Recreational "Hand Catch" Violates Federal Law

[Classic flyer]

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.

I agree the AMA is not a "RULES" maker or enforcer unless you're flying at one of there sites

 

[cblackburn1099]

yes but think about it... i hand catch my quad all the time, but just before i catch it I disarm, it is then no longer "under power" so this doesn't apply to me (yes i am a member of the ama because i fly at ama required fields for races).

As far as the inspire or the phantom, if you grab the "legs" while it's in flight to hand catch it, then it can be argued, you are doing so to make sure it doesn't hurt anyone, so yea this rule doesn't apply in that case.

Just my 2p worth

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.

 

[EdM]

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.

The hand catch rule went into the AMA rule book about 20 years ago after a couple of crew members caught a 30% plus size plane out of a hover at a free style competition. Sorry, It's been long enuff that I no longer remember names, dates, etc.

The AMA puts together a good lobbying effort that has saved the sport of RC flying from some pretty far fetched rules in the past. It's very possible that even being able to purchase and fly your Mavic except in a carefully controlled conditions is because of some action by the AMA in the past.

Slowly, some of the AMA old fogies are finding out the fun of "drone fright" as I heard one of them say. I think it's much better having them in the game even if I don't like ALL their rules, than having them setting on the sidelines not caring at all.

 

[Abuskeletor]

Is no one else using DroneUp? I was under the impression that flying within a CBO’s programming meant being a member, and I didn’t want to pay anything to AMA. So, I joined DroneUp for free. This is from their website: “To fly a drone legally in the United States, you either need to obtain a Part 107 Remote Pilot Certificate or operate under guidelines published by a membership organization like DroneUp. This DroneUp Safe Operations course is designed to teach important safe operating rules and requirements to operate in the National Airspace System. Once you pass the test at the end of this course (90% or 18 of 20 correct) and agree to abide by our DroneUp Pilot Safety Guidelines, you will earn a DroneUp Community Pilot or DCP designation which indicates you are operating as a member in good standing of the DroneUp community. Your DCP badge will appear in the DroneUp app and you’ll be able to show any local authorities that you have the DCP designation.”

 

[sar104]

Is no one else using DroneUp? I was under the impression that flying within a CBO’s programming meant being a member, and I didn’t want to pay anything to AMA. So, I joined DroneUp for free. This is from their website: “To fly a drone legally in the United States, you either need to obtain a Part 107 Remote Pilot Certificate or operate under guidelines published by a membership organization like DroneUp. This DroneUp Safe Operations course is designed to teach important safe operating rules and requirements to operate in the National Airspace System. Once you pass the test at the end of this course (90% or 18 of 20 correct) and agree to abide by our DroneUp Pilot Safety Guidelines, you will earn a DroneUp Community Pilot or DCP designation which indicates you are operating as a member in good standing of the DroneUp community. Your DCP badge will appear in the DroneUp app and you’ll be able to show any local authorities that you have the DCP designation.”

There are some potential problems with their Safety Guidelines - two of them contradict 336/101 requirements.

 

[flockshot]

yes but think about it... i hand catch my quad all the time, but just before i catch it I disarm, it is then no longer "under power" so this doesn't apply to me (yes i am a member of the ama because i fly at ama required fields for races).

As far as the inspire or the phantom, if you grab the "legs" while it's in flight to hand catch it, then it can be argued, you are doing so to make sure it doesn't hurt anyone, so yea this rule doesn't apply in that case.

Just my 2p worth

Fixed wing modelers routinely cut the electric motor on their planes and catch them as they are gliding, while no longer under power. A drone is either under power or in free fall (they don't glide). I have never seen a drone hand catch with the drone in free fall. I use hand catch all the time and have never tried to catch my drone in free fall. You are the only person I have ever head of that catches a drone if free fall every time. Kudos to you.

Everybody knows that 'hand catch' is not unsafe, with just a little common sense. The FAA has no problem with hand catch. The only ones making hand catch illegal, is your AMA.

 

[Abuskeletor]

There are some potential problems with their Safety Guidelines - two of them contradict 336/101 requirements.

Can you expand on this? Which two?

 

[sar104]

Can you expand on this? Which two?

Public Law 112-95, Section 336:

(c) MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘model aircraft’’ means an unmanned aircraft that is—

(1) capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;
(2) flown within visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft; and
(3) flown for hobby or recreational purposes.​

DroneUp Safety Guidelines:

Visual line-of-sight (VLOS) only; the unmanned aircraft must remain within VLOS of the remote pilot in command and the person manipulating the flight controls of the small UAS. Alternatively, the unmanned aircraft must remain within VLOS of a dedicated visual observer (VO) in close proximity to the pilot. The flight operation may use a VO but that is not required.
​

In other words the DroneUp guidelines permit BVLOS with a VO, whereas Section 336 does not permit it.


14 CFR Part 101.41 (e):

(e) When flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport) with prior notice of the operation.
​

DroneUp Safety Guidelines:

Operations in Class B, C, D and E airspace are allowed with the required Air Traffic Control (ATC) permission.
Operations in Class G airspace are allowed without ATC permission.​

Part 101 makes no reference to airspace class, and just requires notification to airports (ATC and airport operator) within 5 miles. DroneUp does not require that, and states that operations in Class G are allowed, but those operations may be within 5 miles of an airport.

 

[msinger]

In other words the DroneUp guidelines permit BVLOS with a VO, whereas Section 336 does not permit it.

Does this mean that DroneUp cannot be a recognized CBO? I was under the impression that people must always follow Section 336 even if the CBO had conflicting rules.

 

[Flawless]

Considering the original wording specifies "in flight", you are not breaking the law by hand catching your drone during landing.

They are different circumstances, as evinced by rules referring to taking off near objects/people, and flying over objects/people at a distance.

