FAA Release NEW rules for UAS Operations

[BigAl07]

Is this new rule going to require hobbyist to get part 107?

It's not part of the "New" ruling but ~44809 does require a Recreational Knowledge test that will be out Q1 of 2021.

 

[mrwagdog]

Does anyone know what's going on with the recurrent knowledge requirement?

My Part 107 was due to expire in 7/20. I took an online course at the FAA site, received a PDF certificate, and apparently that was good for a 6 month extension, which I believe expires this month.

Apparently there is now, or will be an online recurring knowledge course, I just don't know when.

I don't want my Part 107 to expire and I don't believe I can physically get to an open testing center.

 

[BigAl07]

Does anyone know what's going on with the recurrent knowledge requirement?

My Part 107 was due to expire in 7/20. I took an online course at the FAA site, received a PDF certificate, and apparently that was good for a 6 month extension, which I believe expires this month.

Apparently there is now, or will be an online recurring knowledge course, I just don't know when.

I don't want my Part 107 to expire and I don't believe I can physically get to an open testing center.

There will be an ONLINE recurrent training module released in ~45 days. If your license "lapses" before the online training is available you will no longer be current and unable to "legally" utilize the privileges of Part 107 operations. From the date of your currency lapsing until you take the online training you won't be "legal" to fly under Part 107.

 

[Vic Moss]

Does anyone know what's going on with the recurrent knowledge requirement?

My Part 107 was due to expire in 7/20. I took an online course at the FAA site, received a PDF certificate, and apparently that was good for a 6 month extension, which I believe expires this month.

Apparently there is now, or will be an online recurring knowledge course, I just don't know when.

I don't want my Part 107 to expire and I don't believe I can physically get to an open testing center.

You will be allowed to take the online recurrent training (it replaces the in-person UGR) 60 days after publication. So likely 75 +/- days from now.

The FAA will have online training available to study 45 days after publication. But since the rules don't go into effect until 60 days after publication, there is a 15 day head start on the recurrent training.

 

[brett8883]

It seems the fly over people thing is only for part 107 right? Do they still maintain recreational pilots can’t fly over people or do they finally admit that was never one of the rules to begin with?

 

[Vic Moss]

It seems the fly over people thing is only for part 107 right? Do they still maintain recreational pilots can’t fly over people or do they finally admit that was never one of the rules to begin with?

At this time, no they can't. But recreational flyers will be flying under the safety code of a CBO. So when those are published, they may have some over people rules to follow.

 

[tesohn]

This is a pretty pessimistic view of things.

First, there has never been anyone "hauled off to jail, your drone confiscated, and a big fine" for what you're saying.

Second, this has ZERO to do with big business. As a matter of fact, Amazon has been twice denied when they wanted exclusive use of certain airspace. So that disproves "Bezos and the likes can get what they want".

Third, there are no kick-backs. That's hogwash unless you have proof. And you don't.

Fourth, the FAA did not consult with any of those companies when they were crafting rules. They were on the DAC, and a few of the ARCs, but so were other companies.

Fifth, the large telecom companies were salivating over the RID internet connection requirement in order to fly. They were completely cut out of the Final Rule. So there goes your " Big Government providing Special Rules for Big Tech" statement.

Sixth, nowhere does "saying its ok as long as you are selling your goods" ever come into play. More hogwash.

So basically your entire post is wrong.

Looks like we have 2 different points of view on this. And there is plenty of proof of how this only benefits Big Tech, also there were about 6 to 8 big business that were to profit big time with these negotiations with the FAA. [ADMIN removed comment].

 

[karlblessing]

So the minis are exempt from remote ID?

Seems like only as long as you don't add anything on them,

Under 250 grams will not require registration or remote ID. Anything heavier will require registration and some type of remote ID that transmits location, individual identification (serial number?) and location of the operator OR at a minimum location of the drone while flying, identification and take off location. At this point no internet connection required. There is some discussion of ID transmission module for legacy drones. The definition of authorized sites has need expanded so that limitation appears to have been relaxed.

Going to be kind of hard keeping it under 250g if you're required to put on the prop guards.

