Do you really call the FAA?

[terradriller]

So when you call what do you tell them and how does the conversation usually go?

 

[tcope]

So when you call what do you tell them and how does the conversation usually go?

Each airport is different. I find that they usually want to know were I'm flying and from when to when and at what altitude. One wanted me to call them a few minutes before the flight and to call back once I was done. Many times I was only able to leave a message initially so I usually leave my name and phone number. Several times they have called me back.

 

[terradriller]

Thanks for the info

 

[shimonunit]

If you are within 5 miles of any airport tower and owner, you need to call. They cannot restrict your flight. They are free to object to your flight but this does not legally stop you from flying.



I don't log. Most of this information is available on the FAA website.

So what happens if your local rural airport has no control tower.

 

[tcope]

So what happens if your local rural airport has no control tower.

Legally, you'd need to call the owner. I may not have typed my prior post correctly... the US law requires that you call the tower _and_ the owner.

 

[Z06Aggie]

I've had different experiences inside Class D airspace. One tower, that I call regularly, just takes my info over the phone, and says "Be safe and thanks for calling". Today, I called a tower inside a different class D airspace, and was told that I could not fly without an FAA waiver, no exceptions.

 

[vtcats]

I've had different experiences inside Class D airspace. One tower, that I call regularly, just takes my info over the phone, and says "Be safe and thanks for calling". Today, I called a tower inside a different class D airspace, and was told that I could not fly without an FAA waiver, no exceptions.

Flying recreationally? If so, To verify, that call to them was really a notification correct, not permission? Not that they cannot tell you you shouldn’t fly due to some safety issue, but if they didn’t state that, I assumed after notification you can fly.

 

[Z06Aggie]

Flying recreationally? If so, To verify, that call to them was really a notification correct, not permission? Not that they cannot tell you you shouldn’t fly due to some safety issue, but if they didn’t state that, I assumed after notification you can fly.

My intent was just to notify him. ATC informed me I could not fly without a waiver. Seems to be a lot of misinformation out there, on all sides. Trying to do things by the book, but getting confused.

 

[vtcats]

My intent was just to notify him. ATC informed me I could not fly without a waiver. Seems to be a lot of misinformation out there, on all sides. Trying to do things by the book, but getting confused.

Well I believe you did things correctly, but if not flying commercial (only for fun), and they were class D (or even C), I would respectfully ask why not at some point.
I plan on taking the part 107 exam in the next few weeks so have been studying quite a bit. Obviously quite a few differences and rules between commercial and recreational.
But there are other people on here who know the process and rules VERY well. LisaDocs, Tcope among others.

 

[Nickvr628]

I generally call the tower and the operations manager for the airport near me. If nobody answers (which is rare) if you are flying under hobbyist rules, leaving a message is OK, since you only have to notify them. If you are flying Part 107, you need to get approval, so you have to actually talk to them.

Eventually like others have said, they will start to recognize you and all that. Not to mention, if the tower does not like being called constantly by sUAS pilots, they have the pull within the FAA to try change things.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

If you are flying Part 107, you need to get approval, so you have to actually talk to them.

If you are flying under 107 you will first have a waiver to fly in controlled airspace maintained by an operational control tower. Once your waiver is granted it will indicate your method of contact (if any) with the operational control tower.

 

[787steve]

As you can see, there are lots of very divergent interpretations of the regs on this board. It is quite hard to sort out good info from bad. I HIGHLY recommend this short video.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The host does a very good job of breaking it down. And below the video, he has links to the referenced documents. I think all new drone operators should view this, and after reading this board, some of the older ones as well.

My understanding is that Congress defines a hobbyist as one who does and does not do certain things. Among the things you must do to be considered a hobbyist are the following statements:

"(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)).

One of the other things you must do basically amounts to following the safety rules of the AMA. In those rules you will see these two items:
(c) Not fly higher than approximately 400 feet above ground level within three (3) miles of an airport without notifying the airport operator.
(d) Not interfere with operations and traffic patterns at any airport, heliport or seaplane base except where there is a mixed use agreement.

If you don't do these things, and the others in the Congressional record, you are not a hobbyist and fall under the FAA and part 107 which is more restrictive.

Another little excerpt:"(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. " So even if not under Part 107, the FAA still could become involved. I am sure they would if an accident occurred, as that would definitely be "endangering the safety," etc.

Congress also defines a model aircraft. In that definition it says that it is "flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft. I believe that this means you have to be able to see it. Not that you can't take your eyes off of it, and conversely not that you can simply see the part of the sky it is flying in.

I would love to see responses from others as to agreeing or disagreeing with what I think I know.

