FAA Released Advisory Circular 91-57B - Exception for Limited Recreational Operations of Unmanned Aircraft

[kensteele]

1 and 2, above, are identical, and refer to "the flight", not "all flights". That's why it says "the flight".

sorry we got off track there a bit. "the flight' is not part of the language, but "strictly / solely" is part of the language. again, not trying to argue the point, as i've said it's just my opinion, but i only bring it up because i believe the industry has derived this concept out of convenience but in fact, there is no faa regulation to support it. i think you can do this and get away with it just because it's all so subjective but don't be surprised when hobbyist do the same thing. nothing else on paper that i'm finding support this concept "by flight" and so far, nobody has shown otherwise. can a hobbyist fly under 107 by flight? no. one more time, i understand you guys have said it's so...i can see i'm not going to convince this crowd...so leaving it for now. maybe the faa will clear this up later or maybe they'll say it's ok. until then, it up for interpretation i guess.

 

[sar104]

sorry we got off track there a bit. "the flight' is not part of the language, but "strictly / solely" is part of the language. again, not trying to argue the point, as i've said it's just my opinion, but i only bring it up because i believe the industry has derived this concept out of convenience but in fact, there is no faa regulation to support it. i think you can do this and get away with it just because it's all so subjective but don't be surprised when hobbyist do the same thing. nothing else on paper that i'm finding support this concept "by flight" and so far, nobody has shown otherwise. can a hobbyist fly under 107 by flight? no. one more time, i understand you guys have said it's so...i can see i'm not going to convince this crowd...so leaving it for now. maybe the faa will clear this up later or maybe they'll say it's ok. until then, it up for interpretation i guess.

What I don't understand is why you are even arguing about this. Firstly - the FAA has previously clarified that being Part 107 certified doesn't prevent you from flying recreationally - originally under Part 101 - now under 44809. Secondly, if that's not good enough for you - why don't you just call your local FSDO and get direct clarification yourself rather than guessing (wrongly)?

 

[kensteele]

What I don't understand is why you are even arguing about this. Firstly - the FAA has previously clarified that being Part 107 certified doesn't prevent you from flying recreationally - originally under Part 101 - now under 44809. Secondly, if that's not good enough for you - why don't you just call your local FSDO and get direct clarification yourself rather than guessing (wrongly)?

i've already answered that several times. talking interpretation is pointless. ok then do you mind going to my thread and answering the question posed?

 

[tcope]

My understanding is that according to the new rules put into effect, the FAA has 6 months to put the test together. This would mean that they have until November to start administering the recreational pilot test.

That is 6 months in FAA time. So it will be whenever they want it to be. That is, the FAA seldom meets a deadline when it affects themselves. They usually beat a deadline when it affect only other people.

 

[tcope]

The cases that the FAA has pursued is against large commercial companies where they knew, the FAA knew, everyone knew that the flight was for commercial use. The FAA has stated in the past that they don't see going after people such as Youtubers who make money off YT when it included drone flight. So while they could follow the letter of the law, the FAA has better things to do then to go after someone selling a photo. However, they also are required to investigate complaints. So it a competitor or upset person turns in a complaint, they may investigate that. There are documented cases of this.

 

[kadras]

This is the FAA wording at regulations.gov and as published in the Federal Register when AC 91-57B was released. They should have included the same wording in the AC.

II. Statutory Conditions and Additional Guidance

The eight statutory conditions are as follows:

1. The aircraft is flown strictly for recreational purposes.
Your unmanned aircraft must be flown for only a recreational purpose throughout the duration of the operation. You may not combine recreational and commercial purposes in a single operation. If you are using the unmanned aircraft for a commercial or business purpose, the operation must be conducted under 14 CFR part 107 or other applicable FAA regulations.

Regulations.gov

Exception for Limited Recreational Operations of Unmanned Aircraft

This action provides notice of the statutory exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft. It also describes the agency's incremental implementation approach for the exception and how individuals can operate recreational unmanned aircraft (commonly referred to as drones)...

www.federalregister.gov

 

[GadgetGuy]

1 and 2, above, are identical, and refer to "the flight", not "all flights". That's why it says "the flight".

Agreed. A commercial pilot can fly recreationally, if that is the intent when launching, and a recreational pilot could be deemed to be flying commercially (illegally), even without a 107, if the flight was intended to be commercial before launch, through a prior commercial arrangement. FAA is very clear that it is the true intent of the flight before launch that determines the characterization of the flight, not what you later decide to do with the images.

 

[sar104]

i've already answered that several times. talking interpretation is pointless. ok then do you mind going to my thread and answering the question posed?

So you agree that you are contradicting the FAA, or you don't believe that the FAA clarification is genuine, or correct, or what? I have no idea which thread you are talking about. Link?

 

[sar104]

Agreed. A commercial pilot can fly recreationally, if that is the intent when launching, and a recreational pilot could be deemed to be flying commercially (illegally), even without a 107, if the flight was intended to be commercial before launch, through a prior commercial arrangement. FAA is very clear that it is the true intent of the flight before launch that determines the characterization of the flight, not what you later decide to do with the images.

In fact that's how the recreational exemption works. All sUAS flights are, by default, regulated by Part 107 unless they are in a couple of exempt categories:

§107.1 Applicability.​

​

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, this part applies to the registration, airman certification, and operation of civil small unmanned aircraft systems within the United States.​

​

(b) This part does not apply to the following:​

​

(1) Air carrier operations;​

​

(2) Any aircraft subject to the provisions of part 101 of this chapter; or​

​

(3) Any operation that a remote pilot in command elects to conduct pursuant to an exemption issued under section 333 of Public Law 112-95, unless otherwise specified in the exemption.​

 

[kensteele]

So you agree that you are contradicting the FAA, or you don't believe that the FAA clarification is genuine, or correct, or what? I have no idea which thread you are talking about. Link?

already answered. the thread i'm asking about is asking why would a 107 pilot want to fly under recreational rules, for what purpose?

 

[pmshop]

The test does not worry me. If the FAA is late coming up with one, they are late.
But they should have came up with LAANC for the hobbyist BEFORE locking down the towers.
They have a date of July 19th for LAANC to go online for the hobbyist.
Got that from volunteered info from the Albuquerque UAS region while asking an unrelated question of them.
So if they are late with the LAANC, no recourse obviously.

 

[pmshop]

already answered. the thread i'm asking about is asking why would a 107 pilot want to fly under recreational rules, for what purpose?

For plain fun.
107 also has record keeping and report generation to the FAA.
I am sure some 107 pilots would like to just fly simple - no records, no reports...just fly.

 

[sar104]

already answered. the thread i'm asking about is asking why would a 107 pilot want to fly under recreational rules, for what purpose?

Right - you are the poster who answers questions with questions - I'd forgotten that. Disregard.

 

[Rock81]

already answered. the thread i'm asking about is asking why would a 107 pilot want to fly under recreational rules, for what purpose?

Because a part 107 pilot started out like you and I, a hobbyist. Just because they have a part 107 now doesn't mean they still don't enjoy flying like a hobbyist or don't have the right to do so. Also as a hobbyist( Recreational pilot ) it is illegal to sale your content period, ever, or donate it for a financial gain to someone else. How do they enforce it or plan to do so, who cares, it's still the law as readed currently.

 

[GadgetGuy]

Also as a hobbyist( Recreational pilot ) it is illegal to sale your content period, ever, or donate it for a financial gain to someone else.

Not true. See above prior posts explaining why.