WHY does the US legislation differentiate between amateurs and commercial pilots?

[Classic flyer]

So now you are back to that again? The government doesn't get a percentage of the test fee. The $150 is kept by the testing centers.

Show your proof of that

 

[sar104]

Show your proof of that

Hang on - it was you who made the assertion to begin with - it's not my job to disprove it. Look it up yourself. Or call one of the testing centers. Or call the FAA.

 

[Classic flyer]

Hang on - it was you who made the assertion to begin with - it's not my job to disprove it. Look it up yourself. Or call one of the testing centers. Or call the FAA.

Ok if you say that's how it is then it must be true...you win... enjoy the day, be smart fly safe

 

[sar104]

Ok if you say that's how it is then it must be true...you win... enjoy the day, be smart fly safe

No - it's true simply because it is. That's not changed by the fact that I pointed it out, and it's not diminished by the fact that you can't be bothered to fact check either before or after posting.

And what is wrong with people today? Is it the holiday? Just because it's Presidents' Day surely doesn't mean everyone needs to imitate his attitude to reality.

 

[Ty Pilot]

The FAA does not receive any of the fees paid for the 107 certification test, or any of the other tests administered at those test sites.

A quick search of this subject, (107 test fees) brings up any number of sites that clearly explain that the testing centers are private business' that have been selected by the FAA to administer the tests and none of the testing fees are returned to the FAA. Here is a screen shot from one. I have no association with this site.

 

[PhantomFandom]

The FAA does not receive any of the fees paid for the 107 certification test, or any of the other tests administered at those test sites.

A quick search of this subject, (107 test fees) brings up any number of sites that clearly explain that the testing centers are private business' that have been selected by the FAA to administer the tests and none of the testing fees are returned to the FAA. Here is a screen shot from one. I have no association with this site.

View attachment 94268

....and now we can hear the crickets chirping

 

[sar104]

....and now we can hear the crickets chirping

I just don't understand why so many people are apparently completely incapable of admitting when they are wrong about something - even something trivial.

 

[PhantomFandom]

I just don't understand why so many people are apparently completely incapable of admitting when they are wrong about something - even something trivial.

Hey I'm just as stubborn as the next guy; perhaps even more so. However I stick with my assertions ONLY when I am 100% positive that I am right. Even then, I will still go back and check my facts just in case I may have it wrong. If I do turn out to be wrong then I will own up to it and admit my error.

In any case I won't change my assertion 5 times during the course of the discussion. That's how politicians work. Make a statement, flip-flop, deflect any questions regarding the veracity of your claims, then flip-flop back again and hope no one noticed.

Have a good day. I'm still waiting for that one time that you slip up

 

[sar104]

Hey I'm just as stubborn as the next guy; perhaps even more so. However I stick with my assertions ONLY when I am 100% positive that I am right. Even then, I will still go back and check my facts just in case I may have it wrong. If I do turn out to be wrong then I will own up to it and admit my error.

In any case I won't change my assertion 5 times during the course of the discussion. That's how politicians work. Make a statement, flip-flop, deflect any questions regarding the veracity of your claims, then flip-flop back again and hope no one noticed.

Have a good day. I'm still waiting for that one time that you slip up

You need to look harder. There have been numerous occasions that I've got things wrong, and I'm pretty conscientious in making sure that I acknowledge when that happens. Without that there is no point in discussing anything, unless people see it as just some kind of competition to score points rather than to figure things out.

 

[The Editor]

I just don't understand why so many people are apparently completely incapable of admitting when they are wrong about something - even something trivial.

I’m always first to admit that I made a mistake once.

It was when I thought I was wrong, but I wasn’t.

 

[dronerdave]

I just don't understand why so many people are apparently completely incapable of admitting when they are wrong about something - even something trivial.

Well it's too bad this thread ran off the track. My statement that the FAA is funded by taxes (I thought) must be obvious to everybody and a bit sarcastic on my part, but I actually wasn't sure if the FAA took a percentage of the fees or not, hence the questions. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[sar104]

Well it's too bad this thread ran off the track. My statement that the FAA is funded by taxes (I thought) must be obvious to everybody and a bit sarcastic on my part, but I actually wasn't sure if the FAA took a percentage of the fees or not, hence the questions. Thanks for clearing that up.

Well at least we got there in the end, even if the journey was a bit rough.

 

[BigAl07]

Well it's too bad this thread ran off the track. My statement that the FAA is funded by taxes (I thought) must be obvious to everybody and a bit sarcastic on my part, but I actually wasn't sure if the FAA took a percentage of the fees or not, hence the questions. Thanks for clearing that up.

Well at least we got there in the end, even if the journey was a bit rough.

LOL

 

[IlluminationsfromtheAttic]

I didn't read through the thread, but I wanted to throw my two bits into the discussion.

