Hobbyists: how have the new regulations affected your flights?

[Bill combs]

New rules over reaction to public outcry against others having fun at no ones exspence.

when we continue to give up our rights to the government for a license or a permit we will eventually lose all of our rights

 

[sar104]

when we continue to give up our rights to the government for a license or a permit we will eventually lose all of our rights

Which rights are you worried about giving up?

 

[kensteele]

when we continue to give up our rights to the government for a license or a permit we will eventually lose all of our rights

this is exactly true. i'm posting here so we can look back on this one day wondering how it all happened.

 

[Bill combs]

Which rights are you worried about giving up?

did you not understand my statement?

 

[BigAl07]

when we continue to give up our rights to the government for a license or a permit we will eventually lose all of our rights

Circa 1975 I had to get an FCC license to operate an R/C aircraft. I know my memory isn't great but I honestly don't think I lost any rights at all. Actually in just a few years the "license" requirement went away.

 

[Bigbird48]

Circa 1975 I had to get an FCC license to operate an R/C aircraft. I know my memory isn't great but I honestly don't think I lost any rights at all. Actually in just a few years the "license" requirement went away.

Thats a lot different then what were facing here with the FAA. Things are just going to get tougher for Drone operators . They have already taken all the great spots to fly away well a good many of them anyway and more to go I'm sure.

 

[sar104]

did you not understand my statement?

I understood your statement, generically, but you didn't specify which right(s) you were referring to.

 

[mikemoose55]

Holy crap...if I changed my undies this often I would have no money left to buy a freaking drone.
Actually I fly so far mostly in CL G even though I am less than 2 miles from a regional airport.
Here my class G extends surface to 700 AGL. HOWEVER it is very common to have civil aircraft in a landing pattern well within my 400 ft ceiling (by estimate) around my house . Lately for some reason there has been been a huge increase in military helicopter activity highly unusual, in and out of the regional.
No I did not check for NATAMs or any of that other TFR junk... If I hear a plane or chopper I drop to under 100 feet ASAP otherwise BITE ME.
mikemoose55

 

[Bigbird48]

Holy crap...if I changed my undies this often I would have no money left to buy a freaking drone.
Actually I fly so far mostly in CL G even though I am less than 2 miles from a regional airport.
Here my class G extends surface to 700 AGL. HOWEVER it is very common to have civil aircraft in a landing pattern well within my 400 ft ceiling (by estimate) around my house . Lately for some reason there has been been a huge increase in military helicopter activity highly unusual, in and out of the regional.
No I did not check for NATAMs or any of that other TFR junk... If I hear a plane or chopper I drop to under 100 feet ASAP otherwise BITE ME.
mikemoose55

 

[Slim.slamma]

Thats a lot different then what were facing here with the FAA. Things are just going to get tougher for Drone operators . They have already taken all the great spots to fly away well a good many of them anyway and more to go I'm sure.

A Simple test away from becoming a licensed pilot!
On the bright side that is Sir

No worries

 

[bushie]

Zero impact, but i am in Australia

 

[Slim.slamma]

Zero impact, but i am in Australia

Must be nice to be free like a bird
Sheeesh

 

[johnmeyer]

I didn't know about the new laws, but just now looked at the actual document passed by Congress:

https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hr302/BILLS-115hr302enr.pdf

It is 462 pages of exceedingly fine print, probably much longer than "War and Peace," or any other massively long novel.

It is, in short, completely and totally impossible to read and therefore impossible to comply with.

It is a joke.

Like almost all government regulations of the past twenty years, this one is destined to be ignored, en masse, just like the dozens of "hands-free" cell phone laws. And, like those feckless laws, almost no one will be prosecuted. Heck, out here in CA, there is so little money left because all of it is going to the CALPers recipients (California retirement pensions for government employees) that we don't even have speeding tickets anymore because there is no money to pay for that work. In the last ten years, I have seen exactly one person pulled over for speeding.

So, fly responsibly, but don't expect these laws to change what other people do, or how they act.

 

[sar104]

I didn't know about the new laws, but just now looked at the actual document passed by Congress:

https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hr302/BILLS-115hr302enr.pdf

It is 462 pages of exceedingly fine print, probably much longer than "War and Peace," or any other massively long novel.

It is, in short, completely and totally impossible to read and therefore impossible to comply with.

It is a joke.

While the original intentions may have been good, the actual law is unreadable and therefore impossible comply with.

Like almost all government regulations of the past twenty years, this one is destined to be ignored, en masse, just like the dozens of "hands-free" cell phone laws. And, like those feckless laws, almost no one will be prosecuted. Heck, out here in CA, there is so little money left because all of it is going to the CALPers recipients (California retirement pensions for government employees) that we don't even have speeding tickets anymore because there is no money to pay for that work. In the last ten years, I have seen exactly one person pulled over for speeding.

