Recreational "Hand Catch" Violates Federal Law

[flockshot]

Here is a silly law for drone drivers. The AMA strictly prohibits touching any unmanned aircraft while it is in flight, except to prevent it from hitting someone.
Hand catch violates federal law, if flying recreationally, because you are not abiding by AMA rules.

 

[JMF]

Oh yeah, federal law, that's the law that most of our politicians DON'T follow, lol....

 

[ksmusa]

Very interesting… I am quite curious to see how this would actually be enforced.

 

[flockshot]

Very interesting… I am quite curious to see how this would actually be enforced.

There are a few of these 'gotcha' laws that will never be enforced unless you find a cop that hates drones. What are the chances of that?

 

[Plawa]

I catch it to prevent it from hitting me when I'm catching it... ha!

 

[sar104]

I doubt that guideline was written to preclude hand launching, which is design mode for many aircraft, or hand catching.

 

[Lake_Flyer]

Some insurance company will find it and use it to avoid having to pay out, or sew you as a pilot (when your drone injures someone else who catches it for you).

 

[Lake_Flyer]

I doubt that guideline was written to preclude hand launching, which is design mode for many aircraft, or hand catching.

Hand launching was a common practice with RC flying, small motor planes or gliders without landing gear, hand catching never. Those planes always land on their belly.

 

[Lake_Flyer]

I do hand catch a lot because it is perfectly safe with a mavic (with landing protection off).
With an Inspire1 I use it on the boat with someone trained to catch it.

 

[sar104]

Hand launching was a common practice with RC flying, small motor planes or gliders without landing gear, hand catching never. Those planes always land on their belly.

Right - I'm not suggesting hand catching was common practice before the advent of small quads - just that since the rule clearly doesn't apply to hand launching, it probably wasn't written to address hand catching quads.

 

[Lake_Flyer]

Right - I'm not suggesting hand catching was common practice before the advent of small quads - just that since the rule clearly doesn't apply to hand launching, it probably wasn't written to address hand catching quads.

agreed, nobody knew what was coming, I didn't until 5 years ago.

 

[Lake_Flyer]

DJI should actually program a hand catch mode that you can select during flying, (an on screen button) that automatically switches off anything that can endanger the catcher, like obstacle avoidance, and landing protection. It should also be changing to a soft smooth control, a bit like tripod mode.

It would make live easier, just have all the goodies available but be able to switch them off with one button, just moments before starting a hand catch approach,

 

[flockshot]

DJI should actually program a hand catch mode that you can select during flying, (an on screen button) that automatically switches off anything that can endanger the catcher, like obstacle avoidance, and landing protection. It should also be changing to a soft smooth control, a bit like tripod mode.

It would make live easier, just have all the goodies available but be able to switch them off with one button, just moments before starting a hand catch approach,

I really doesn't matter how many buttons DJI puts on their controller. You can not legally had catch as a recreational pilot. That is the law, unless and until AMA changes their Model Aircraft Safety Code.

 

[tcope]

Here is a silly law for drone drivers. The AMA strictly prohibits touching any unmanned aircraft while it is in flight, except to prevent it from hitting someone.
Hand catch violates federal law, if flying recreationally, because you are not abiding by AMA rules.

It doesn't. You are most likely coming from the idea that all hobby flyers need to abide by all or one CBO rules. This is simply incorrect. CBO rules only need to be followed when they apply to the person in question (in this case, the person is a member of the AMA). This allows the AMA to have these rules and not be in violation of US Code. AMA rules do not apply to non-AMA members.

If you are under the impression that AMA rules apply to everyone because the AMA is a CBO, then is it all or just one CBO that people need to follow? If one, I go by the American UAV Fliers rules and there is only one rule.... we don't talk about American UAV Fliers. The FAA has not stated that the AUF is not a CBO so until someone tells me it's not, it is.

Sound absurd? Because it is. The reason CBO's are mentioned is so organizations like the AMA can have their own rules for their members. Without it, the AMA would be in violation of US Code (only the FAA can regulate airspace). But again, AMA rules only apply to AMA members.

I _really_ don't want to get into this debate for the umpteenth time so I will just leave it at that.

 

[LuvMyTJ]

Here is a silly law for drone drivers. The AMA strictly prohibits touching any unmanned aircraft while it is in flight, except to prevent it from hitting someone.
Hand catch violates federal law, if flying recreationally, because you are not abiding by AMA rules.

The worse case scenario is that they might kick you out of the AMA. Please show us the "federal law" you are quoting.

 

[flockshot]

It doesn't. You are most likely coming from the idea that all hobby flyers need to abide by all or one CBO rules. This is simply incorrect. CBO rules only need to be followed when they apply to the person in question (in this case, the person is a member of the AMA). This allows the AMA to have these rules and not be in violation of US Code. AMA rules do not apply to non-AMA members.

If you are under the impression that AMA rules apply to everyone because the AMA is a CBO, then is it all or just one CBO that people need to follow? If one, I go by the American UAV Fliers rules and there is only one rule.... we don't talk about American UAV Fliers. The FAA has not stated that the AUF is not a CBO so until someone tells me it's not, it is.

Sound absurd? Because it is. The reason CBO's are mentioned is so organizations like the AMA can have their own rules for their members. Without it, the AMA would be in violation of US Code (only the FAA can regulate airspace). But again, AMA rules only apply to AMA members.

I _really_ don't want to get into this debate for the umpteenth time so I will just leave it at that.

A great way to get around the FAA and AMA. I wish you the best.

 

[tcope]

A great way to get around the FAA and AMA. I wish you the best.

The AMA has no power over non-members.

 

[tcope]

The worse case scenario is that they might kick you out of the AMA. Please show us the "federal law" you are quoting.

Not to speak for Flock but I'm under the impression that he's referring to Section 336 and the FAA confirming that the AMA is a CBO. This is then equates to hobby fliers needing to obey all/some CBO's so everyone is bound by the AMA's rules is they want to fly under section 336.

 

[flockshot]

The worse case scenario is that they might kick you out of the AMA. Please show us the "federal law" you are quoting.

Federal Aviation Regulations - Part 101, Subpart E, 101.41 (b)
This subpart prescribes rules governing the operation of a model aircraft (or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft) that meets all of the following conditions as set forth in section 336 of Public Law 112-95:

(a) The aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;

(b) The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;

AMA National Model Aircraft Safety Code Section B, Number 7
"Under no circumstances may a pilot or other person touch an outdoor model aircraft in flight while it is still under power, except to divert it from striking an individual."

If you have a nationwide community-based organization other than the AMA, please post their rules so we will all have a choice.

 

[flockshot]

The AMA has no power over non-members.

Ok then, a great way to get around FAA part 101, subpart E, 101.41 (b). And I agree about the AMA.