Good news on Part 107, maybe?

[Bad Santa]

I might have heard some good news.
You know, the stuff that you can't post your source, though it's a reliable source.
Something about the Part 107 being revised a bit.
Can't say too much but it seems there's some possible movement to make the Part 107 a little easier to get.

One of my biggest complaints about the Part 107 is that there's a lot of non-relevant information being tested. Stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with drones.
There might (or might not) be some movement to remove some of the non-relevant knowledge requirements.

The details are NOT public knowledge. I'm doing what I can to be vague enough to not get anyone in trouble.

 

[GadgetGuy]

I might have heard some good news.
You know, the stuff that you can't post your source, though it's a reliable source.
Something about the Part 107 being revised a bit.
Can't say too much but it seems there's some possible movement to make the Part 107 a little easier to get.

One of my biggest complaints about the Part 107 is that there's a lot of non-relevant information being tested. Stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with drones.
There might (or might not) be some movement to remove some of the non-relevant knowledge requirements.

The details are NOT public knowledge. I'm doing what I can to be vague enough to not get anyone in trouble.

Hopefully, no family members involved in the "leak?" LOL!

 

[Bad Santa]

Hopefully, no family members involved in the "leak?" LOL!

Hopefully.

 

[BlueHeeler]

So they're "lowering" the bar ???

 

[hank970]

So they're "lowering" the bar ???

If true, that is good news. I don't know if the bar is too high or too wide or too whatever, but the much of the knowledge needed to pass the Part 107 examination is weighted too heavily toward general aviation concerns and isn't even remotely germane to or necessary for safe and responsible drone operation.

 

[BlueHeeler]

If true, that is good news. I don't know if the bar is too high or too wide or too whatever, but the much of the knowledge needed to pass the Part 107 examination is weighted too heavily toward general aviation concerns and isn't even remotely germane to or necessary for safe and responsible drone operation.

That's correct, I studied and took the Exam in 2022, there were concerns back then as to why the study materials almost resembles that of a private pilot, the response I have always gotten is that the FAA wants Remote Pilots to understand and be advised of what the private pilot must know, especially reading and understanding those Maps, I believe it should be revised and be more geared towards the nuances of being a Remote Pilot.

 

[sawman]

Probably because of the forthcoming Part 108?

 

[tstr14]

So they're "lowering" the bar ???

Ah yes, I can hear it now, just like when the FCC did away with the Morse code requirement for amateur radio licenses. Never mind that the vast majority of radio operators opt for voice over code, the old timers cried foul and gnashed their teeth for more than 30 years over the change. Was it 'dumbing down' the requirements? No, it was just acknowledging that "requirement" was no longer germane to the field, like much of the info required for a 107 is not related to the field.

 

[Bad Santa]

Probably because of the forthcoming Part 108?

And that's a possibility.
Odd thing, though, my contact doesn't have any official knowledge of an impending Part 108. Says it's not something even searchable in the database.

 

[skycam509]

On the other hand, if it's a little harder, maybe it helps weed out some of the less responsible people who could potentially not take it seriously enough and do stupid stuff that could potentially tarnish the reputation of certified drone pilots in general.

I look at it kind of like a college degree. You won't ever use what you learned in some of the requisite classes you had to take that don't have anything to do with the field of your degree, but it shows that you were able to apply yourself and pay your dues for the degree.

 

[1gratefulflyingdawg]

On the other hand, if it's a little harder, maybe it helps weed out some of the less responsible people who could potentially not take it seriously enough and do stupid stuff that could potentially tarnish the reputation of certified drone pilots in general.

I look at it kind of like a college degree. You won't ever use what you learned in some of the requisite classes you had to take that don't have anything to do with the field of your degree, but it shows that you were able to apply yourself and pay your dues for the degree.

Stupid people are going to do stupid things and that’s just life. SPAA Stupid People Awareness and Avoidance.

 

[Bad Santa]

On the other hand, if it's a little harder, maybe it helps weed out some of the less responsible people who could potentially not take it seriously enough and do stupid stuff that could potentially tarnish the reputation of certified drone pilots in general.

I look at it kind of like a college degree. You won't ever use what you learned in some of the requisite classes you had to take that don't have anything to do with the field of your degree, but it shows that you were able to apply yourself and pay your dues for the degree.

Odd thing is your comment and conclusion are opposite of a good argument.

People spend 10's of thousands of dollars on "learning" things that are not at all pertinent to the subject intended to learn. When, in reality, they could spend that extra time and money learning more about the subject.

Same goes for the part 107. If they spend more energy teaching about unmanned aircraft instead of spending time teaching about airport runway directions and all that, then more people would be better educated about unmanned aircraft. Especially when it's a super thin line between recreational pilots and vaguely commercial. It would also encourage more people to obtain their Part 107 rather than fudging things.

Example: Flying your drone to see if you need your gutters cleaned.

 

[hank970]

And that's a possibility.
Odd thing, though, my contact doesn't have any official knowledge of an impending Part 108. Says it's not something even searchable in the database.

Your contact apparently isn't very knowledgeable or doesn't know how to conduct an online search. Tell him or her to type 14 CFR 108 in any search engine. The proposed text, more than 600 pages of it, has been published in the Federal Register, and the FAA is awaiting subsequent public review and comments before making final revisions. Enactment will likely occur in 2027.

I'm far too lazy to read through the whole thing, but summaries suggest that much of it relates to anticipated fleet operations like commercial delivery services and larger scale agricultural and mapping/survey endeavors involving heavier (55-1320 pound) UAS craft. Not sure if it will have any impact on folks like us who are either recreational pilots or engaged in smaller scale commercial activities, unless, of course, it prompts a more relaxed revision of Part 107 as is being discussed in this thread.

 

[mavic3usa]

Odd thing is your comment and conclusion are opposite of a good argument.

People spend 10's of thousands of dollars on "learning" things that are not at all pertinent to the subject intended to learn. When, in reality, they could spend that extra time and money learning more about the subject.

Same goes for the part 107. If they spend more energy teaching about unmanned aircraft instead of spending time teaching about airport runway directions and all that, then more people would be better educated about unmanned aircraft. Especially when it's a super thin line between recreational pilots and vaguely commercial. It would also encourage more people to obtain their Part 107 rather than fudging things.

Example: Flying your drone to see if you need your gutters cleaned.

That line is so thin I would say there doesn't need to be a true test for commercial drone operations. Maybe just a few key items that you need to know in order to perform the additional steps like waivers, etc. It's up to *you* to further your business with your own classes and techniques (to be offered by private companies not the government) and if you don't and you suck, that's on you. Other countries don't make the distinction do they?

So I'm not proposing we eliminate some sort of advanced "voluntary" training where applicable but instead perhaps an intermediate "license" so the recreational pilot can make one step from flying for fun to "seeing if you need your gutters cleaned." If someone had the time and money and knowledge to become the ultimate professional and maybe their job requires it, let them choose to further their education and improve their skills thru other available means.