|Jul 06, 2014, 02:44 PM|
New FAA altitude limit--400 feet
Reading thru the latest FAA interpretations they seem to include a blanket ban on all RC flights above 400'!
Although the FAA seems to be fudging a bit since, I believe, their old guideline was no flights above 400' when within x distance of an airport (but it's not listed that way in their new document). Maybe this will continue to be a voluntary guideline?
If I'm reading it right, low alt, capped glider flights will mean missing some of the real booming thermals. Plus will ales and other competitions need to be re-written or discontinued within the context of AMA sanctioned events?
|Jul 06, 2014, 03:40 PM|
Or the FAA has taken a turn for the worse by changing text to read as fact. But the government would never do that.
The 400 ft rule has been misinterpreted so much maybe they are taking it as fact.
Safety code of' the community based self regulation' bit. Compare langauge below.
|Jul 06, 2014, 05:41 PM|
USA, AZ, Mesa
Joined Oct 2004
I think we need to keep in mind a few things here:
The AMA is working hard to sort out this problem which the FAA seems to want to create.
The incidents so far, few though they are, are sensationalized, and not perpetrated by AMA members as far as we know.
The hobby Industry has a stake in this too; they are not going to just quit without a fight. That would throw thousands out of work, as if the present administration has not done enough damage!
This is not easily enforced anyway. The 3, now proposed as 5 mile limit part is easy, but how high is 400 feet? It looks very different with a 2M model than with a 4M model.
The model fliers, even non-AMA members pay taxes, and are likely to voice their opinion at the ballot box, whether at a local or federal level.
Last I looked, the badly trampled Constitution of the United States of America still stated that government is by the people, for the people.
I hope all will send their comments to the FAA in the appropriate way, using the AMA 'format'.
This is a free country, and we have the RIGHT to the pursuit of happiness, providing we do not endanger others.
Yes, this has political overtones, but WE THE PEOPLE have our inalienable rights.
Fly safely always.
|Jul 06, 2014, 09:50 PM|
Joined Apr 2012
Please, good people, let's try to find out what we are talking about before we start playing the "sovereign citizen" card. We don't even know what AeroHeadTW is talking about much less what specific rules might affect us. I flew at a club field that enforced a 400 foot limit more than 30 years ago. That's one of the reasons I no longer belong to that club though a bigger reason was an old fart, who couldn't safely fly any plane much less his favorite 50 pound warbirds, who threw a hissy fit because I was doing tail slides with a Sig Seniorita. He felt entitled to crash said 50 pound warbirds all over the area, including crashing through the windshield of a car 2 miles away, but he freaked out because I was doing aerobatics he couldn't hope to achieve with a plane that "wasn't designed for it".
There have always been federal guidelines governing model aircraft but I have always found the rules imposed by fellow modelers to be far more galling. I might add that I have always objected to being forced to pay for a damned magazine I don't want in order to maintain my AMA membership. Let's find put what AeroHeadTW is talking about and then find a way to enjoy our hobby as we have always done.
|Jul 06, 2014, 10:14 PM|
|Jul 06, 2014, 10:34 PM|
Joined Apr 2012
I Assume that you are talking about this passage:
I. Background of FAA Oversight of
Model Aircraft Operations
Historically, the FAA has considered
model aircraft to be aircraft that fall
within the statutory and regulatory
definitions of an aircraft, as they are
contrivances or devices that are
‘‘invented, used, or designed to
navigate, or fly in, the air.’’
U.S.C. 40102 and 14 CFR 1.1. As
aircraft, these devices generally are
subject to FAA oversight and
enforcement. However, consistent with
FAA’s enforcement philosophy, FAA’s
oversight of model aircraft has been
guided by the risk that these operations
present. The FAA first recognized in
1981 that ‘‘model aircraft can at times
pose a hazard to full-scale aircraft in
flight and to persons and property on
the surface,’’ and recommended a set of
voluntary operating standards for model
aircraft operators to follow to mitigate
these safety risks.
91–57, Model Aircraft Operating
Standards (June 9, 1981). These
operating standards included restricting
operations over populated areas,
limiting use of the devices around
spectators until after the devices had
been flight tested and proven airworthy;
restricting operations to 400 feet above
the surface; requiring that the devices
give right of way to, and avoid flying
near manned aircraft, and using
observers to assist in operations.
I'm still not sure that AeroHeadTW is referring to the same passage and, since it lays out voluntary guidelines that have been in play for decades I'm not sure why anyone would panic. I have long viewed the guidelines as a long winded way to say "modelers will take all appropriate measures to ensure the safety of uncontrolled airspace".
I have still not seen anything that suggests that models that were formally allowed to fly above 400 feet are now forbidden from flying at over 400 feet. I might have missed something but until AeroHeadTW can provide direction to the document he is talking about I simply don't see any reason to panic.
|Jul 07, 2014, 07:27 AM|
There is no need to panic, the FAA's interpretation is just that, non-binding, and AMA is fighting this on modelers' behalf.
This has been ongoing for 5+ years ... some people are just late to the party.
As an AMA member, expect to receive emails detailing how to comment on the interpretation in the Federal Register.
|Jul 07, 2014, 03:50 PM|
This is the new situation that the AMA is questioning and is not a "late to the party" factor:
The Academy of Model Aeronautics has a long and successful history in advocating for the flying privileges of the aeromodeling community. It is one of the top reasons why modelers join the AMA and renew their membership year after year. Congress has recently passed legislation intended to prevent model aviation from being swept up in the effort to enable the operation of commercial and public use unmanned aircraft and to protect the aeromodeler from overreaching and burdensome regulation.
While this was a positive step, the FAA has recently released an Interpretive Rule that in essences diminishes the protection provided by Congress in the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and arguably negates the Special Rule. The Interpretive Rule has the potential of signficantly impacting the aeromodeling community and as such we need to be vigilant in responding to FAA's request for comments. It is also important to keep in mind that the FAA will likely release its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for small Unmanned Aircraft Systems by the end of the year, 2014. Please visit these pages regularly for the latest developments. To contact the AMA Government Relations team, email email@example.com.
|Category||Thread||Thread Starter||Forum||Replies||Last Post|
|Discussion||FAA interpretations 2014--400' height limit||AeroHeadTW||Sailplane Talk||20||Jul 12, 2014 07:11 PM|
|Discussion||The 400' altitude limit debate||MassiveOverkill||Mini Multirotors||3||Jul 12, 2014 10:04 AM|
|Mini-Review||Hobbyking Altitude/Time Limiting System||AlastairL||Sailplane Talk||9||Mar 13, 2014 01:13 PM|
|For Sale||Eagle Tree compatible neo-6m GPS. Accurate and 150k feet altitude limit||Koo||FPV Equipment (FS/W)||0||Jun 19, 2013 12:35 PM|
|Discussion||FAA & AMA and 400 foot max altitude||rud-elev||Aerial Photography||25||Feb 19, 2007 09:52 PM|