Just curious

[RatBob]

and from what I read from official sources of information, and the Des Moines FAA confirmed, hobbyists are subject to 400' ceiling and LOS rules currently, I keep hearing people say the contrary, but I have yet to hear it from the FAA

 

[Phaedrus]

and from what I read from official sources of information, and the Des Moines FAA confirmed, hobbyists are subject to 400' ceiling and LOS rules currently, I keep hearing people say the contrary, but I have yet to hear it from the FAA

The FAA has clearly stated to continue operating under the current rules structure, one where they encourage operations below 400 feet. There is no legal establishment of a 400 foot hobby limit right now. Section 349 of P.L. 115-254 is pending implementation. Once the FAA goes through the NPRM process to incorporate it into the FARs then there will be a hard 400 foot ceiling in Class G airspace, and authorization using a LAANC type system will be required to operate in Class B, C, D, E (surface) areas where they will set your altitude limit. The notification within 5 miles goes away once 349 is in the FARs.

Having said all that, the FAA would like us all to stay below 400 feet especially when flying close to airports. But until it is written into the FARs it is not a law. Many will cite AC 91-57A and 91-57 before it, but those are advisory circulars and do not carry the force of law.

And finally hobby operations are required to be conducted within the parameters of an established Safety Program. Right now by default that is pretty much the AMA. AMA does not mention 400 feet in it;

https://www.modelaircraft.org/sites/default/files/105.pdf

The Safety Handbook states that you "should" (not shall) remain below 400 feet when within 3 miles of an airport

https://www.modelaircraft.org/sites/default/files/100.pdf

The easiest way to settle it is ask where in the FARs it says hobby flights are restricted to 400 feet. Right now there is no such reference, but there will be. Along with a required test, the previously mentioned airspace authorizations, and the continue requirement to register and display your number externally on your aircraft.

And the existing VLOS requirement will remain in the new rules.

 

[Phaedrus]

Also keep in mind that despite any published minimum safe altitudes stated in 91.119 we, as sUAS pilots, are required to remain clear of manned aircraft. Period. "WE" have no airspace. It is entirely on us to avoid conflicts.

 

[DoomMeister]

Also keep in mind that despite any published minimum safe altitudes stated in 91.119 we, as sUAS pilots, are required to remain clear of manned aircraft. Period. "WE" have no airspace. It is entirely on us to avoid conflicts.

Thanks Phaedrus! I’d like to add that even if the pilot of a manned aircraft were flying in an area they shouldn’t be, we are still required to yield right of way.

To think of it sensibly, we can see a manned aircraft in our area a lot more easily than they could possibly see ours. Just consider the size difference of the two aircraft and the picture becomes very clear at that point.

 

[Fred Garvin]

Also keep in mind that despite any published minimum safe altitudes stated in 91.119 we, as sUAS pilots, are required to remain clear of manned aircraft. Period. "WE" have no airspace. It is entirely on us to avoid conflicts.

And we must not cause them to take any evasive action.

 

[Phaedrus]

Yep, all that is wrapped up into my word "conflicts". Despite the numerous alleged sightings by airliners the reality is they cannot see us.

 

[AH-1G]

If evasive action/maneuvers is taken, I'll use a 7.62mm Minigun or the (M129 which I prefer) depending what is mounted in the turret.?

 

[Phaedrus]

Like this?

 

[AH-1G]

LOVE IT!?

 

[AH-1G]

Unfortunately that's edited in Photoshop.

 

[Phaedrus]

Unfortunately that's edited in Photoshop.

WHAT!?!?! You're kidding? I read a guy on the Internet say that his sister's best friend's next door neighbor's dog catcher swore it was real ?

 

[AH-1G]

I'm sure we're not surprised many think it's real.
What's the on going buzz of the ignorant and lazy? "Any thing on google is real!"?

 

[Phaedrus]

Exactly

 

[RatBob]

I'll be happy when LANC is fully implemented. The local procedure worked out with KFOD is to call and leave a message on weekends because no is out at the airport, seems a bit silly since no one will hear it till Monday morning.

 

[Phaedrus]

You can keep track of the list as the FAA updates it here:

Airports Participating in LAANC

www.faa.gov

 

[AH-1G]

I'll be happy when LANC is fully implemented. The local procedure worked out with KFOD is to call and leave a message on weekends because no is out at the airport, seems a bit silly since no one will hear it till Monday morning.

LAANC is implemented there! Fill out the form.
It's a Class E2

 

[AH-1G]

Why not go and meet with the Airport Manager introduce yourself and explain what your intentions are.
Once they get to know you, they may give you personal permission rather than waiting for the weekend.
However, with LAANC, I got permission for a flight 1.8 miles from Orlando Executive Airport.
Class C airport approval in as little as 30 seconds.

 

[Stink-Eye]

Sorry, but you didn't really answer my question. If that is the case, then tell me this. I live just outside five miles from an uncontrolled airport, due south of a departure/approach. If that pilot maintains 50' after takeoff and flies over my property then strikes my hex, isn't he in some serious trouble? Because I will have done absolutely nothing wrong.

Not necessarily. Federal regulations require pilots to maintain an altitude of at least 1000 feet over "populated" areas, buildings, vehicles (cars and trucks), and outdoor gatherings of people. As long as there are no buildings in the area, or public gatherings, etc. a pilot can, within reason and as long as he/she can safely perform an emergency landing in the event of an engine failure, go as low as he wants to. On final approach in uncontrolled airspace, at an altitude of 400 feet, I'm generally half a mile, or maybe a little more, from the intended touch down point. Since I fly small aircraft, on departure, I wont even be beyond the end of the runway at 400 feet in a lot of places. In any event, it is the responsibility of the drone operator to stay clear of air traffic. It sounds unfair, but look at it from more practical standpoint. Imagine you're in your car cruising along at 80mph and some guy running an RC truck pops out in front of you. Who should have the right of way? Who is better able to see and avoid an accident? The guy with the 2 lb. RC truck, or you in a 2000 lb vehicle travelling at 80mph? I hope this helps.

 

[Mrbrucedw]

I will give the same answer. You own the land, but not the airspace.

Here's from experience. I work in an awesome build, and one of the pit that I work in is Truebeck, who's buiding the extension of Facebook. Google has a helicopter that goes around, and takes aerial scans. I have a Right to use Airspace Waver (only good in areas, where I operate) and one day, I happened to be doing a progressive report on the Facebook build, taking video and photos. Every so often I check Flightradar24 for air traffic, and the App is telling me that a helo is approaching at 600ft. But once it got closer to my worksite, it dropped its altitude.

What should I do? I have a waiver from the FAA. I have the right to use the airspace at 400ft, should I give way?

Let's forget the FAA rules for a second and let's think about the lives inside the cockpit that aircraft. Manned aircraft will always have the right of way, regardless without questions, it does not matter if you own land in the whole state or city. Give way, because it can save lives.

Faa Regs state that you still have to stay clear of manned aircraft on the ground and in the air.