fly at AMA events but I feel I have to follow the AMA guidelines regardless where and when I fly recreationally. The FAA requires you to declare your allegiance to a CBO and follow their rules else the FAA will revoke your recreational exemption which will put you in serious jeopardy since you won't be able to follow part 107.

The FAA doesn't "revoke" your Recreational Exemption. That's not how this works.

All US Civil UAS Operators are, by default, operating under Part 107.

If you just fly willy-nilly, don't take (and agree to) the TRUST, and/or you don't follow every-single-aspect of 49, US Code ~44809 (The Exception for limited Recreational Operations of Unmanned Aircraft) then you are flying under Part 107 regardless if your rating. So if you're flying around and violate any section of ~44809, you are 100% legally liable for every aspect of Part 107.

I don't understand the "Rub" with the FAA requiring you to follow/adhere to a specific set of CBO is such a bad thing. TBH I think Part 107 should be the "Drone Law of the Land" for recreational operations up to a certain level/complexity of UAS and then have higher and more stringent levels from there on up.

~44809 merely states (in the context of this thread):

The aircraft is operated in accordance with or within the programming of a community-based organization’s set of safety guidelines that are developed in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration.

If you don't like the current offerings of CBO guidelines, then by all means form your own set and get them approved with the FAA. There are, as of 12/7/2023 a total of (4) FAA Recognized CBO's. This means that (3) other entities felt like you do and actually did something about it.

​

 

[mavic3usa]

The FAA doesn't "revoke" your Recreational Exemption. That's not how this works.

All US Civil UAS Operators are, by default, operating under Part 107.

If you just fly willy-nilly, don't take (and agree to) the TRUST, and/or you don't follow every-single-aspect of 49, US Code ~44809 (The Exception for limited Recreational Operations of Unmanned Aircraft) then you are flying under Part 107 regardless if your rating. So if you're flying around and violate any section of ~44809, you are 100% legally liable for every aspect of Part 107.

I don't understand the "Rub" with the FAA requiring you to follow/adhere to a specific set of CBO is such a bad thing. TBH I think Part 107 should be the "Drone Law of the Land" for recreational operations up to a certain level/complexity of UAS and then have higher and more stringent levels from there on up.

~44809 merely states (in the context of this thread):

The aircraft is operated in accordance with or within the programming of a community-based organization’s set of safety guidelines that are developed in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration.

If you don't like the current offerings of CBO guidelines, then by all means form your own set and get them approved with the FAA. There are, as of 12/7/2023 a total of (4) FAA Recognized CBO's. This means that (3) other entities felt like you do and actually did something about it.

​

I would like the same even if it means two sets of [separate] rules. As a recreational pilot, I would much prefer to adhere to CBO guidelines rather than part 107. The problem is it's given as an exception.

Imagine if all drivers on teh highway required a CDL. And if you are a student or a commuter or you go to run an errand, you qualify for the driver's exception and you don't need a CDL and everything that comes along with it and you can go to the store, buy your goods, go home while driving your POV on your Class A DL. However, along the way, you are speeding (breaking the rules) and the police pull you over and asks for your CDL. "I'm just going to the grocery store to get a soda." You broke the traffic rules, you don't qualify for the exception, you are a commercial driver and I need to see your CDL, your log book, I need the name of your commercial insurer, and I need your inspection binder (or whatever) or you are under arrest for the illegal operation of a commercial vehicle, doing business in the state without a business license, and operating a commercial vehicle on a residential street, etc!

If recreational flyers had our own rules then we can pay the price for breaking our own rules, big or small. As I mentioned before, does this happen alot, probably not. Is that the way the rules are written? I think so but I'm open to anyone correcting me if I am not reading it improperly. Perhaps it is my imagination but I was a little surprised when I read the content from post #1 that perhaps some people didn't know the CBO guidelines apply to all recreational flyers and you can pick one which has your favorite rules but they are all government-approved so you can choose anyone color as long as it's black; the rules are basically the same. When I choose the AMA and they say no flying over occupied structures, to me that means I need to change to another CBO so I don't accidentally lose my ability to fly under the exception. Again, I might be seeing this all wrong.

 

[MARK (LI)]

Drones are specifically excluded from the few AMA fields any where near where I live ...no reason to join them....
So..if you have 107 do you have to follow CBO rules.....or since you would have the 107 Cert to lose, does the FAA consider being 107 Certified to be an exemption to following CBO rules?

 

[MS Coast]

Drones are specifically excluded from the few AMA fields any where near where I live ...no reason to join them....
So..if you have 107 do you have to follow CBO rules.....or since you would have the 107 Cert to lose, does the FAA consider being 107 Certified to be an exemption to following CBO rules?

