FAA Section 349, Recreational Operations ~ The bits & pieces

[sgrinavi]

Bravely spoken. You don’t know me, so until you do don’t throw false courage around. I’m all for remaining law-abiding, but government over-reach is killing this hobby.

I couldn't agree more. I get sick of the guys telling me about following laws then they go and fly at 1000 feet well out of visual range.

 

[sar104]

I couldn't agree more. I get sick of the guys telling me about following laws then they go and fly at 1000 feet well out of visual range.

Did someone do that?

 

[Slade]

It will if you keep posting nonsense about "FAA thugs", "government overreach" and throwing ad hominems rather than having an intelligent discussion.

Fortunately, membership is not your call.

 

[kingsnake11]

From a Canadian perspective, we have new rules coming into effect June 1rst, 2019 that apply to all UAV's. As part of the new rules, they introduced to levels of certification, the basic certification which roughly is similar to the US section 349, and the advanced operation certificate, which goes beyond the US part 107 with a checkout flight by an accredited flight reviewer. To get the basic certification was not a slam dunk, and if the FAA introduces an online testing system, like transport Canada has done, then you may be in for a shock. The Canadian transport Canada online test even for the basic certification was far more difficult and encompassing than most people had imagined and if you go online to youtube, you will see a number of complaints about it and how some well known flyers had to take the test multiple times to pass even the basic level. In the Canadian online test for the basic certification, there are 35 questions, you get 90 minutes and it's open book. Questions had to do with 1- air law and regulations (14), 2-sUAV airframes, power plants, and systems(2), 3-Human factors(2), 4- Meteorology(2), 5-Navigation(4), 6-flight operations(6), 7-theory of flight(2) and 8- radiotelephony(4). The number in brackets are the number of questions in each topic. The questions are randomized and not in order of the basic sections. Further, if you have to retake the test you will get a different set of 35 questions within those categories. a minimum of 65% is required to pass. It took me more than a few days of brushing up and studying but I managed to pass my basic certification on the first try with a 90%. The advanced certification is a 50 question test to be done in 60 minutes with a result of 80% minimum to pass and covers the same plus a few more areas with a different proportion for each category. I've been told it's more challenging than the current FAA part 107 exam. I am busy studying for my advanced certification as I know it's going to be a challenge. Oh one more thing, in Canada, even if you have the advanced certification, your sUAV needs to be certified for advanced operations too. Luckily, DJI has certified most of their sUAV's for flight in controlled airspace.
I would not be surprised that the new FAA testing will mirror the Canadian Transport Canada system. As of today, Transport Canada has not made it clear if there is an exemption for those flying at a MAAC (AMA field in the US) field. It was originally proposed that MAAC fields would be exempt from the new rules requiring certification, but as the new rules take effect in a few weeks, the lack of news makes me think that an exemption is not forthcoming. I do hope that the FAA doesn't introduce some of the more crappy rules that Transport Canada has done. For example, there is a limitation on who can fly. You have to be a Canadian citizen to be certified, so any visitor would have to apply for a SFOC (special flight operation certificate) to fly at a specific time and place or find a certified pilot to fly with. That is quite an onerous imposition to visitors

 

[Drbobk]

, but government over-reach is killing this hobby.

Government overreach is not killing the hobby. It's people doing stupid stunts, like flying to set distance limits, or height limits, or even any flight out of VLOS where the pilot can't guarantee the safety of others. Oh sure, he can see straight ahead, but in what other realm of flight is straight ahead the only place to look when flying? Pilots are told to "keep your head on a swivel" to be sure of everything going on around them, and under them, and over them. A forward facing camera doesn't give that to you, and there's no reason why flying without situational awareness should be tolerated.

 

[Viper8]

So do you still have to take the 107 test to fly commercially at a test facility or will it be offered online?

 

[BigAl07]

So do you still have to take the 107 test to fly commercially at a test facility or will it be offered online?

We don't know those answers yet.That's a whole other ball of wax that we'll get to delve into at a much later date.

