Don't have your FAA Part 107? You might be flying illegally even if for recreation purposes

[Scooterx64]

Be careful what you wish for. This is really a double edged sword. If your goal is to block more /most people from flying drones then the cost to you to fly will go up. Also they will pile on a **** load of process - imagine having to file a flight plan, get approval, get clearance to to take off and permission to land. Need to deviate from the flight plan = having to wait for approval while you burn precious battery. And then inevitably you will screw up and the FAA will suspend you and hold a hearing and reexamination to verify your fitness to operate. All at our great expense as we pay to get licensed and renewal fees. And then they will require liablility insurance. And then ... and then....

 

[Jackcutrone]

Be careful what you wish for. This is really a double edged sword. If your goal is to block more /most people from flying drones then the cost to you to fly will go up. Also they will pile on a **** load of process - imagine having to file a flight plan, get approval, get clearance to to take off and permission to land. Need to deviate from the flight plan = having to wait for approval while you burn precious battery. And then inevitably you will screw up and the FAA will suspend you and hold a hearing and reexamination to verify your fitness to operate. All at our great expense as we pay to get licensed and renewal fees. And then they will require liablility insurance. And then ... and then....

Be alarmist all you want but they don’t require flight plans for vfr flight for full scale airplanes so they are not going to require it for short duration low altitude flights by a drone

 

[crlmjohnson]

Im not sure if Im reading this correctly, but in reading over the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, it states that

‘‘§44809. Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subsection (e), and notwithstanding chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code, a person may operate a small unmanned aircraft without specific certification or operating authority from the Federal Aviation Administration if the operation adheres to all of the following limitations: ‘‘(1) The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes. ‘‘(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. ‘‘(3) The aircraft is flown within the visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft or a visual observer co- located and in direct communication with the operator. ‘‘(4) The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft. ‘‘(5) In Class B, Class C, or Class D airspace or within the lateral boundaries of the surface area of Class E airspace designated for an airport, the operator obtains prior authorization from the Administrator or designee before operating and complies with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions. ‘‘(6) In Class G airspace, the aircraft is flown from the surface to not more than 400 feet above ground level and complies with all airspace restrictions and prohibitions. ‘‘(7) The operator has passed an aeronautical knowledge and safety test described in subsection (g) and maintains proof of test passage to be made available to the Administrator or law enforcement upon request. ‘‘(8) The aircraft is registered and marked in accordance with chapter 441 of this title and proof of registration is made available to the Administrator or a designee of the Administrator or law enforcement upon request.

Am I understanding this correctly?

These rules also applied even after you have pass the test.

 

[Jackcutrone]

But the FAA has not promulgated the test yet so until they do you are ok.

 

[CactusJackSlade]

RE: Flight performance test for 107 cert -

To CactusJackSlade, don’t worry it’s going to happen in the near future.

I certainly hope so.... although this will be interesting, since most of the 107 cert test centers are at or near airports ;-)
Actually, I am going to be asking this question of the FAA at their booth at CES in a couple weeks....

 

[CactusJackSlade]

Be careful what you wish for. This is really a double edged sword. If your goal is to block more /most people from flying drones then the cost to you to fly will go up. Also they will pile on a **** load of process - imagine having to file a flight plan, get approval, get clearance to to take off and permission to land. Need to deviate from the flight plan = having to wait for approval while you burn precious battery. And then inevitably you will screw up and the FAA will suspend you and hold a hearing and reexamination to verify your fitness to operate. All at our great expense as we pay to get licensed and renewal fees. And then they will require liablility insurance. And then ... and then....

I doubt it, with the LAANC system already in place this will continue to help the streamlining of authorizations as it expands. I'm more after proof someone can fly without an app or GPS handling the actual flight - and I'm meaning for profit. A good example is the situation that happened while these "inspectors" (Some guy and his kid) attempted to inspect the Millennium Tower. The pilot said they lost GPS signal (no GPS hold) and it drifted - meaning they could not FLY the drone without the GPS and app functioning. THIS is what I'm talking about... and all on video for the media to report on.

 

[Aran]

There are too many laws, we need to be working at minimizing, not celebrating further encroachments.

 

[Phoenix Drone]

^^^^
This!

I hope the aeronautical knowledge test (for hobbyist drone pilots) is actually difficult to pass. I hope it requires study. I hope such difficulty and study deters a lot of people from buying a drone.

Mark

Mark, I totally agree with this statement. They relaxed amateur radio test requirements and the people on the air are often uninformed. A drone test that requires study may help. I am concerned about the government infringing on our rights, we need to do anything possible to slow them down.

 

[ReadyKilowatt]

I am of two minds about that. The problem is that the FAA act bundles two very different aircraft together and treats them both the same.

On the one hand are the quads with FPV which have gained such popularity and the use and misuse of these has caused most of the problems. Because of the FPV capability they can be flown much beyond line of sight and with most being capable of aerial videography or photography operators want to take videos or photos in places that create potential danger to others.