One last note. The rules have changed a lot, and I am sure that will continue. Be careful when reading the board to check the date of the post.
Fly safe, and legal.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

As you can see, there are lots of very divergent interpretations of the regs on this board. It is quite hard to sort out good info from bad. I HIGHLY recommend this short video.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The host does a very good job of breaking it down. And below the video, he has links to the referenced documents. I think all new drone operators should view this, and after reading this board, some of the older ones as well.

My understanding is that Congress defines a hobbyist as one who does and does not do certain things. Among the things you must do to be considered a hobbyist are the following statements:

"(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)).

One of the other things you must do basically amounts to following the safety rules of the AMA. In those rules you will see these two items:
(c) Not fly higher than approximately 400 feet above ground level within three (3) miles of an airport without notifying the airport operator.
(d) Not interfere with operations and traffic patterns at any airport, heliport or seaplane base except where there is a mixed use agreement.

If you don't do these things, and the others in the Congressional record, you are not a hobbyist and fall under the FAA and part 107 which is more restrictive.

Another little excerpt:"(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. " So even if not under Part 107, the FAA still could become involved. I am sure they would if an accident occurred, as that would definitely be "endangering the safety," etc.

Congress also defines a model aircraft. In that definition it says that it is "flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft. I believe that this means you have to be able to see it. Not that you can't take your eyes off of it, and conversely not that you can simply see the part of the sky it is flying in.

I would love to see responses from others as to agreeing or disagreeing with what I think I know.

One last note. The rules have changed a lot, and I am sure that will continue. Be careful when reading the board to check the date of the post.
Fly safe, and legal.

Steve I think for the most part you nailed it. The item that I think many hobbyists frequently ignore is based on 336, you cannot fly BVLOS. I've seen people discuss this, agree with this and then post video clips where they miles from their launch point.

 

[787steve]

Thanks for the verification, Flyboy. Sterling Ralph nailed it in his video. I simply paraphrased. A great video for all to watch. It gave me peace of mind to see it and to peruse the underlying documents he links to.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Thanks for the verification, Flyboy. Sterling Ralph nailed it in his video. I simply paraphrased. A great video for all to watch. It gave me peace of mind to see it and to peruse the underlying documents he links to.

I think the other link in this is many hobbyist didn't read the June 18, 2014 FAA interpretation of section 336. Here is section IV, some pretty sobering reading (removed the page breaks, note my bold)

IV. Examples of Regulations That Apply to Model Aircraft

The FAA could apply several regulations in part 91 when determining whether to take enforcement action against a model aircraft operator for endangering the NAS. The FAA’s general operating and flight rules are housed in part 91 of the FAA’s regulations.

These rules are the baseline rules that apply to all aircraft operated in the United States with limited exceptions,

14 and are the appropriate rules to apply when evaluating model aircraft operations. See 14 CFR 91.1.

Rules relevant to these operations fall generally into three categories:

(1) how the aircraft is operated;

(2) operating rules for designated airspace; and,

(3) special restrictions such as temporary flight restrictions (TFRs) and notices to airmen

(NOTAMs). These rules are discussed in greater detail below.

Rules addressing operation of the aircraft may include prohibitions on careless or reckless operation and dropping objects so as to create a hazard to persons or property. See 14 CFR 91.13 through 91.15. Additionally, § 91.113 establishes right-of way rules for converging aircraft.15 Model aircraft that do not comply with those rules could be subject to FAA enforcement action.

Rules governing operations in designated airspace are found in §§ 91.126 through 91.135. In general, those rules establish requirements for operating in the various classes of airspace, and near airports in non-designated airspace to minimize risk of collision in higher traffic airspace. Generally, if an operator is unable to comply with the regulatory requirements for operating in a particular class of airspace, the operator would need authorization from air traffic control to operate in that area. See, e.g., 14 CFR 91.127(a), 91.129(a).

Operations within restricted areas designated in part 73 would be prohibited without permission from the using or controlling agency. Accordingly, as part of the requirements for model aircraft operations within 5 miles of an airport set forth in section 336(a)(4) of P.L. 112-95, the FAA would expect modelers operating model aircraft in airspace covered by §§ 91.126 through 91.135 and part 73 to obtain authorization from air traffic control prior to operating.

The third category of rules relevant to model aircraft operations are rules relating to operations in areas covered by temporary flight restrictions and NOTAMs found in §§ 91.137 through 91.145. The FAA would expect that model aircraft operations comply with restrictions on airspace when established under these rules.

Other rules in part 91, or other parts of the regulations, may apply to model aircraft operations, depending on the particular circumstances of the operation. The regulations cited above are not intended to be an exhaustive list of rules that could apply to model aircraft operations. The FAA anticipates that the cited regulations are the ones that would most commonly apply to model aircraft operations.

 

[787steve]

Is this all still valid after the changes in '17? The FAA doesn't go out of their way to make it clear to hobbyists.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Is this all still valid after the changes in '17? The FAA doesn't go out of their way to make it clear to hobbyists.