 

[msinger]

If anyone's interested, I posted a detailed overview of these rule changes in this thread:

Overview of current hobbyist FAA rules (updated 7/23/19)

As of 5/17/19, here's a complete list of rules hobbyists must follow when flying outdoors in the US: Register your drone with the FAA Mark your registration number on the exterior of the drone (decals available here) Fly a drone under 55 lbs Fly only for hobby or recreation Follow the safety...

mavicpilots.com

 

[2020HeinSite]

It does appear Hobbyists will eventually be able to use the LAANC system to gain approval. I have to believe access will coincide with the knowledge testing mandated for hobbyists.

From what I have read the FAA is hopeful to make their LAANC system available to recreational pilots sometime this summer. But according to the new regulations from above:

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this section, the Administrator, in consultation with manufacturers of unmanned aircraft systems, other industry stakeholders, and community-based organizations, shall develop an aeronautical knowledge and safety test, which can then be administered electronically by the Administrator, a community-based organization, or a person designated by the Administrator."

As measured from the implementation date of May 17, 2019, this would put their deadline for having the online test ready by or before Nov 13, 2019. If I had to guess I would think they'll get LAANC ready first. I would also expect DJI will update RC software to assist with all this at roughly the same time.

 

[brett8883]

“(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this section, the Administrator, in consultation with manufacturers of unmanned aircraft systems, other industry stakeholders, and community-based organizations, shall develop an aeronautical knowledge and safety test, which can then be administered electronically by the Administrator, a community-based organization, or a person designated by the Administrator."

As measured from the implementation date of May 17, 2019, this would put their deadline for having the online test ready by or before Nov 13, 2019. If I had to guess I would think they'll get LAANC ready first. I would also expect DJI will update RC software to assist with all this at roughly the same time.

I read that to mean 180 days from the day the law goes into effect. I kinda doubt Congress meant “from the day the FAA arbitrarily decides its going to do it.”

Now I’m not sure when that was technically, either the day the President signed it into law which was Oct. 5th, 2018, in which case 180 would have been April 3rd in which case must not have been too important since they missed it.

OR

It could have been Jan. 1st when most new laws go into effect, in which case that would be June 30th and they’ve arbitrarily chosen a date a month and a half before that deadline even though they were not ready for it for reasons that must only make sense to an Administration that doesn’t care about the people it affects.

Maybe I have that all wrong but it still wouldn’t change the fact that they put something into effect before it was ready.

 

[brett8883]

@BigAl07 so does this mean recreational pilots do not have to notify lets say a heli pad in class G?

Also if flying under the ceiling of a controlled airspace does that require authorization rec pilots? It’s gonna be almost impossible to show that on a map designed for the masses.

Last thing. I was driving to the mountains today and there was a single engine plane flying I want to say maybe 500 feet over the busy road leading to the mountains. I could see the registration numbers and could have read them if it wasn’t for the fact that I was driving and needed to keep my eyes on the road. This is a place I fly my drone all the time.

You think it’s worth reporting since I couldn’t write down the numbers? All this talk about drone pilots doing the wrong thing I’m chomping at the bit to show manned pilots aren’t perfect angels either.

 

[BigAl07]

@BigAl07 so does this mean recreational pilots do not have to notify lets say a heli pad in class G?

Is it required by law? No but would it be a good idea ? I'd say yes.

@BigAl07 Also if flying under the ceiling of a controlled airspace does that require authorization rec pilots? It’s gonna be almost impossible to show that on a map designed for the masses.

"Under the Ceiling" - Do you mean under the shelf? For instance flying at 399' under the shelf of a 700' area? This is exactly why everyone needs to know how to read and understand an FAA Sectional. You fly per the Airspace you're flying in (which is indeed a 3D situation not just 2D). That map designed for the masses is called the Sectional and it's not impossible to read. Once you "Get it" they become easy to read and if you're always flying in the same general area it's even easier.

Last thing. I was driving to the mountains today and there was a single engine plane flying I want to say maybe 500 feet over the busy road leading to the mountains. I could see the registration numbers and could have read them if it wasn’t for the fact that I was driving and needed to keep my eyes on the road. This is a place I fly my drone all the time.

You think it’s worth reporting since I couldn’t write down the numbers? All this talk about drone pilots doing the wrong thing I’m chomping at the bit to show manned pilots aren’t perfect angels either.

