Night Flight question, just to be sure....

[Vic Moss]

Cool! So it's like a job?

Nope, volunteer only. It would be nice if I got paid, but then I'd be an FAA employee. And I'd make a horrible Federal Employee.

 

[lookout]

So if you’re flying a mini which is below the weight limit for registration under part 107, but then you add strobes to comply with the night flight, you’ll most likely add enough weight to have to register part 107.

But since mini is not registered under part 107, the extra weight and burden of the lights is not required. If I understand correctly. I’m sure others are trying to clarify this as well. This little divvy is a case for confusion.

 

[Vic Moss]

So if you’re flying a mini which is below the weight limit for registration under part 107, but then you add strobes to comply with the night flight, you’ll most likely add enough weight to have to register part 107.

There is no weight limit for Part 107 flown UAS. Every drone flown under Part 107 rules must be registered. Regardless of weight.

But since mini is not registered under part 107, the extra weight and burden of the lights is not required. If I understand correctly. I’m sure others are trying to clarify this as well. This little divvy is a case for confusion.

The only time you don't have to register the Mini series drones (& the Nano when it comes out) is if you're only flying under 44809 (recreational) rules and the take off weight remains below 250g.

 

[lookout]

There is no weight limit for Part 107 flown UAS. Every drone flown under Part 107 rules must be registered. Regardless of weight.

The only time you don't have to register the Mini series drones (& the Nano when it comes out) is if you're only flying under 44809 (recreational) rules and the take off weight remains below 250g.

So night flight is considered a part 107 operation, which even though a mini is under weight, it still has to be registered for night flight. And then you have to add the directional strobe lights. Pro has the directional function even in the daytime, so just add strobes.

And I wish the FAA would’ve kept the modeler R/C guys separate from the quad guys, and now they try to combine them together in a FRIA. AMA fields fall into the idea/concept of a FRIA. But I don’t think the R/Cs are necessarily under 250g, so now the modeler guys get the quad treatment going the other way. But the way it is presented is that a quad under 250g doesn’t have to be registered under part 107. Which on another case doesn’t have the requirement of RID. But if the reason is because it can only fly around in a FRIA, it basically goes back to being a paperweight. Even the modelers had a logistical problem with registering hundreds if not thousand of their own paperweights they had accumulated over the years before part 107.

The other part of the CBO is that it might have an entanglement with another government entity: 501(c)(3) tax exemption status with the IRS. As far as I can tell there is really no distinction between airspace and commercial use of quads in relation to part 107. Or maybe you need a part 107 to fly those gone with the wind toys you can get at the grocery store.

And outside of the quads situation are residential airparks that get occupied by non aviation people who are the ones who complain about the aircraft noise, not the aviators who live there; the “through the fence” campaign. The FAA is trying to shut down residential airparks over an issue of people who have nothing to do with aviation. Quads are getting shut down over similar situations. And why does the non aviation operations like Amazon advising the FAA on quad operations?

Well, we won’t have to wear masks. Oh no, we need to wear a mask. Oh wait, no 2 masks, now 3, oh how about wearing 4 masks.

 

[Vic Moss]

So night flight is considered a part 107 operation, which even though a mini is under weight, it still has to be registered for night flight. And then you have to add the directional strobe lights. Pro has the directional function even in the daytime, so just add strobes.

No, recreational flyers can fly at night, and always have been able to. Just because it's a night flight doesn't make it a 107.

And I wish the FAA would’ve kept the modeler R/C guys separate from the quad guys, and now they try to combine them together in a FRIA. AMA fields fall into the idea/concept of a FRIA. But I don’t think the R/Cs are necessarily under 250g, so now the modeler guys get the quad treatment going the other way. But the way it is presented is that a quad under 250g doesn’t have to be registered under part 107. Which on another case doesn’t have the requirement of RID. But if the reason is because it can only fly around in a FRIA, it basically goes back to being a paperweight. Even the modelers had a logistical problem with registering hundreds if not thousand of their own paperweights they had accumulated over the years before part 107.

No, nowhere does it say under 250g doesn't have to be registered if they're flown under 107. I'm not sure where you got that. Also, non-registered drone don't require RID, and can be flown outside of FRIAs.

107 and 44809 are intent dependent, not model dependent.

The other part of the CBO is that it might have an entanglement with another government entity: 501(c)(3) tax exemption status with the IRS. As far as I can tell there is really no distinction between airspace and commercial use of quads in relation to part 107. Or maybe you need a part 107 to fly those gone with the wind toys you can get at the grocery store.