 

[maelstrom]

And there is plenty of proof of how this only benefits Big Tech, also there were about 6 to 8 big business that were to profit big time with these negotiations with the FAA.
[ADMIN removed comment].

Please post links which provide actual proof of this.

 

[Vic Moss]

Seems like only as long as you don't add anything on them,

And if you only fly them recreationally.

Going to be kind of hard keeping it under 250g if you're required to put on the prop guards.

The other option is a motor kill switch.

 

[Vic Moss]

Looks like we have 2 different points of view on this. And there is plenty of proof of how this only benefits Big Tech, also there were about 6 to 8 big business that were to profit big time with these negotiations with the FAA. [ADMIN removed comment].

Please show us proof.

I'm involved in this and I've not seen any.

 

[karlblessing]

And if you only fly them recreationally.


The other option is a motor kill switch.

Which we do have on the DJI drones when enabled in the app. I'd be fine if that's an allowed option, since it's going to be harder to keep a drone from crashing outdoors with the prop guard on it.

 

[Vic Moss]

Which we do have on the DJI drones when enabled in the app. I'd be fine if that's an allowed option, since it's going to be harder to keep a drone from crashing outdoors with the prop guard on it.

The motor kill would need to be automatic, not just pushing a button combination. So it would need to be a pushed though on a firmware update. But that is a distinct (maybe even likely) update soon.

 

[karlblessing]

The motor kill would need to be automatic, not just pushing a button combination. So it would need to be a pushed though on a firmware update. But that is a distinct (maybe even likely) update soon.

In which way automatic? When it detects it's no longer level, or remotely activated by whoever has access? (would feel very uncomfortable if it required the ability for someone other than myself to shut them off).

 

[Vic Moss]

In which way automatic? When it detects it's no longer level, or remotely activated by whoever has access? (would feel very uncomfortable if it required the ability for someone other than myself to shut them off).

It will probably be tied to the accelerometers. Programming and physics of how is beyond me. But companies like ParaZero and Indemnis have all of that worked out in their parachute software. So having DJI do it for their Mavic Mini series should be fairly easy for folks much smarter than I.

 

[RCdancer]

The FAA has opened a pandora's box and if you think they care you've never dealt with the FAA. Individuals perhaps but not the Administration. You used to be able to walk into the FAA, sit down in a booth and take a written...Knowledge Test as it's now called. You could call the FAA and schedule within a week a checkride and take it for free. Those days are long gone. Now you have to have an appointment to visit the local FSDO and wait at the door before they decide to let you in and of course that's only for standing at the counter... If you expect to have a meeting you will need a security pass...regardless for how long you've held a certificate. In my case 60 years...no violations. It's all a little discouraging I have to say.

Yes. I'm with you hiflyer201.

When I took my recurrent test last month at an FAA test center, I had to be let in through the locked (bulletproof?) door, had to empty my pockets and turn them all inside out to prove nothing was in them, was not permitted to wear my mechanical(!) watch into the test room, was not permitted to wear my fleece sweater, had to pull my pant legs up and had to submit to a full pat down(!). Anyone that thinks the FAA (or any government agency) is now their friend is either incredibly naive or was not around for old days. Taking my FAA instrument written exam and check-ride in 1973 was in a wonderful galaxy far, far away. I have never had any kind of violation from the FAA, yet am now treated like a drug-fueled, crazed revolutionary terrorist. It used to be that people were assumed to have common sense and act accordingly and were largely trusted, unless there was good reason not to. I remember being able to stroll onto an airplane with no security checks. No longer (perhaps with good reason given the way the culture is deteriorating?) Instead of assuming the best of people, it seems the authorities now automatically assume the worst of everyone without exception until/unless you can inarguably prove and document it in multiple ways. Even then the "trust" extended you is only for a limited period of time until you have to again prove your trustworthiness in even more rigorous ways.

The most feared words from the government are "We're your friends and are here to help."

 

[mrwagdog]

There will be an ONLINE recurrent training module released in ~45 days. If your license "lapses" before the online training is available you will no longer be current and unable to "legally" utilize the privileges of Part 107 operations. From the date of your currency lapsing until you take the online training you won't be "legal" to fly under Part 107.