The CBO guidelines requirement is part of the 44809 regulations that allow recreational pilots to be exempted from the full Part 107 regulations. It has no bearing on Part 107 pilots flying under Part 107 rules.

Again, as a recreational pilot, you do not have to join a CBO. You simply have to fly by their guidelines, which are freely available.

 

[MS Coast]

As a recreational pilot, I would much prefer to adhere to CBO guidelines rather than part 107. The problem is it's given as an exception.

Yes, 44809 is an exception to the Part 107 rules that you don't care for. 44809 allows the recreational pilot to be completely free of the extensive regulations in Part 107 if they adhere to that simple set of regulations.

What's the issue with it being an exception? The 44809/Part 107 situation is not at all like your imagined confrontation with overzealous police officers a fantasy driver's licenses infraction.

If recreational flyers had our own rules then we can pay the price for breaking our own rules, big or small.

Recreational pilots do have their own set of rules. Here's they are, from the Congressional Record.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title49-section44809&num=0&edition=prelim

44809 is a simple way to comply without having to fuss with all of the full Part 107 rules. The FAA did something nice for recreational fliers. "Do these simple things and you won't be breaking any of the big, confusing set of rules."

All drone operations, all the time, in the US are subject to Part 107 rules.

If a recreational pilot doesn't comply with 44809 and does something prohibited, like flying over a pro football stadium during a game, he's broken the 44809 regulations and loses the exemption from the other Part 107 rules. If a Part 107 pilot flies over the same stadium, at game time, he's also subject to the full Part 107 rules.

 

[mavic3usa]

Drones are specifically excluded from the few AMA fields any where near where I live ...no reason to join them....
So..if you have 107 do you have to follow CBO rules.....or since you would have the 107 Cert to lose, does the FAA consider being 107 Certified to be an exemption to following CBO rules?

Everyone will tell you that the recreational flyer must abide by the freely available CBO guidelines (and it's true) but no one (except me) will tell you what could happen to you if you don't. Millions of recreational flyers don't even know what could happen to them.

 

[mavic3usa]

Yes, 44809 is an exception to the Part 107 rules that you don't care for.

Agreed. 44809 is an exception but it's not that I don't care for part 107 rules (most of them are fair), I just think they are meant (or should be) for commercial pilots (not hobby pilots) but it's not about what I care or care not for.....again, it's not about me or what I care about.

What's the issue with it being an exception?

I've already explained the issue with it being an exception rather than it's own set of rules. The ordinary DL is not an exception to a CDL....for good reason. But you call my example a fantasy.

How about this. If I am flying under the recreational exception and I fly my drone at 450 AGL and you are flying commercial under part 107 and you fly your drone at 450 AGL in the same space; we are both in violation. What could potentially happen to me vs. what could potentially happen to you if those are our only violations?

I need to make a change to my previous statement so it will more accurately reflect what I was thinking:

Was: "If recreational flyers had our own rules then we can pay the price for breaking our own rules, big or small."

Is: "If recreational flyers had our own rules which did not comprise as an exception to overall rules knows as part 107 then we can pay the price for breaking our own rules, big or small."

All drone operations, all the time, in the US are subject to Part 107 rules.

Agreed unless you are excepted. If there is a proposal to the FAA to support a clarification which states any recreational pilot who intends to fly under the exception for recreational activity fails to meet all the standards set in 44809 shall not be automatically subject to part 107 sanctions and do not automatically lose their claim to a 44809 exception, would you support it?

Ok, that's about all for know; I think I've said as much as I know about the topic. No one has come along as said that I'm wrong and I'm way off base so until then, maybe I'll just wait to see if this is all for nothing because I read it wrong or simply don't know what I'm talking about. I already realize if you throw yourself to the mercy of the FAA nothing bad is likely to happen to you as long as you didn't do anything "egregious" but that wasn't the point. I'm trying to protect the hobby community from the bad actors like the person described in the OP.

 

[MS Coast]

Ok, that's about all for know; I think I've said as much as I know about the topic.

I'm afraid we've all reached that point some time ago.

 

[MARK (LI)]

The CBO guidelines requirement is part of the 44809 regulations that allow recreational pilots to be exempted from the full Part 107 regulations. It has no bearing on Part 107 pilots flying under Part 107 rules.

Again, as a recreational pilot, you do not have to join a CBO. You simply have to fly by their guidelines, which are freely available.