I have no idea what you're saying here. The only difference between 107 and 44809 when it comes to airspace is that 107 can fly above UASFM limits, and at night is controlled airspace. However, once CBOs are set, odds are 44809 will be able to fly at night as well. That's just a guess though.

And the 501(c)(3) requirement for CBOs came directly from AMA's lobbying efforts.

And outside of the quads situation are residential airparks that get occupied by non aviation people who are the ones who complain about the aircraft noise, not the aviators who live there; the “through the fence” campaign. The FAA is trying to shut down residential airparks over an issue of people who have nothing to do with aviation. Quads are getting shut down over similar situations. And why does the non aviation operations like Amazon advising the FAA on quad operations?

You're just venting now, so I don't have a response for this. Amazon is on the AAAC because of Part 135 operations. So they do need to be at the AAAC table as well. Every entity on there belongs there.

Well, we won’t have to wear masks. Oh no, we need to wear a mask. Oh wait, no 2 masks, now 3, oh how about wearing 4 masks.

Venting again...

 

[lookout]

No, recreational flyers can fly at night, and always have been able to. Just because it's a night flight doesn't make it a 107.

No, nowhere does it say under 250g doesn't have to be registered if they're flown under 107. I'm not sure where you got that. Also, non-registered drone don't require RID, and can be flown outside of FRIAs.

107 and 44809 are intent dependent, not model dependent.

I have no idea what you're saying here. The only difference between 107 and 44809 when it comes to airspace is that 107 can fly above UASFM limits, and at night is controlled airspace. However, once CBOs are set, odds are 44809 will be able to fly at night as well. That's just a guess though.

And the 501(c)(3) requirement for CBOs came directly from AMA's lobbying efforts.

You're just venting now, so I don't have a response for this. Amazon is on the AAAC because of Part 135 operations. So they do need to be at the AAAC table as well. Every entity on there belongs there.

Venting again...

This is one of these cross checking episodes.

§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.

So recreational means what here? Is that under 250g (which appears to be 107) or just AMA guys? But number 2 talks about the CBO which would seem to indicate that the two are separate, but the all above seems to say recreational at an AMA field.

(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.

Doesn’t specify a weight here. So this is probably AMA guys.

(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;

So it would most likely be that flying a mini at night would be found specified under 107, rather than 44809, but does not fall under 107. It seemed like there was some thing about recreational flights could go at night, but not part 107. So now they’ve changed it so that part 107 can fly at night without the waiver. So as I gather if I understand the confusing triple no sentence above, that RID wouldn’t be useful as it is not tied to a registration that is not required for a sub 250g like a mini. Even at night, only in uncontrolled G airspace, and could technically still require a strobe or no?

This thread seems to indicate that the lighting part mysteriously disappeared from the revised legislation. FAA webpage for Recreational Flyers - Night Flying?.

 

[Vic Moss]

Once the FAA has developed the criteria for recognition of CBOs and started officially recognizing CBOs, those CBOs’ safety guidelines will be available for use. During this interim period, the FAA offers two means to satisfy this statutory condition. Recreational flyers should be able to explain to an FAA inspector or law enforcement official which safety guidelines they are following.This is one of these cross checking episodes.

§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.

So recreational means what here? Is that under 250g (which appears to be 107) or just AMA guys? But number 2 talks about the CBO which would seem to indicate that the two are separate, but the all above seems to say recreational at an AMA field.

There are no official FAA approved CBOs at the moment. For now the FAA has recreational follow previous rules. AC 91-57B (https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/Editorial_Update_AC_91-57B.pdf) states, "Once the FAA has developed the criteria for recognition of CBOs and started officially recognizing CBOs, those CBOs’ safety guidelines will be available for use. During this interim period, the FAA offers two means to satisfy this statutory condition. Recreational flyers should be able to explain to an FAA inspector or law enforcement official which safety guidelines they are following." Those rules would be the night op rules currently used by hobby organizations. Most people follow AMA's.

(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.

Doesn’t specify a weight here. So this is probably AMA guys.

(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;

So it would most likely be that flying a mini at night would be found specified under 107, rather than 44809, but does not fall under 107. It seemed like there was some thing about recreational flights could go at night, but not part 107. So now they’ve changed it so that part 107 can fly at night without the waiver. So as I gather if I understand the confusing triple no sentence above, that RID wouldn’t be useful as it is not tied to a registration that is not required for a sub 250g like a mini. Even at night, only in uncontrolled G airspace, and could technically still require a strobe or no?