On the other hand there are the radio controlled airplanes and helicopters that rc hobbyists have been flying for decades. I fly both. Very few of these are equipped for FPV and are strictly flown in LOS. These do not cause the problems that FPV quads do and they should be treated differently. Most are flown from radio control club fields removed from airports. For the most part they fly within a quarter mile or so in order to maintain visual perception of the aircraft’s orientation which is very necessary to fly successfully and avoid crashing what can be expensive aircraft and generally are flown less than 400 feet in altitude. Many of these rc pilots are older and do not need to know as much about the national airspace and its rules as an FPV pilot flying at much greater distances and potential altitudes. After decades of flying safely they are being required to take a test about things they really don’t need to know to continue flying and that seems to me unfair most every rc hobbyist I know takes the AMA rules as gospel. They quickly point out to others at the field any transgressions of the AMA rules. They have safely self policed for decades.

As to the FPV pilots I am in favor of a test which actually requires substantial knowledge of the rules about national airspace safety.

I'm fairly certain the same sort of discussion took place when Mr Ford introduced his Model T vehicle. Early automobiles were at best hobby vehicles for technically minded upper-classes. When inexpensive internal combustion engines began to appear there was a trickledown effect where the middle class could start to drive. At first it was more modification of bicycles and backyard tinkerers, and no one would really consider them practical for anything but Sunday drives and demonstration racing. But once a mass-production model was successful the need for proper regulation and training became apparent. If only because automobile operation went from being a means to an end toward a way to enhance or make possible secondary activities.

Count me as one of those pilots who have very little interest in flying model aircraft. I'm an AMA member because I think they're at least open to the idea of drone operators and new ideas and they've proven to be a pretty effective voice in the legislature. The idea of running a basic control line aircraft has all the appeal to me of watching grass grow, yet I see articles in Model Aviation for them and how much fun it is. Same thing for dogfighting, hovering a fixed wing, and painting up little pilot figures. I'm very grateful for you guys who worked in silence over the years to get us to where we are today (especially with RC control and telemetry systems), but count me out. I'm much more interested in using drones to enhance other activities, not as an activity in itself. And I think pilots like myself should have to prove some amount of proficiency, because anyone who really wants to fly drones is going to put in the time to be proficient on their own just because that's what they want to do. Unfortunately there's really no fair way to provide an exception for the model aircraft enthusiasts short of putting heavy restrictions on where they're permitted to operate (like a track day driver). For some model hobby people that might be just fine, but if you have the skills, why not get the cert too? That way you can do both.

 

[drvrbob]

I doubt it, with the LAANC system already in place this will continue to help the streamlining of authorizations as it expands. I'm more after proof someone can fly without an app or GPS handling the actual flight - and I'm meaning for profit. A good example is the situation that happened while these "inspectors" (Some guy and his kid) attempted to inspect the Millennium Tower. The pilot said they lost GPS signal (no GPS hold) and it drifted - meaning they could not FLY the drone without the GPS and app functioning. THIS is what I'm talking about... and all on video for the media to report on.

Laanc not working in all areas, DFW FOR EXAMPLE. We all no taking a skills test will insure everyone is qualified and I'll never break the law just as it works for those with drivers license all regulations will do is make it harder for everyone in the long run people that are going to break the law will break the law no lost stops crime or illegal activities.

 

[ReadyKilowatt]

Laanc not working in all areas, DFW FOR EXAMPLE. We all no taking a skills test will insure everyone is qualified and I'll never break the law just as it works for those with drivers license all regulations will do is make it harder for everyone in the long run people that are going to break the law will break the law no lost stops crime or illegal activities.

Sure, there are people who drive cars on suspended or no licenses. The 9/11 attacks were carried out by people who didn't have a commercial pilot license. It is still pretty much possible for anyone to run a car though a crowd or drive into buildings just for the LULZ, but it is so rare as to be national (international?) news when it happens.

I have a coworker who owns a drone. He had no idea that there were any limitations about flying at his (at the time) new home until the drone wouldn't take off. He has asked me a lot of simple questions because I'm now an "expert" even though I've only been flying for about 3 years or so and even then intermittently enough to hardly be an instructor. If his drone hadn't had geofencing around the airport he would have flown in violation and had no idea he was in the wrong. A truly common sense certification requirement would have been very beneficial for him. Especially when we see that the industry has no intention of self-policing outside of trying to apply dubious technological solutions.

And this is coming from someone who voted for Gary Johnson and every other Libertarian party candidate in 2016. Heck, that might be why I'm in favor of some regulation. Because I know plenty of people who believe that it's their right (nay, duty) to bypass all technological and/or legislative restrictions.

 

[epyonxero]

^^^^
This!

The OP quoted a section of the NEW law (passed in September 2018) that applies to recreational/hobbyist UAS operation. The FAA hasn't unveiled the new mandatory aeronautical knowledge test yet.

His quote has NOTHING to do with part 107.

I hope the aeronautical knowledge test (for hobbyist drone pilots) is actually difficult to pass. I hope it requires study. I hope such difficulty and study deters a lot of people from buying a drone.

Mark

Making the licensing difficult will just encourage people to fly without it.