I got my commercial license last year, and in all honesty the materials I studied and the contents of the test were largely irrelevant to UAV pilots. There was also a distinct feeling that the test was intentionally made more difficult than it needed to be.

Afterwards I came to the conclusion that the whole thing is nothing more than a barrier to entry meant either to stifle competition in the industry, to make flight schools a bit of extra cash, or to stifle the industry of commercial drone work itself.

Really, I think a commercial licenses should have no requirements besides signing a disclaimer stating that you understand the regulations that cover commercial work, and perhaps a small fee to cover the cost of printing the license.

 

[The Editor]

I didn't read through the thread, but I wanted to throw my two bits into the discussion.

I got my commercial license last year, and in all honesty the materials I studied and the contents of the test were largely irrelevant to UAV pilots. There was also a distinct feeling that the test was intentionally made more difficult than it needed to be.

Afterwards I came to the conclusion that the whole thing is nothing more than a barrier to entry meant either to stifle competition in the industry, to make flight schools a bit of extra cash, or to stifle the industry of commercial drone work itself.

Really, I think a commercial licenses should have no requirements besides signing a disclaimer stating that you understand the regulations that cover commercial work, and perhaps a small fee to cover the cost of printing the license.

Probably for the same reason you didn't bother reading through this thread - people would just self certify they knew what they were doing but wouldn't !

Its ridiculous to say that commercial operators should only have to sign a bit of paper.

In virtually every profession, you want to know that whoever you are hiring has reached a level of competency and certification recognised by the industry.
Would you hire somebody to come round your house and work on your gas boiler/furnace because they signed a bit of paper and said to you " Oh yeah - I can do that"?

 

[Meta4]

In virtually every profession, you want to know that whoever you are hiring has reached a level of competency and certification recognised by the industry.
Would you hire somebody to come round your house and work on your gas boiler/furnace because they signed a bit of paper and said to you " Oh yeah - I can do that"?

That all makes perfect sense but the problem is that anyone can get the 107 certification without ever having flown or even seen a drone.
It has nothing to do with proficiency or professional ability.

 

[BigAl07]

I didn't read through the thread, but I wanted to throw my two bits into the discussion.

I got my commercial license last year, and in all honesty the materials I studied and the contents of the test were largely irrelevant to UAV pilots. There was also a distinct feeling that the test was intentionally made more difficult than it needed to be.

Which questions on the Part 107 were (in your words) "irrelevant to UAV pilots"? I'd love to see those questions as I'm pretty sure the FAA went to great trouble to make sure ALL of their test questions pertain to UAS operations.

You think that silly test was difficult? Keep in mind that up until Part 107 went into effect (August 29th, 2016) you had to have a current Pilot's License to fly UAS for commercial operations. Ground School, Flight School, 40+ hours flying a MANNED AIRCRAFT.

Afterwards I came to the conclusion that the whole thing is nothing more than a barrier to entry meant either to stifle competition in the industry, to make flight schools a bit of extra cash, or to stifle the industry of commercial drone work itself.

Really, I think a commercial licenses should have no requirements besides signing a disclaimer stating that you understand the regulations that cover commercial work, and perhaps a small fee to cover the cost of printing the license.

With Self Certification most people (not all but most) will take the easy way out and cheat their way through the process.

At least if you've taken Part 107 training and testing you've been exposed to a large portion of the Rules & Regulations and hopefully some of it "stuck". Many of us have stated that obtaining your Part 107 is merely a license to learn.... there's so much to it and it's constantly changing that you've got to be deeply immersed in it constantly or you're left behind trying to catch up.

Probably for the same reason you didn't bother reading through this thread - people would just self certify they knew what they were doing but wouldn't !

Its ridiculous to say that commercial operators should only have to sign a bit of paper.

In virtually every profession, you want to know that whoever you are hiring has reached a level of competency and certification recognised by the industry.
Would you hire somebody to come round your house and work on your gas boiler/furnace because they signed a bit of paper and said to you " Oh yeah - I can do that"?

I completely agree... but I think Part 107 should also include some Flight Demonstration and Flight Proficiency testing as well. It's way too easy.

That all makes perfect sense but the problem is that anyone can get the 107 certification without ever having flown or even seen a drone.
It has nothing to do with proficiency or professional ability.

I agree, it needs to have those aspects demonstrated as well. Big Time!!!

 

[sar104]

That all makes perfect sense but the problem is that anyone can get the 107 certification without ever having flown or even seen a drone.
It has nothing to do with proficiency or professional ability.

It has nothing to do with actual piloting proficiency, but it does address proficiency in the important aspects of flight regulations.

 

[The Editor]

Which questions on the Part 107 were (in your words) "irrelevant to UAV pilots"? I'd love to see those questions as I'm pretty sure the FAA went to great trouble to make sure ALL of their test questions pertain to UAS operations.