If they were not different circumstances, you would be breaking the law if someone wandered within 50m of your drone while you were landing - even if it was you.

 

[Abuskeletor]

Does this mean that DroneUp cannot be a recognized CBO? I was under the impression that people must always follow Section 336 even if the CBO had conflicting rules.

Yeah, I don’t think it precludes them being a CBO. The pilot is still bound by part 336, even if the CBO guidelines are in conflict.

 

[sar104]

Does this mean that DroneUp cannot be a recognized CBO? I was under the impression that people must always follow Section 336 even if the CBO had conflicting rules.

No - I guess that any organization can make a claim to be a CBO. I think it somewhat dents their credibility however, if they publish safety guidelines that appear to be some kind of mix-and-match of Part 101 and Part 107, and which are compliant with neither.

 

[flockshot]

What is the FAA's definition of a CBO? Their interpretation of that definition is the only one that matters, for enforcement purposes.

 

[msinger]

What is the FAA's definition of a CBO? Their interpretation of that definition is the only one that matters, for enforcement purposes.

I don't think their interpretation matters since they are not tasked with interpreting it. US law (not the FAA) requires you follow the rules of a CBO.

 

[STKNRUD]

This thread is interesting but useless. 336 was written for the AMA because the FAA incorporated all remote models into sUAS rules. 336, as it applies to drones, is going away. AMA is all but recognized that. The AMA effort now is to get the the FAA to distinguish, what they should have in the beginning, between sUAS that can not fly autonomously and beyond VLOS, and those that can. A Recreational Drone License and rules will come next. That is consistent with the FARs...Private Pilot vs Commercial Pilot Licenses.

 

[flockshot]

I don't think their interpretation matters since they are not tasked with interpreting it. US law (not the FAA) requires you follow the rules of a CBO.

Perhaps I can ask thee question better so that you won't just find a technicality to invalidate it.
What is the US Law definition of a CBO? Who determines if a CBO is recognized, as a CBO, by the courts?

 

[Abuskeletor]

Perhaps I can ask thee question better so that you won't just find a technicality to invalidate it.
What is the US Law definition of a CBO? Who determines if a CBO is recognized, as a CBO, by the courts?

I think the FAA has been pretty diligent about skirting this issue.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

A few comments - a similar cluster has existed in the soaring world with regards to tow hooks and equipment used by some foreign gliders. Gliders brought into the US are certified as if they were an aircraft component, rather than a specific type of aircraft.

But getting back to the original subject matter - there is no hard FAA FAR that would induce an FAA violation for hand catching your drone if you were operating as a hobbyist. IMO once you have the drone in your hand you have terminated "operational control" (see FAR 1.1) As long as the manufacturer does not prohibit this operation, I don't see the FEDS even getting remotely involved with it!

 

[flockshot]

A few comments - a similar cluster has existed in the soaring world with regards to tow hooks and equipment used by some foreign gliders. Gliders brought into the US are certified as if they were an aircraft component, rather than a specific type of aircraft.

But getting back to the original subject matter - there is no hard FAA FAR that would induce an FAA violation for hand catching your drone if you were operating as a hobbyist. IMO once you have the drone in your hand you have terminated "operational control" (see FAR 1.1) As long as the manufacturer does not prohibit this operation, I don't see the FEDS even getting remotely involved with it!

The FAA doesn't care if you had catch or not. They do not restrict it in any way.
What the FAA cares about is that you either fly under Part 107 or all the rules of a Community Based Organization such as the AMA. In order to fly as a hobbyist you must follow all AMA rules (at least until another CBO is identified). It is the AMA that expressly prohibits hand catch. If you are neither Part 107 or Hobbyist, then you are technically in violation.
Nobody will ever have legal issues over hand catch, unless it involves a question of legal liability for some sort of damage or injury, in which case a lawyer will be on it like a dog on a soup bone.

 

[projockey]

Let me see if I can be more clear.
To qualify as a drone driver, the Government of the United States gives me two choices. (1) I can get a part 107 license and fly under those rules or, (2) I can fly my drone under the rules of a Community Based Organization and disregard part 107. I can choose either set of rules that I want to. I can NOT however take the parts of 107 that I like and the parts of the CBO rules that I like. It is 100% one or the other.
The law is that I must abide by ALL the 107 rules, or ALL the AMA rules (sucks but it is the law since AMA is the only CBO we currently have). So, if you are not flying under all the CBO rules you are automatically flying subject to 107 enforcement.
To answer your question, no, I am not following all these rules no matter where I am. I am clearly in violation of the law. However, I don't want to be in violation of the law. I want the rules to change so that drone drivers like me can enjoy our hobby without having some old AMA modeler, or cop that hates drones, calling me out for violating some outdated law that was never intended to apply to my drone.
The other groups that you mention (cities, states, counties etc.) can make laws that are only valid within the boundaries of that city, state, county etc., but they are not CBO's recognized by the FAA, so not really part of this discussion. Right now, according to the FAA, the AMA is the only CBO whose rules they recognize (I hope this changes sooner rather than later). Yes you must comply 100% with all rules of the FAA or all rules of the AMA, your choice.

Be careful what you ask for as new rules made up by lawmakers who don't have a clue about Drones or officials who are apt to follow the best voting possibilities will make laws that may not nessesarily be to your liking.
We cousins to the North of you have specific "drone" rulings and laws that are fairly restrictive and it seems that the "lawmakers" can't settle on what should be, or should not be, law at the moment.
It doesn't look good for our future sofar.

Then Insurance will be the next hurdle for us at a quote sofar of $625 a season if that law will be implemented.
Insurance companies can only understand money.

Didn't mean to start another problem, but don't assume that new rules and regs will be to your liking.
PJ.