 

[Photo Booth]

Making the licensing difficult will just encourage people to fly without it.

A $10,000 minimum fine and 30 days in jail for flying without the proper registration/testing certification should help dissuade most.

Mark

 

[sar104]

Making the licensing difficult will just encourage people to fly without it.

Do driving tests encourage people to drive unlicensed?

 

[Photo Booth]

Do driving tests encourage people to drive unlicensed?

I know you participate in the forum more frequently than I do. How do you handle it so well?

I might stop in the forum once or twice during the week but, mostly, I visit the forum on Saturday morning after receiving the Popular Topics email the night before. As I scroll down the list of popular topics I play a little game with myself to see if I can guess which topic is going to have the highest entertainment value. You know, the ones where a new pilot is ranting and raving about how the stupid DJI drone has a mind of its own but, truth be told, it was all pilot error.



Mark

 

[Lapeer20m]

I am of two minds about that. The problem is that the FAA act bundles two very different aircraft together and treats them both the same.

On the one hand are the quads with FPV which have gained such popularity and the use and misuse of these has caused most of the problems. Because of the FPV capability they can be flown much beyond line of sight and with most being capable of aerial videography or photography operators want to take videos or photos in places that create potential danger to others.

On the other hand there are the radio controlled airplanes and helicopters that rc hobbyists have been flying for decades. I fly both. Very few of these are equipped for FPV and are strictly flown in LOS. These do not cause the problems that FPV quads do and they should be treated differently. Most are flown from radio control club fields removed from airports. For the most part they fly within a quarter mile or so in order to maintain visual perception of the aircraft’s orientation which is very necessary to fly successfully and avoid crashing what can be expensive aircraft and generally are flown less than 400 feet in altitude. Many of these rc pilots are older and do not need to know as much about the national airspace and its rules as an FPV pilot flying at much greater distances and potential altitudes. After decades of flying safely they are being required to take a test about things they really don’t need to know to continue flying and that seems to me unfair most every rc hobbyist I know takes the AMA rules as gospel. They quickly point out to others at the field any transgressions of the AMA rules. They have safely self policed for decades.

As to the FPV pilots I am in favor of a test which actually requires substantial knowledge of the rules about national airspace safety.

This is exactly how government seems to work. Take a group of people who aren’t causing any problems and make them pass some ridged standards and be tested on information that has nothing at all to do with their hobby.

 

[Prmath]

This is exactly how government seems to work. Take a group of people who aren’t causing any problems and make them pass some ridged standards and be tested on information that has nothing at all to do with their hobby.

You nailed it PERFECTLY

 

[Photo Booth]

This is exactly how government seems to work. Take a group of people who aren’t causing any problems and make them pass some ridged standards and be tested on information that has nothing at all to do with their hobby.

The "government" is choosing to regulate the situation only after MORONS spoiled it for everyone else. Prior to the wide availability of drones, the radio controlled aircraft hobby was self regulating because there was a considerable level of skill required to fly the aircraft. 99% of current drone pilots don't know the first thing about safely and successfully flying a radio controlled fixed-wing aircraft of helicopter (myself included). Any "newbie" spending considerable money on a RC airplane and NOT taking the time to educate themselves and go through necessary training/experience will quickly have a pile of rubble. Before drones, it was self regulating because the morons couldn't afford to keep chasing good money after bad. So, in general, the morons stayed away. The skill required was beyond their ability (or willingness to learn).

Drones changed the equation. Now any simpleton can buy a drone, lift it into the air and let it hover, and immediately feel the pride of "flying" a drone. Which, of course, is not remotely (pun intended) equivalent to flying a fixed-wing RC aircraft.

And because there ARE morons that buy drones and do STUPID things with them, the "government" has to step in because these morons won't self-regulate. They can't, they are morons.

Mark

 

[WildHarleyGuy]

^^^^
This!

The OP quoted a section of the NEW law (passed in September 2018) that applies to recreational/hobbyist UAS operation. The FAA hasn't unveiled the new mandatory aeronautical knowledge test yet.

His quote has NOTHING to do with part 107.

I hope the aeronautical knowledge test (for hobbyist drone pilots) is actually difficult to pass. I hope it requires study. I hope such difficulty and study deters a lot of people from buying a drone.

Mark

As a new drone owner, I think your last paragraph is bull. Whether people take a hard test that they have to study for or not, they’ll either obey the law or they won’t. You don’t need a passing result to buy one so it’s not restricting anyone. This isn’t a firearm.
Everyone should enjoy the fun!

 

[Photo Booth]

As a new drone owner, I think your last paragraph is bull. Whether people take a hard test that they have to study for or not, they’ll either obey the law or they won’t. You don’t need a passing result to buy one so it’s not restricting anyone. This isn’t a firearm.
Everyone should enjoy the fun!

Not only should the aeronautical knowledge test be difficult enough to require real study, I feel it should be mandatory (with passing score) before anyone can BUY a drone.

Too many careless, clueless people and cowboys out there flying drones. All you have to do is read this forum once a week to see how true that is. Drones that can cause SERIOUS damage to life and property in the right circumstances.

Mark