So, fly responsibly, but don't expect these laws to change what other people do, or how they act.

Sure - you certainly could try to read the entire FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, but presumably you don't imagine that it is all about hobbyists flying drones, do you? So alternatively, you could read the two pages of Section 349 that actually apply. You can make the font size bigger if needed.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/302/text#toc-HFC2BF962EFA14270B797E485483D072C

 

[johnmeyer]

Sure - you certainly could try to read the entire FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, but presumably you don't imagine that it is all about hobbyists flying drones, do you? So alternatively, you could read the two pages of Section 349 that actually apply. You can make the font size bigger if needed.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/302/text#toc-HFC2BF962EFA14270B797E485483D072C

That is certainly shorter, but still reads like the tax code.

 

[sar104]

That is certainly shorter, but still reads like the tax code.

No - it really doesn't read at all like the tax code. It's written in perfectly plain English:

§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.​

(b) Other Operations.—Unmanned aircraft operations that do not conform to the limitations in subsection (a) must comply with all statutes and regulations generally applicable to unmanned aircraft and unmanned aircraft systems.

(c) Operations at Fixed Sites.—

(1) Operating procedure required.—Persons operating unmanned aircraft under subsection (a) from a fixed site within 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, or a community-based organization conducting a sanctioned event within such airspace, shall make the location of the fixed site known to the Administrator and shall establish a mutually agreed upon operating procedure with the air traffic control facility.​

​

(2) Unmanned aircraft weighing more than 55 pounds.—A person may operate an unmanned aircraft weighing more than 55 pounds, including the weight of anything attached to or carried by the aircraft, under subsection (a) if—​

​

(A) the unmanned aircraft complies with standards and limitations developed by a community-based organization and approved by the Administrator; and​

​

(B) the aircraft is operated from a fixed site as described in paragraph (1).​

(d) Updates.—

(1) In general.—The Administrator, in consultation with government, stakeholders, and community-based organizations, shall initiate a process to periodically update the operational parameters under subsection (a), as appropriate.​

​

(2) Considerations.—In updating an operational parameter under paragraph (1), the Administrator shall consider—​

​

(A) appropriate operational limitations to mitigate risks to aviation safety and national security, including risk to the uninvolved public and critical infrastructure;​

​

(B) operations outside the membership, guidelines, and programming of a community-based organization;​

​

(C) physical characteristics, technical standards, and classes of aircraft operating under this section;​

​

(D) trends in use, enforcement, or incidents involving unmanned aircraft systems;​

​

(E) ensuring, to the greatest extent practicable, that updates to the operational parameters correspond to, and leverage, advances in technology; and​

​

(F) equipage requirements that facilitate safe, efficient, and secure operations and further integrate all unmanned aircraft into the national airspace system.​

​

​

(3) Savings clause.—Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as expanding the authority of the Administrator to require a person operating an unmanned aircraft under this section to seek permissive authority of the Administrator, beyond that required in subsection (a) of this section, prior to operation in the national airspace system.​

(e) Statutory Construction.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the Administrator to pursue an enforcement action against a person operating any unmanned aircraft who endangers the safety of the national airspace system.

(f) Exceptions.—Nothing in this section prohibits the Administrator from promulgating rules generally applicable to unmanned aircraft, including those unmanned aircraft eligible for the exception set forth in this section, relating to—

(1) updates to the operational parameters for unmanned aircraft in subsection (a);​

​

(2) the registration and marking of unmanned aircraft;​

​

(3) the standards for remotely identifying owners and operators of unmanned aircraft systems and associated unmanned aircraft; and​

​

(4) other standards consistent with maintaining the safety and security of the national airspace system.​

(g) Aeronautical Knowledge and Safety Test.—

(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.​

​

(2) Requirements.—The Administrator shall ensure the aeronautical knowledge and safety test is designed to adequately demonstrate an operator's—​

​

(A) understanding of aeronautical safety knowledge; and​

​

(B) knowledge of Federal Aviation Administration regulations and requirements pertaining to the operation of an unmanned aircraft system in the national airspace system.​

(h) Community-based Organization Defined.—In this section, the term "community-based organization" means a membership-based association entity that—

(1) is described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;​

​

(2) is exempt from tax under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;​

​

(3) the mission of which is demonstrably the furtherance of model aviation;​

​

(4) provides a comprehensive set of safety guidelines for all aspects of model aviation addressing the assembly and operation of model aircraft and that emphasize safe aeromodelling operations within the national airspace system and the protection and safety of individuals and property on the ground, and may provide a comprehensive set of safety rules and programming for the operation of unmanned aircraft that have the advanced flight capabilities enabling active, sustained, and controlled navigation of the aircraft beyond visual line of sight of the operator;​

​

(5) provides programming and support for any local charter organizations, affiliates, or clubs; and​

​

(6) provides assistance and support in the development and operation of locally designated model aircraft flying sites.​

(i) Recognition of Community-based Organizations.—In collaboration with aeromodelling stakeholders, the Administrator shall publish an advisory circular within 180 days of the date of enactment of this section that identifies the criteria and process required for recognition of community-based organizations.

