NEW FAA RULES - EFFECTIVE MAY 17, 2019
- Thread starter Phaedrus
- Start date
So in other words they're going to start denying the honest people that already followed the rules. Sounds like typical government.
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2017
- Messages
- 4,258
- Reaction score
- 2,025
Here's where I agree with the new rule. "Recreational Flyers" should use LAANC to fly in ATC areas. Seems like "Recreational Flyers" have more freedom than me with a 107.
Last edited:
They are simply implementing the law written by Congress and signed into law last October. Section 349 of P.L. 115-254
LAANC for Limited Recreational will not go into effect until this summer according to what they have written.
And the differences between 107 and LR sUAS are getting fewer and fewer.
Both will/do require testing
Both have similar altitude restrictions with the exception that 107 has the added 400 feet above/around towers, etc.
Both will use LAANC
LR sUAS look to be prohibited within 2 miles of a controlled airspace airport
Any news about when more LAANC airports will be added? The nearest "big" airport to me still isn't on board yet.
Denying? No Congress has given the FAA a means to streamline the process while also not tying up ATC resources on the phone. The LAANC system is super easy, smooth, and quick unless you're requesting something that's not "Safe/Smart". Then it can take a few days.
It just takes some of the work load off of ATC and gives the FAA the authority to regulate hobby err Light Recreation like it does Part 107 and PS operations.
180 days from May 16th (or is it 17th lol).
Not too far away but might seem like a long time for those who want to fly there sooner than 180 days away.
AMA looked into the memo. It was an internal memo for controllers to give them guidance as to what to do if a sUAS operator calls the tower. It hasn't changed anything about what we can and can't do.
amablog.modelaircraft.org
FAA Memorandum for Air Traffic Control Education - AMA IN ACTION Advocating for Members
Recently an FAA Memorandum that addressed altitude and flying restrictions in controlled airspace was circulated around the internet. This memorandum was in ...
amablog.modelaircraft.org
AMA looked into the memo. It was an internal memo for controllers to give them guidance as to what to do if a sUAS operator calls the tower. It hasn't changed anything about what we can and can't do.
FAA Memorandum for Air Traffic Control Education - AMA IN ACTION Advocating for Members
Recently an FAA Memorandum that addressed altitude and flying restrictions in controlled airspace was circulated around the internet. This memorandum was in ...
IIRC it does tomorrow 5/17/2019 unless something has changed.
AMA looked into the memo. It was an internal memo for controllers to give them guidance as to what to do if a sUAS operator calls the tower. It hasn't changed anything about what we can and can't do.
FAA Memorandum for Air Traffic Control Education - AMA IN ACTION Advocating for Members
Recently an FAA Memorandum that addressed altitude and flying restrictions in controlled airspace was circulated around the internet. This memorandum was in ...
AMA got it wrong, again. Contents of memo just dropped on the Federal Register for publication effective tomorrow
Highlights:
Recreational flying in controlled airspace now restricted to established flying sites. Altitude caps in accordance with UASFM maps.
LAANC for recreation later this summer. Same altitude restrictions on UASFM after that.
400-foot cap in Class G airspace, no further authorization needed regardless of distance from airports.
No fixed sites within 2 miles of closest runway point in controlled airspace.
Very well done @Phaedrus sir.
Thank you for being a reliable source of official information for the rest of us.
Eh. I read the 8 points just now. The no model airfields within 2 miles thing is exaggerated. It really says that airfields outside of 2 miles of an airport are fine, and the ones within 2 miles will be individually reviewed. That's different from "no" airfields.
And the restricted-to-airfields part is only for the interim period between now and when LAANC becomes available to recreational fliers.
Honestly, of all the rec rules that annoy me, these are low on the list. I find it far more obnoxious that I have to notify every helipad, "seaport" where some rich guy parks his Cessna on a lake, and tax-purposes-only farm "airport" within 5 miles of my flight. From some locations that can mean I'm legally supposed to notify over a dozen "airports," the majority of which aren't even real.
Unfortunately, so many people have been flaunting the rules and doing stupid things that a crackdown is inevitable. Just the other day I saw a drone hovering over kids on recess, half a mile from a towered airport. Operator was nowhere in sight even when I drove around the block checking for him, and given the layout of the land that means he was almost certainly not in VLOS to his drone. So there's 3 big stupids right there not to mention setting off people's creep radar with an unknown person taking pictures of little kids, and that kind of thing is repeated over and over again every day nationwide.
And when I read other drone sites, I often find a "who cares what the rules are; it's not like anyone's gonna catch you" attitude that isn't present here -- if more operators had the mindset of the people here, I doubt this thread would exist.
And the restricted-to-airfields part is only for the interim period between now and when LAANC becomes available to recreational fliers.
Honestly, of all the rec rules that annoy me, these are low on the list. I find it far more obnoxious that I have to notify every helipad, "seaport" where some rich guy parks his Cessna on a lake, and tax-purposes-only farm "airport" within 5 miles of my flight. From some locations that can mean I'm legally supposed to notify over a dozen "airports," the majority of which aren't even real.
Unfortunately, so many people have been flaunting the rules and doing stupid things that a crackdown is inevitable. Just the other day I saw a drone hovering over kids on recess, half a mile from a towered airport. Operator was nowhere in sight even when I drove around the block checking for him, and given the layout of the land that means he was almost certainly not in VLOS to his drone. So there's 3 big stupids right there not to mention setting off people's creep radar with an unknown person taking pictures of little kids, and that kind of thing is repeated over and over again every day nationwide.
And when I read other drone sites, I often find a "who cares what the rules are; it's not like anyone's gonna catch you" attitude that isn't present here -- if more operators had the mindset of the people here, I doubt this thread would exist.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2018
- Messages
- 1,103
- Reaction score
- 1,013
- Age
- 59
- Location
- DFW Metroplex
- Website
- orbisdroneservices.com
Unless I missed it, operations at night are not restricted. Unless it’s specifically prohibited, it’s legal. AMA has nothing in their guidelines prohibiting it.
So, Recreational Pilots can fly at night. Trained, licensed 107 pilots cannot, without a wavier.
So, Recreational Pilots can fly at night. Trained, licensed 107 pilots cannot, without a wavier.
True. But most 107 pilots are not "trained", especially not in the same sense as a Part 61 pilot. They took a test, but that is not the same things as training.
There's going to be a LOT of grey area and some confusion until this whole thing finally flushes out in a year or so. This is a HUGE, and much appreciated at least by me, step in the right direction by the FAA.
And it's not uncommon for "amateurs" to have more freedom than "professionals." I can drink a beer and then drive home as long as my BAC is less than .08. But the CDL holder hauling freight in a semi has to have .04 or less. If the guy with the CDL drives non-commercially -- goes to the bar on his day off -- then he can have a .08 even though he has a CDL.
Much as in that example, if I'm interpreting the current state of the rules correctly, if you as a part 107 fly an entirely recreational, non-commercial flight, you can fly at night without a waiver.
Much as in that example, if I'm interpreting the current state of the rules correctly, if you as a part 107 fly an entirely recreational, non-commercial flight, you can fly at night without a waiver.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Sticky