I've seen no new FAA interpretation of section 336 so I'm assuming it's still valid. Agree, the FAA doesn't make this cut and dry for the average Joe with no aviation experience wanting to get into the hobby. I'm hoping that the next round of regulation involves being specific with model operations, altitudes, VLOS and airspace.

 

[787steve]

AMEN.

 

[saboken]

As you can see, there are lots of very divergent interpretations of the regs on this board. It is quite hard to sort out good info from bad. I HIGHLY recommend this short video.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The host does a very good job of breaking it down. And below the video, he has links to the referenced documents. I think all new drone operators should view this, and after reading this board, some of the older ones as well.

My understanding is that Congress defines a hobbyist as one who does and does not do certain things. Among the things you must do to be considered a hobbyist are the following statements:

"(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)).

One of the other things you must do basically amounts to following the safety rules of the AMA. In those rules you will see these two items:
(c) Not fly higher than approximately 400 feet above ground level within three (3) miles of an airport without notifying the airport operator.
(d) Not interfere with operations and traffic patterns at any airport, heliport or seaplane base except where there is a mixed use agreement.

If you don't do these things, and the others in the Congressional record, you are not a hobbyist and fall under the FAA and part 107 which is more restrictive.

Another little excerpt:"(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. " So even if not under Part 107, the FAA still could become involved. I am sure they would if an accident occurred, as that would definitely be "endangering the safety," etc.

Congress also defines a model aircraft. In that definition it says that it is "flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft. I believe that this means you have to be able to see it. Not that you can't take your eyes off of it, and conversely not that you can simply see the part of the sky it is flying in.

I would love to see responses from others as to agreeing or disagreeing with what I think I know.

One last note. The rules have changed a lot, and I am sure that will continue. Be careful when reading the board to check the date of the post.
Fly safe, and legal.

A interesting point about hobby vs profit is his reference to YouTube! If you post drone footage on YouTube and let YouTube run advertising for you! Your no longer a hobbyist! And can’t fly under those rules! I see a lot of YouTube videos that are monetized and the pilot is flying as a hobby! If something goes wrong and they find themselves in court they could loose just because of how they have there YouTube channel setup.

 

[cairnwalker]

I’m a noob, but I’ve been preparing for the 107 Test since long before I got my Alpine White MP. So I’m currently a hobbyist with plans for a certificate, though not necessarily with a business or profitability in mind. I just like knowing what I’m doing, and want the flexibility. Like others here, I’ve found regulations confusing and at times difficult to follow with regard to practicality. However, perhaps my recent experiences may be relevant (or at least of some interest) to some of you.

I’m fortunate to live in a rural area near the south (Texas) shore of Lake Texoma. I’m far enough from D/FW that it’s not a problem for me. I’m about 7 miles from a former AFB that now serves as a Class D facility from 1300-0100 daily, and is Class E at other times. Again, no problem.

My issues relate to two private, untowered grass airstrips that are just within 5 miles of my home, from which I fly. One is owned and operated by a marina across the lake, and the other is one of those private strips with a few homes and hangars alongside.

Trying to do everything by the book, I have attempted to call the using the phone numbers on AirNav.com. After wading through the marina’s voice menu I finally got a live person. I asked the woman who answered if I had the correct number for the airport. She said she guessed so, but that her other duties included renting boats, boat slips, making dinner reservations for the restaurant, and booking motel rooms at the resort. I told her that I was notifying her that I was going to fly a drone about 4-5 miles away. She said she’d have to check with someone, but returned shortly and said “as long as you stay under 400 feet, it’s OK, and you don’t have to call us each time.” I asked for an email address and told her I would notify them in this manner in the future, since it seemed that they didn’t seem to think I didn’t need to call every time.

I’m assuming this constitutes a “mutually-agreed upon operating procedure.”

Now the other, private, residential airstrip is another matter. The owner/manager lives out of town and the sole number listed on AirNav.com is “no longer in service.” No amount of googling produces an alternative, so I drove over to the strip. Many of the dozen or fewer homes with hangars apparently belong to weekenders, but I finally found one full time resident with whom to speak. I told her my purpose and she thanked me, saying no one else ever asks permission for anything, including flying kites, model aircraft, or even landing small planes on the strip. I told her the listed manager’s phone # was not in service, and asked if she knew of any other way to reach him. She said no, but his name is Jim (that jives with AirNav), and “I think he’s in Florida now.”

She understood my purpose and was very nice, insisting that I write her name down, and suggested that she would verify that I had provided notice if anyone ever questioned it.

Again, I’m assuming this constitutes a “mutually-agreed upon operating procedure.” And yes, I know what they say about assumptions.

Bottom line, if you’re confused about airport notification requirements, you’re probably not alone. From what I’ve seen, many small airport operators are no better informed.