UAS: The FAA Tightens the Screws

[Wille]

It has NEVER been legal in this country to marry one’s sister nor has polymagy been legal anywhere. And while owning a “rocket launcher” is legal the amount of regulation and hoops to jump through that are required to do so would make an Australian blush. Where do non-Americans get this garbage from????

Oh, p.s. there are only 50 states

Whoa there, I said Cousins, not Sisters. And while i defer to your knowledge of your own country, I read polygamy was a thing
for Mormons at one point in time.
*Mormons are as cool or cooler than the next guy btw. Not going that direction.

I'm from NZ, actually.
Funnily enough there is still a "recoiless rifle" box you can tick when renewing your licence here, not sure where
that originated.

Does the 50 states include Hawaii and Alaska?

 

[DroningOn]

Whoa there, I said Cousins, not Sisters. And while i defer to your knowledge of your own country, I read polygamy was a thing
for Mormons at one point in time.
*Mormons are as cool or cooler than the next guy btw. Not going that direction.

I'm from NZ, actually.
Funnily enough there is still a "recoiless rifle" box you can tick when renewing your licence here, not sure where
that originated.

Does the 50 states include Hawaii and Alaska?

Yes, Alaska and Hawaii are both states. Numbers 49 and 50 admitted to the union in 1959.
And while polygamy was informally practiced in the territory of Utah, it was never legally recognized. Before Utah could become a state in 1896, the practice had to be officially denounced by the LDS church. You will never find a group more anti-polygamy then members of the modern Mormon church. It is a slur to associate the two

 

[bushie]

Here in Australia each state and many local government areas have made laws to control drones. The only body clearly able to do this is CASA. In my state National parks tried to ban drones but recently changed their policy and only require compliance with CASA rules.

Similarly my local city was going to ban them but received legal advise they did not have power to do so.

I suspect many local authority laws are not legal but it will take someone with deep pockets to take them on

After the happenings in Christchurch last friday firearm regulation in NZ is due for big changes.

 

[Wille]

Yes, Alaska and Hawaii are both states. Numbers 49 and 50 admitted to the union in 1959.
And while polygamy was informally practiced in the territory of Utah, it was never legally recognized. Before Utah could become a state in 1896, the practice had to be officially denounced by the LDS church. You will never find a group more anti-polygamy then members of the modern Mormon church. It is a slur to associate the two

Ok, got it. No offense intended.

Got no words for the Christchurch Business. Too messed up

 

[MavicFlyer]

You have a media who uses fear mongering when either of the items is used in a harmful way and the result is more scared and uneducated people. Eventually the "we need to do something about _____" insert guns or drones here. Cue the politician who don't really care about people, just their votes and to be seen "doing something about ____" once again insert guns or drones here. Politicians aren't educated or knowledgeable about either item but then proceed to make laws against them.

Well said!
Politicians and media both have agendas that they want to impose on the country, and unfortunately too many people are naive sheep who want someone who will "take care" of them, blindly following. The good news is that there are still folks who choose to think for themselves, and recognize politicians and media for what they are. The best journalists are the ones whose politics I can't determine - they report, and we decide. I resent the networks in the US where "talking heads" get more air time than the reporting of straight news...i.e., facts.

 

[Point Zero]

If I was the FAA I would put more effort into making sure passenger aircraft are safe for human beings to use rather than spending so much time ball busting drone pilots.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/17/...epartment-faa-boeing-investigation/index.html

Probably already old news here, sorry in advance if that's the case.

 

[JSKCKNIT]

In a story titled:
UAS: The FAA Tightens the Screws
Plane-ly Spoken
March 14, 2019 by Mark E. McKinnon

UAS operators will be facing greater oversight and inspections from local Flight Standards District Offices (FSDO) under a new National Policy recently issued by the FAA. The document requires all FSDOs to immediately update their 2019 National Work Program Guidelines to include new Required Surveillance Work Activities. (click the link below for the FULL story)


UAS: The FAA Tightens the Screws

Great article, thanks for sharing.

As I read the article, the first thing that came to mind was the recent video of the guy flying over Niagara and nearly colliding with a helicopter. The FAA left a comment on his video. First time I've ever seen that.

Much needed and welcomed actions by the FAA.

 

[Mrmund]

This is actually a good this for all of us who fly safely.

The FAA practices and enforces a "compliance philosophy", meaning they reach out to offenders and try to educate them. The way I read this is:
If there's multiple incidents in an area they will have to monitor the area, "track down" the pilots who are problems and hopefully explain to them what they're doing wrong.