 

[BigAl07]

I didn't know about the new laws, but just now looked at the actual document passed by Congress:

https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hr302/BILLS-115hr302enr.pdf

It is 462 pages of exceedingly fine print, probably much longer than "War and Peace," or any other massively long novel.

It is, in short, completely and totally impossible to read and therefore impossible to comply with.

It is a joke.

Like almost all government regulations of the past twenty years, this one is destined to be ignored, en masse, just like the dozens of "hands-free" cell phone laws. And, like those feckless laws, almost no one will be prosecuted. Heck, out here in CA, there is so little money left because all of it is going to the CALPers recipients (California retirement pensions for government employees) that we don't even have speeding tickets anymore because there is no money to pay for that work. In the last ten years, I have seen exactly one person pulled over for speeding.

So, fly responsibly, but don't expect these laws to change what other people do, or how they act.

Thank goodness everyone doesn't see it that way. You should see all the rules & regulations for flying an airplane. Fortunately all of the other pilots in the US don't just say, "Ehhhh that legal stuff is too long and hard to read so I'll just fly any way I like and hope for the best".

Here's a well written and very accurate break down (digested version) that goes a long way to making it much more easily understood:

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

PS: Our good friend @sar104 beat me to it with an excellent break down. Well done sir.

 

[AMann]

when we continue to give up our rights to the government for a license or a permit we will eventually lose all of our rights

 

[johnmeyer]

... when we continue to give up our rights to the government for a license or a permit we will eventually lose all of our rights.

While that is a little extreme for what we are discussing, it does get to the main point: these are a lot of complicated rules for a relatively low-risk activity (compared to, as an example, driving a car at 70 mph which is infinitely more hazardous) and which isn't much different than many other similar things that have gone on, without regulation, for years (like operating other R/C vehicles).

No - it really doesn't read at all like the tax code. It's written in perfectly plain English:

Except as provided in subsection (e), and notwithstanding chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code, ... ​

​

I don't want to be argumentative or start a fight, but your definition of "perfectly plain English" and my definition of that phrase are quite different. What you quoted is exactly how the tax code reads, and is why almost no one does their own returns by hand anymore because it is so complicated, ambiguous, and self-referrential. I know this becuase I did my own returns for twenty years, until I had to give up in the late 80's.

Thank goodness everyone doesn't see it that way. You should see all the rules & regulations for flying an airplane. Fortunately all of the other pilots in the US don't just say, "Ehhhh that legal stuff is too long and hard to read so I'll just fly any way I like and hope for the best".

Ah, but there is a HUGE difference between the subject of this thread (rules governing hobby flying) and rules governing an activity which requires a license.

I react to these rules exactly like I would react if the government bureaucrats decided they had the right to force me, when preparing dinner tonight, to follow all the rules a restaurant owner must follow when preparing and serving food to the public, something which requires a license, and which, by virtue of that license, requires the owner to open up his operation for inspection on demand. In that case, the requirements of the license override the usual protections of the fourth amendment.

However, no license is being issued or required here, and the government is creating this quasi-license which I'm pretty sure will not be enforceable and which, as described in the first quote above, is almost certainly governmental overreach. As a result, it will be as widely ignored as all the other similar ineffectual (that's what "feckless" means) laws we have, such as those requiring hands-free phone use in a car; laws against unsolicited phone calls, etc.

I tried to research this the other day, before I knew about this new round of "laws," and found that almost no hobbyist has ever been convicted of breaking the prior restrictions, and those who were prosecuted (with the charges eventually being dropped) were doing things that were so egregious that new laws weren't even needed, because existing laws already covered their aberrant behavior (e.g., privacy laws against "peeping Toms;" endangering property; trespassing, etc.).

 

[sar104]

​

I don't want to be argumentative or start a fight, but your definition of "perfectly plain English" and my definition of that phrase are quite different. What you quoted is exactly how the tax code reads, and is why almost no one does their own returns by hand anymore because it is so complicated, ambiguous, and self-referrential. I know this becuase I did my own returns for twenty years, until I had to give up in the late 80's.

No seriously - if the law that I quoted above is too complicated for you to understand then you definitely should not be flying around in the NAS.

I react to these rules exactly like I would react if the government bureaucrats decided they had the right to force me, when preparing dinner tonight, to follow all the rules a restaurant owner must follow when preparing and serving food to the public...

That's because unlike preparing your dinner, flying your drone in the NAS is, in fact, a potential threat to others. The logical extension of your argument would be that no private aviation activities require regulation or licensing.