OK...so a guy who is new to the hobby, goes and gets a sub 250 gram drone ...gets his TRUST cert and goes flying SHOULD have found a CBO of his liking and be familiar with and able to repeat their rules....However, if you have your 107 Cert.....it is not necessary to have that CBO connection? ( not a member, but knowledge of their rules)

 

[Cafguy]

Why such a gloomy attitude?
You don't live in North Korea.
There's no indication any of this would ever happen.

Because We in the RC hobby have seen this before.
Without RID on a drone over 250g you must fly at a F.R.I.A. Where do you suppose they will locate this F.R.I.A.? Maybe on an already approved by the FAA Flying field. [local AMA field] and how do you get permission to fly at this AMA field- well you become an AMA member.
Do you think the FAA will have 2 sets of guidelines for the same hobby? There are AMA approved fields in almost every county in the U.S. These fields have all been approved using established guidelines- Why do you think the FAA would start from scratch with brand new fields when they can simply make space at the already existing field?

Non AMA CBO: STEM+C CBO – STEM + C

STEM +C works in conjunction with --The AMA.

 

[Ty Pilot]

OK...so a guy who is new to the hobby, goes and gets a sub 250 gram drone ...gets his TRUST cert and goes flying SHOULD have found a CBO of his liking and be familiar with and able to repeat their rules....However, if you have your 107 Cert.....it is not necessary to have that CBO connection?

Correct. If we're flying a 107 flight, as a commercial pilot -CBO guidelines have no bearing on what I do. We simply adhere strictly to the 107 regulations for the entirety of that flight.

But by the same token, if I want to go a make a 'recreational' flight - I/we (107 operators), are now expected to follow all of 44809 and this includes; knowing and adhering to a CBO's guidelines.

!07 can fly recreationally, I do it all the time. However every flight must start and end under one set of guidlines or the other. No exceptions.

 

[MS Coast]

OK...so a guy who is new to the hobby, goes and gets a sub 250 gram drone ...gets his TRUST cert and goes flying SHOULD have found a CBO of his liking and be familiar with and able to repeat their rules....However, if you have your 107 Cert.....it is not necessary to have that CBO connection? ( not a member, but knowledge of their rules)

From 44809:
(2) The aircraft is operated in accordance with or within the programming of a community-based organization's set of safety guidelines that are developed in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration.

It requires operating by a CBO's rules, not just being able to quote the rules. And "should" should be "must."

The requirement to operate by CBO guidelines does not apply to Part 107 operations and pilots.

 

[MARK (LI)]

Thanks for the response @MS Coast

 

[Meta4]

Without RID on a drone over 250g you must fly at a F.R.I.A. Where do you suppose they will locate this F.R.I.A.?

You need to lighten up and stop catastrophising.
The FAA aren't going to do anything like you are imagining.
You don't seem to realise that DJI drones made in the last 5 years have RID and seperate DID devices are available if you are flying something older?

 

[Paint Rock Drones]

You need to lighten up and stop catastrophising.
The FAA aren't going to do anything like you are imagining.
You don't seem to realise that DJI drones made in the last 5 years have RID and seperate DID devices are available if you are flying something older?

Who knew catastrophizing was a word? I like it.

 

[New England Droning]

When I started this I didn't know it would open a can of worms... but from what I read, IF we fly as recreational flyers then we just claim any of the 4 or so CBOs. I won't claim the AMA because I'm not too fond of the no-flying over houses or no-flying where we might be considered a nuisance for noise. I understand that the "gassers" are very loud and most of the AMA rules are designed for their AMA fields and probably not meant for flying in your backyard. So I won't worry about it too much because I never take off for non-commercial purposes (photographer/artist) But if I do I will have to consider this.
Thank you everyone for the points of view...

 

[BigAl07]

When I started this I didn't know it would open a can of worms... but from what I read, IF we fly as recreational flyers then we just claim any of the 4 or so CBOs. I won't claim the AMA because I'm not too fond of the no-flying over houses or no-flying where we might be considered a nuisance for noise. I understand that the "gassers" are very loud and most of the AMA rules are designed for their AMA fields and probably not meant for flying in your backyard. So I won't worry about it too much because I never take off for non-commercial purposes (photographer/artist) But if I do I will have to consider this.
Thank you everyone for the points of view...

Yes AMA rules are structured for Flying Fields and their rules are pretty much standard R/C Flying Field rules across the nation whether AMA members or not. That's just how we did it back in the day when you were actually "flying" the aircraft. This was before Gryo stabilized flight, GPS Guidance, and all the other "training wheels" we now enjoy when "Remotely Flying" our UAS.

I actually always fly under Part 107 rules just for simplicity. For me, and how I fly, it just makes sense.