Maybe this can prevent a real incident before something bad actually happens and turns everyone against us. My guess is even those pilots on here who sometimes bend the rules (myself included occasionally for that perfect shot) pay attention and know what they're doing. Even the new people who show up on this forum asking why they can't fly next to an airport, you guys explain it to them.

This mandate is for those pilots who don't respect or understand airspace and safety, not people like us who endeavor to learn more about UAS and be better pilots. We should all support this.

 

[Mavic Medic]

Just my .02 On the OP. My thinking is if enforcement is increased then how is the FAA going to regulate hobbies flying under 333? The FAA has a terrible record of enforcing any regulation imposed on citizens. Now Part 107 its not a big deal for them to revoke your 107. But I’m talking about in the court of law, How are they going to enforce a rule they made on a person that never entered into a contract. Attorneys know this and although the FAA threatens big fines and jail time when it gets to the court the FAA case falls apart due to lack of precedence and specific law wording or lack there of.

We do have to admit there is a growing problem with rogue operators creating unsafe conditions for aviation and the public. With the advance of camera/imaging privacy issues are becoming more frequent. It just seems to me that any increased enforcement is likely going to effect commercial 107 operators than the recreation pilots that are causing most of the problems. I’m not sure what the solution is but i fear if we dont get a handle on the people causing the issues then the legislature is going to make very restrictive rules that could kill the hobby/smaller 107 operators. DJI has taken some bold steps (and pissed off a bunch of paying customers) with the geofencing but what good is that really doing when other manufactures dont have anything. DJI may be pressured to make more software changes to limit flight distance, or make a sensor between the drone and controller to ensure VLOS.

I’m very new to the drone world. Already I’m seeing some real problems up ahead for us. I can almost see a complete ban on recreation sale and flight of drones, that would be terrible! Maybe big corporations would own the drone airspace? Am I completely off base here? I would love to read some of the thoughts and experiences of those that have been droning a while!

How’s that for a first post? Hope I didn’t break any rules.

 

[BigAl07]

Just my .02 On the OP. My thinking is if enforcement is increased then how is the FAA going to regulate hobbies flying under 333?

I think you meant 336 as Section 333 is for exemptions to existing Federal Aviation Regulations. 336 is (currently) the guidelines for hobbyists.

The FAA has a terrible record of enforcing any regulation imposed on citizens. Now Part 107 its not a big deal for them to revoke your 107. But I’m talking about in the court of law, How are they going to enforce a rule they made on a person that never entered into a contract. Attorneys know this and although the FAA threatens big fines and jail time when it gets to the court the FAA case falls apart due to lack of precedence and specific law wording or lack there of.

Isn't simply "taking to the air" entering into a contract? It's no different than driving illegally on a stare highway with no drivers license. No license no contract but still very much illegal. I'm far from an attorney and def outside my wheel house on this one.

We do have to admit there is a growing problem with rogue operators creating unsafe conditions for aviation and the public. With the advance of camera/imaging privacy issues are becoming more frequent. It just seems to me that any increased enforcement is likely going to effect commercial 107 operators than the recreation pilots that are causing most of the problems. I’m not sure what the solution is but i fear if we dont get a handle on the people causing the issues then the legislature is going to make very restrictive rules that could kill the hobby/smaller 107 operators. DJI has taken some bold steps (and pissed off a bunch of paying customers) with the geofencing but what good is that really doing when other manufactures dont have anything. DJI may be pressured to make more software changes to limit flight distance, or make a sensor between the drone and controller to ensure VLOS.

I am sort of on the fence on this one. I think that hobby operations (and I fly hobby a LOT) should have increased restrictions similar to GEOFENCING. But at the same time when I'm flying commercially and I'm "Current" with my licensing etc I should be able to decide when/where it's safe to fly and be held accountable w/o having software tell me. I am able to determine where it's safe to fly and also how/when to call and get official ATC authorization. I actually have nonDJI aircraft (absolutely no GEOFENCING) for this reason because there are times with the DJI system has a hiccup and it would cost me work and reputation .Now I have options and can literally fly (and have flown) from an airport runway if needed. It's up to me, the legal, licensed, trained sUAS Operator to know when and where I can fly safely and legally.

I’m very new to the drone world. Already I’m seeing some real problems up ahead for us. I can almost see a complete ban on recreation sale and flight of drones, that would be terrible! Maybe big corporations would own the drone airspace? Am I completely off base here? I would love to read some of the thoughts and experiences of those that have been droning a while!

