New Products Flash Sale
Thread Tools
Old Yesterday, 02:01 PM
Silent-AV8R is offline
Find More Posts by Silent-AV8R
Team Futaba
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
Orange County, CA
Joined Aug 2004
5,370 Posts
Discussion
FAA Updates AC 91-57

The FAA has just released an updated AC 91-57, named AC 91-57A. Mostly restates the provisions of Section 336 of Public Law 112-95, with one important difference. It now states that:

"e. Model aircraft operators should follow best practices including limiting operations to 400 feet above ground level (AGL). "


So while still an Advisory Circular only, it is a clear attempt to codify 400 feet AGL as the operational altitude limit for model aircraft. Which of course would spell the end to soaring, pattern, and IMAC. It would also severely limit jets as well.

http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m.../AC_91-57A.pdf
Silent-AV8R is offline Find More Posts by Silent-AV8R
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Yesterday, 02:29 PM
R2R is offline
R2R
Find More Posts by R2R
R2R
Registered User
R2R's Avatar
United States, FL, St Johns
Joined Nov 2009
674 Posts
I would like to believe the key terms in that statement are "should" and "best practice" which is vague and not necessarily inclusive of all model types, since the optimal operating altitude of some types are and/or range above 400' AGL. Model rocketry would also be in jeopardy. So, at least this is not stated as a mandate. Just my two cents.
R2R is offline Find More Posts by R2R
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 02:47 PM
Evan D is offline
Find More Posts by Evan D
Registered User
Evan D's Avatar
Charlotte, NC
Joined Jan 2004
7,190 Posts
Not yet anyway...
Evan D is offline Find More Posts by Evan D
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 02:51 PM
Silent-AV8R is offline
Find More Posts by Silent-AV8R
Team Futaba
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
Orange County, CA
Joined Aug 2004
5,370 Posts
True, this is an Advisory Circular which requests voluntary compliance. However, since they state that they think 400 feet agl is a "best practices" altitude they could then use this to construe that exceeding that is reckless or careless operation since you are no longer following their "best practices".
Silent-AV8R is offline Find More Posts by Silent-AV8R
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 02:56 PM
Thermaler is offline
Find More Posts by Thermaler
Balsa breaks better
Thermaler's Avatar
Buchanan Mi
Joined Apr 2005
2,461 Posts
Until I am told otherwise "community-based set of guidelines " ; "best practices" refers to the AMA Safety Code .


Joe
Thermaler is offline Find More Posts by Thermaler
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 02:58 PM
Curtis Suter is online now
Find More Posts by Curtis Suter
Red Merle ALES
Curtis Suter's Avatar
United States, Mt, Helena
Joined Apr 2002
6,356 Posts
Paragraph d. is a major addition and are regulatory in nature via other regulations.
The 400' rule has been answered and is not regulatoryin nature.
The main interest will be when the FAA finalizes and issues CFR FAR 107.

Curtis
Montana
Curtis Suter is online now Find More Posts by Curtis Suter
RCG Plus Member
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 03:19 PM
Silent-AV8R is offline
Find More Posts by Silent-AV8R
Team Futaba
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
Orange County, CA
Joined Aug 2004
5,370 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis Suter View Post
Paragraph d. is a major addition and are regulatory in nature via other regulations.
The 400' rule has been answered and is not regulatoryin nature.
Not saying it is. What I am saying is they can use it to backdoor a violation for reckless or careless operation Part 91.13, which the FAA has said they will use if they need to.

Quote:
The main interest will be when the FAA finalizes and issues CFR FAR 107.
Part 107 does not apply to hobby flying. Part 101.41 essentially codifies Section 336 of P.L. 112-95 and is the part that covers model aviation.
Silent-AV8R is offline Find More Posts by Silent-AV8R
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 03:24 PM
Silent-AV8R is offline
Find More Posts by Silent-AV8R
Team Futaba
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
Orange County, CA
Joined Aug 2004
5,370 Posts
Worth a look

http://jrupprechtlaw.com/advisory-ci...with-ac-91-57a
Silent-AV8R is offline Find More Posts by Silent-AV8R
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 09:24 PM
Jet_A is offline
Find More Posts by Jet_A
Registered User
United States, PA, Allentown
Joined Dec 2011
50 Posts
It's the FAA......
It's a bunch of grey haired guys with carbon paper!

I think we can out-fox them!!
Jet_A is offline Find More Posts by Jet_A
Last edited by Jet_A; Yesterday at 09:25 PM. Reason: Spelling issues...
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:28 PM
Lou is offline
Lou
Find More Posts by Lou
Lou
Ground Penetration Tester
United States, VA, Waynesboro
Joined Dec 2005
6,606 Posts
On a more positive note the competitions can be limited to 7 minutes due to the lower height. Going to be able to get more rounds in per day.
Lou is offline Find More Posts by Lou
RCG Plus Member


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion FAA request cancellation of AC 91-57 Azarr Electric Plane Talk 50 Oct 21, 2014 11:31 AM
Discussion AC 91-57 Cancelled patrickegan Aerial Photography 35 Oct 17, 2014 06:58 PM
Discussion FAA Cancels AC 91-57 Silent-AV8R Sailplane Talk 13 Oct 16, 2014 02:31 PM
Discussion AC 91-57 (Cancelled) - Model Aircraft Operating Standards BE77 Pilot Life, The Universe, and Politics 19 Oct 14, 2014 06:43 AM
FAA Advisory Circular AC 91-57 jbrundt Electric Plane Talk 17 Jun 10, 2004 01:16 PM