Thank you @BigAl07 and @Vic Moss for the reply.

I'm OK with it lapsing as I don't do much commercial work in the winter anyway. I just don't want to start over.

I'm having trouble figuring out when anything expires/lapses though. At the FAA site, I see I have a REMOTE PILOT certificate, an Issued date of 7/31/2018 and no "Expires" date.

To further confuse things, at another FAA site (the training site?), I have two certificates of training, one of which is the Part 107 Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (small UAS) Recurrent, which I completed on 7/24/2020.

If you don't mind @BigAl07 - can you point me to where you got the information?

I'm just confused, and there doesn't appear to be a single source of information.

Thank you for your help!

 

[RCdancer]

Thank you @BigAl07 and @Vic Moss for the reply.

I'm OK with it lapsing as I don't do much commercial work in the winter anyway. I just don't want to start over.

I'm having trouble figuring out when anything expires/lapses though. At the FAA site, I see I have a REMOTE PILOT certificate, an Issued date of 7/31/2018 and no "Expires" date.

To further confuse things, at another FAA site (the training site?), I have two certificates of training, one of which is the Part 107 Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (small UAS) Recurrent, which I completed on 7/24/2020.

If you don't mind @BigAl07 - can you point me to where you got the information?

I'm just confused, and there doesn't appear to be a single source of information.

Thank you for your help!

Your certificate never expires. (You are not issued a new certificate after passing the recurrent.)

But you must be "current".. For manned aircraft pilots that means passing checkrides on a regular basis. For unmanned ac pilots, it currently means passing a recurrent written exam every two years. I was told after passing my recurrent to simply keep the documentation of it along with my original certificate.

You must pass the recurrent within 2 years of the certificate issue date. There seems to be a little confusion as to the 2-year period. Online it says you have until the end of expiration month (i.e. for example if your certificate issue date is 08/17/20, you have until 08/31/22 to pass the recurrent. Yet at the FAA test center I was told it's 2 years to the day. To be safe, I'd the take recurrent just before the 2 year period to the day.

 

[BigAl07]

Thank you @BigAl07 and @Vic Moss for the reply.

I'm OK with it lapsing as I don't do much commercial work in the winter anyway. I just don't want to start over.

I'm having trouble figuring out when anything expires/lapses though. At the FAA site, I see I have a REMOTE PILOT certificate, an Issued date of 7/31/2018 and no "Expires" date.

To further confuse things, at another FAA site (the training site?), I have two certificates of training, one of which is the Part 107 Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (small UAS) Recurrent, which I completed on 7/24/2020.

If you don't mind @BigAl07 - can you point me to where you got the information?

I'm just confused, and there doesn't appear to be a single source of information.

Thank you for your help!

It's kind of confusing because there are some "Covid" allowances (extensions/grace periods) in the formula for some.

Your "Currency" LAPSES (you go NON-Current) on the last day of the 24th month from the time you renewed your currency.

For instance lets say I was last recurrent on 12/1/2018. So the 24 months would have been up 12/1/2020. My "currency" would lapse 12/31/2020 and I would not be able to legally fly 1/1/2021. So depending on the day you last because current you would have 24 months and a few days extra.

If your Currency Lapses before the recurrent training and issuance of the new rules take place, you can not legally fly until either you take the recurrency TEST or you complete the recurrency TRAINING.

 

[Droneology]

They use a technical definition that I can't quite wrap my head around because I'm not a Physics major.

For example, Category 2 says, in part, "a transfer of 11 foot-pounds of kinetic energy upon impact from a rigid object, does not contain any exposed rotating parts that could lacerate human skin upon impact with a human being".

Uhhh, that would include...what?

DJI Spark? Or MA2? Or Inspire?

And are propeller guards sufficient to meet this requirement? Etc.

It also says, "Requires FAA-accepted means of compliance and FAA-accepted declaration of compliance."

I think it's a great move in the right direction, but it's also clear as mud.

It's a government document therefore will be used to their benefit, and may change depending on who the reader is. The DOT is the same way. It keeps things interesting, and hopefully will create more cashflow for the ones who wrote it. They must validate their jobs. Lol.