You think that silly test was difficult? Keep in mind that up until Part 107 went into effect (August 29th, 2016) you had to have a current Pilot's License to fly UAS for commercial operations. Ground School, Flight School, 40+ hours flying a MANNED AIRCRAFT.


With Self Certification most people (not all but most) will take the easy way out and cheat their way through the process.

At least if you've taken Part 107 training and testing you've been exposed to a large portion of the Rules & Regulations and hopefully some of it "stuck". Many of us have stated that obtaining your Part 107 is merely a license to learn.... there's so much to it and it's constantly changing that you've got to be deeply immersed in it constantly or you're left behind trying to catch up.



I completely agree... but I think Part 107 should also include some Flight Demonstration and Flight Proficiency testing as well. It's way too easy.


I agree, it needs to have those aspects demonstrated as well. Big Time!!!

Here’s my two pennyworth coming from a (certified)Limey.

I took a look at the 107 questions from a sample paper/mock type exam the other day as I was curious what you guys have to do to become qualified to operate commercially compared to us lot on the rainy side of the pond.

The one overwhelming thing that struck me was how many questions were not pertinent to UAV operation and really had no bearing on being able to operate proficiently with a remote aircraft in the NAS!

Things like, the loading factor on an aircraft when doing a banked turn of 40 degrees! Is that going to help me plan and undertake a mission?
Don't get me wrong - there are also relevant things in there regarding airspace, weather, METARS/TAFS etc which absolutely should be included, but an awful lot of unnecessary ‘fluff’ as well more suited to manned aircraft.

In the UK, as well as a written exam we also have to undertake a flight test which is examined by a flight instructor (in my case two!) and they test your proficiency at flying together with some ‘emergency’ procedures and how you react to them as well as your pre flight checks and post flight debrief.

I think maybe the 107 could benefit from having a practical element in there since (as many have said) there is nothing stopping someone sitting and passing their 107 having never even seen a UAV let alone flown one!

I don’t think either side of the pond or any one country has it 100% right for UAS training/competency but where I thought at one point the USA where trailblazing to a certain extent with drone use, laws and leading the way seems to have turned 180 and now you guys are being held back by some draconian regulations and laws.

Its changing completely again for us over in the UK from the 1st July but I thing for the better with the introduction of the EASA regs which will be adopted by all member states (and the UK even post Brexit).

This will allow (with training), overflights of uninvolved people for low MTOM aircraft as well as being able to get as close as 5m to uninvolved people with drones as large as the Inspire 2 etc.

There will also cease to be any differentiation between commercial and recreational flights meaning anyone is free to make money with their aircraft, albeit with larger standoff distances for non certified pilots.

Not a pop at anyone or any system - just my observations from a long time CAA Certified operator in a neighboring country and taking a pragmatic view on what I have seen develop in the USA over the last few years.

 

[BigAl07]

Here’s my two pennyworth coming from a (certified)Limey.

I took a look at the 107 questions from a sample paper/mock type exam the other day as I was curious what you guys have to do to become qualified to operate commercially compared to us lot on the rainy side of the pond.

The one overwhelming thing that struck me was how many questions were not pertinent to UAV operation and really had no bearing on being able to operate proficiently with a remote aircraft in the NAS!

Things like, the loading factor on an aircraft when doing a banked turn of 40 degrees! Is that going to help me plan and undertake a mission?
.......

I fully understand your point and while those scenarios may not apply to MultiRotors they ARE very relevant to other types of UAS which are operating in our NAS and very much fall under Part 107 operations. Remember that over here all R/C aircraft (model aircraft multirotors, heli etc) are UAS depending on weight, speed etc.

It's probably very irrelevant to what YOU do much like knowing Runway Markings etc would be for most MR operations but there are some of us who fly something other than Mavic/Phantom/Matrice and fly in areas where we need to know more than Charge, Click, Fly. Flying Fixed Wing aircraft with a heavy payload etc you probably need to take into account what happens when you exceed the 30deg bank. When you're planning your mission if you put too much bank angle in, the results are going to be potentially disastrous.

Keep in mind we need to think outside of our MultiRotor box and realize there are some operators in the field that are flying larger and more complex systems and the Part 107 (while it's still VERY lacking in many regards) is an attempt to cover as much UAS operations as possible.

I hope that Part 107 gets more refined over the next few years as it was a Rushed to Production Fiasco to try and cut down the whining and crying we experienced because Section 333 was too cumbersome and expensive. IMHO the more sensible thing would be something in between Section 33 and Part 107. I feel like Part 107 is more akin to hobby operations (which some slight changes) and Commercial should demand higher testing and proficiency demonstrations. Just my 2 cents.