Welcome to the FORUM and the hobby

Yes we have some REAL problems for sure. Take this thread for instance:

Mile High Club

This new sUAS operator is flying over a MILE above his take off point. To make matters worse he is blatantly stating next time will be higher.... GRRRR

I've said a few times that I could definitely see where hobby/recreational sUAS operations are either banned completely or severely crippled as to not allow flights more than a few feet high or away from the operator. Much like the old CoAxial helicopters at the mall were just a few years ago.

No I think your perception is extremely clear and accurate.

I've been droning for a while now... I started flying R/C in 1974 and I've seen a LOT of changes over the years . . .

 

[Mavic Medic]

I think you meant 336 as Section 333 is for exemptions to existing Federal Aviation Regulations. 336 is (currently) the guidelines for hobbyists.

You are correct! Sorry about that! Was a very late in the night post!

Isn't simply "taking to the air" entering into a contract? It's no different than driving illegally on a stare highway with no drivers license. No license no contract but still very much illegal. I'm far from an attorney and def outside my wheel house on this one.

I see what your saying, to clarify, When FAA takes Administrative action and asks the courts to enforce it the courts get tangled up on the criminal laws side of things. It’s kind of hard to explain but I have seen the same thing with Dept of health and the medical field. Now this problem is almost solved when a State or congress makes a criminal law that specifically states that within their boundaries FAA specific regulations are to be followed and then list the criminal penalty then FAA has teeth. Cause lets face it the Federal courts are so overwhelmed with cases that they are unlikely to even hear a drone case unless someone was really hurt or received attention. Im not an attorney and i have rarely ever received a definitive answer on any legal question i have ever had that I can remember.

I am sort of on the fence on this one. I think that hobby operations (and I fly hobby a LOT) should have increased restrictions similar to GEOFENCING. But at the same time when I'm flying commercially and I'm "Current" with my licensing etc I should be able to decide when/where it's safe to fly and be held accountable w/o having software tell me. I am able to determine where it's safe to fly and also how/when to call and get official ATC authorization. I actually have nonDJI aircraft (absolutely no GEOFENCING) for this reason because there are times with the DJI system has a hiccup and it would cost me work and reputation .Now I have options and can literally fly (and have flown) from an airport runway if needed. It's up to me, the legal, licensed, trained sUAS Operator to know when and where I can fly safely and legally.

Great points! And I completely agree! DJI should allow all restrictions to be disabled for commercial use! Even if it was on a flight by flight or day by day basis. Maybe even force a log recording and upload to a server and make that available to the FAA upon request to keep everyone honest. I have seen many videos on YouTube with commercial operators are going to non DJI equipment. DJI will realize this when it is felt in their pockets! Many opine that DJI is beginning to focus more on commercial and less on recreation. Maybe this is a sign of what’s about to come in the near future. DJI may be positioning themselves for a very restrictive recreation and have the systems in place for the commercial side. They have a history of being the industry innovator after all, not to mention they have the market share to persuade.
4

Welcome to the FORUM and the hobby

Yes we have some REAL problems for sure. Take this thread for instance:

Mile High Club

This new sUAS operator is flying over a MILE above his take off point. To make matters worse he is blatantly stating next time will be higher.... GRRRR

I've said a few times that I could definitely see where hobby/recreational sUAS operations are either banned completely or severely crippled as to not allow flights more than a few feet high or away from the operator. Much like the old CoAxial helicopters at the mall were just a few years ago.

No I think your perception is extremely clear and accurate.

I've been droning for a while now... I started flying R/C in 1974 and I've seen a LOT of changes over the years . .

Thanks form the welcome!, yes your example identifies the problem accurately. I believe your right with the hobby restrictions.
I feel like I’m a little late to the party in the drone world. And its becoming evident that this business endeavor is going to be a long difficult process to become profitable. But on the other hand I am excited at the potential opportunities that may happen. I have a stable career with job security so I doubt it will turn into a full time thing, but you never know!

Thanks again for the reply! I look forward to learning from the experienced pilots.

 

[BigAl07]

I feel like I’m a little late to the party in the drone world. And its becoming evident that this business endeavor is going to be a long difficult process to become profitable. But on the other hand I am excited at the potential opportunities that may happen. I have a stable career with job security so I doubt it will turn into a full time thing, but you never know!

Be sure to join and check out:

Commercial Drone Pilots Forum

Commercial Drone, UAV, UAS Industry Discussions

www.commercialdronepilots.com