A) without the # your report is empty so no need to even waste your time.
B) if it was operating at your estimated 500' it was probably higher and even if at 500' it was probably legal unless flying over a congested area.

 

[brett8883]

Is it required by law? No but would it be a good idea ? I'd say yes.



"Under the Ceiling" - Do you mean under the shelf? For instance flying at 399' under the shelf of a 700' area? This is exactly why everyone needs to know how to read and understand an FAA Sectional. You fly per the Airspace you're flying in (which is indeed a 3D situation not just 2D). That map designed for the masses is called the Sectional and it's not impossible to read. Once you "Get it" they become easy to read and if you're always flying in the same general area it's even easier.



A) without the # your report is empty so no need to even waste your time.
B) if it was operating at your estimated 500' it was probably higher and even if at 500' it was probably legal unless flying over a congested area.

Yea I meant shelf ?. Thanks!

 

[2020HeinSite]

I read that to mean 180 days from the day the law goes into effect. I kinda doubt Congress meant “from the day the FAA arbitrarily decides its going to do it.”

Now I’m not sure when that was technically, either the day the President signed it into law which was Oct. 5th, 2018, in which case 180 would have been April 3rd in which case must not have been too important since they missed it.

OR

It could have been Jan. 1st when most new laws go into effect, in which case that would be June 30th and they’ve arbitrarily chosen a date a month and a half before that deadline even though they were not ready for it for reasons that must only make sense to an Administration that doesn’t care about the people it affects.

Maybe I have that all wrong but it still wouldn’t change the fact that they put something into effect before it was ready.

It's complicated the way laws work versus the rule making agencies like the FAA have to implement once a law is passed. Laws (Acts) often do not provide the specifics of how things work, they're general in nature. But regardless, things go into effect once they're published in the Federal Register... and this was published on 05/17/19.

Jonathan Rupprect of Rupprecht Law recently explains it better than I can, so I'll just quote him here with his links for further reading:

May 4, 2016, the FAA published their interpretation allowing for the education use of unmanned aircraft under 336. In July 2016, Congress passed the FAA Extension Safety, and Security Act of 2016 which criminalized unmanned aircraft flights near wildfires August 2016, the FAA published Part 101 Subpart E regulations for model aircraft flyers which was basically a copy-paste job of the previous Section 336 from the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. In October 2018, Congress passed the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 which did away with Section 336 and added many more restrictions to model aircraft flyers.

In April 2019, the FAA published an official withdrawal of their 2014 model aircraft interpretation. May 17, 2019, the FAA will start implementing Section 349 and 350 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018.

Because of of the changes from the 2018 FAA Re authorization, Part 101’s Subpart E model aircraft regulations have been superseded. A giant reset button has been pressed for model aircraft flyers laws.

 

[Rangerider]

So when/how do we take the knowledge test? I just registered and no mention by the FAA of where/when/how to take a knowledge test! Are we all criminals now because we haven't taken 'the' knowledge test? Shish!

 

[sar104]

So when/how do we take the knowledge test? I just registered and no mention by the FAA of where/when/how to take a knowledge test! Are we all criminals now because we haven't taken 'the' knowledge test? Shish!

No - the test hasn't been rolled out yet and nor has the requirement. You are going to have to find something else to be offended by.

 

[Rangerider]

Oh dear. You are not going to last long around here.

That's a threat.

 

[Rangerider]

I can remember when uncontrolled airspace was everything below 12,500 14,500 ft msl outside of prohibited & control zones, etc! Now it's down to 400 ft! I admit that drones present challenging circumstances but just put transponders on them and let the planes see and avoid. They(drones) are at least as big as birds which also present danger to aircraft. B1rds don't even have the decency to carry transponders. Ask me how I know?

 

[sar104]

That's a threat.

No - a prediction.

 

[sar104]

I can remember when uncontrolled airspace was everything below 12,500 ft msl outside of prohibited & control zones, etc! Now it's down to 400 ft! I admit that drones present challenging circumstances but just put transponders on them and let the planes see and avoid. They(drones) are at least as big as birds which also present danger to aircraft.

So you are proposing letting drones fly just about anywhere, and making it the responsibility of manned aircraft to detect and avoid them? Brilliant.