See above. For now there is no 3SM strobe requirement. All of these questions will finally be solved once the FAA releases the list of CBOs who have a safety guide developed in cooperation with the FAA. Those are in the final stages now. "Soon" is what we hear when we officially ask. And I ask often.

This thread seems to indicate that the lighting part mysteriously disappeared from the revised legislation. FAA webpage for Recreational Flyers - Night Flying?.

 

[lookout]

The AMAs were well established so I don’t understand why they even bothered to change the rules or put them under the quad regulations umbrella or even need to establish separate CBOs.

The quads needed their own fields so they added FRIAs and CBOs to operate them I guess.

 

[Vic Moss]

The AMAs were well established so I don’t understand why they even bothered to change the rules or put them under the quad regulations umbrella or even need to establish separate CBOs.

Congress mandated that in order to be a CBO, that organization had to develop a "... set of safety guidelines that are developed in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration." AMA's was not developed in coordination with the FAA. But they will be one of the first set of guidelines accepted.

The quads needed their own fields so they added FRIAs and CBOs to operate them I guess.

 

[lookout]

Congress mandated that in order to be a CBO, that organization had to develop a "... set of safety guidelines that are developed in coordination with the Federal Aviation Administration." AMA's was not developed in coordination with the FAA. But they will be one of the first set of guidelines accepted.

So now they have to coordinate with the FAA? Assuming that any quads even use the AMA fields. The quads seemed to have changed the FAA’s tune that they actually recognize the AMA fields, like they would a regular airfield.

If I want to run a quad, I guess I should designate my driveway as a “field”, but it would have to compete with four wheels that don’t fly.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Drone Pros Clarify New FAA Rules

Drone experts at Kansas State Polytechnic hosted a drone webinar on Feb. 25, clarifying upcoming rule changes.

www.forconstructionpros.com

RID not required for under 250g but everyone else 2023.

This article has been updated to state that non-standard RID drones, flown under the RID module category, are not exempt from RID rules. The only drones exempt from RID and are still allowed to fly outside FRIAs are those weighing less than 250 grams and flown strictly for recreational purposes. Every other drone flown in the U.S. will need to have RID after Sept. 16, 2023.

The FAA is now offering a free, online course to train operators in night drone flight, which takes the place of the recurrent drone certification test. Currently, to fly a drone, operators are required to take a test every 24 months. Starting March 16, the test will no longer be required. Instead, operators will need to take the free online course, available at https://www.faasafety.gov.

 

[Vic Moss]

So now they have to coordinate with the FAA? Assuming that any quads even use the AMA fields. The quads seemed to have changed the FAA’s tune that they actually recognize the AMA fields, like they would a regular airfield.

If I want to run a quad, I guess I should designate my driveway as a “field”, but it would have to compete with four wheels that don’t fly.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Drone Pros Clarify New FAA Rules

Drone experts at Kansas State Polytechnic hosted a drone webinar on Feb. 25, clarifying upcoming rule changes.

www.forconstructionpros.com

RID not required for under 250g but everyone else 2023.

This article has been updated to state that non-standard RID drones, flown under the RID module category, are not exempt from RID rules. The only drones exempt from RID and are still allowed to fly outside FRIAs are those weighing less than 250 grams and flown strictly for recreational purposes. Every other drone flown in the U.S. will need to have RID after Sept. 16, 2023.

The FAA is now offering a free, online course to train operators in night drone flight, which takes the place of the recurrent drone certification test. Currently, to fly a drone, operators are required to take a test every 24 months. Starting March 16, the test will no longer be required. Instead, operators will need to take the free online course, available at https://www.faasafety.gov.

You're all over the board with your logic, so I think we're done. I've written rules as the are now, and as they will be soon. And I've told you that this is a mandate from Congress. You don't seem to want to hear that.

So yeah, we're done.

 

[lookout]

You're all over the board with your logic, so I think we're done. I've written rules as the are now, and as they will be soon. And I've told you that this is a mandate from Congress. You don't seem to want to hear that.

So yeah, we're done.

Congress created the FAA to take on these tasks, and they should leave it to the FAA. But there are several topics going on here. Quads under 250g flying at night versus the alleviation of the same waiver for part 107 versus what the modeling guys do.

 

[lookout]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Christmas lights?

 

[dviera]

Wrong.

Wromg!

 

[BigAl07]

Wromg!

Please elaborate!!