SMALL - espritmodel.com SMALL - Telemetry SMALL - Radio
Reply
Thread Tools
This thread is privately moderated by Gary Evans, who may elect to delete unwanted replies.
Old Jan 07, 2013, 08:16 PM
Just trying to get a nut.
scrtsqrl's Avatar
United States, VA, McLean
Joined Oct 2006
6,430 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by bmschulman View Post
If the hands-off approach has worked for gliders and ULs all these years, why regulate FPV modelers? Especially considering that there is no one on board the hobby aircraft who is at risk, unlike gliders and ULs.

Because, the assumption goes, someone who is actually sitting in the plane cares more about safety because he has more at stake than someone who is sitting safely on the ground.

scrtsqrl is online now Find More Posts by scrtsqrl
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Jan 07, 2013, 11:45 PM
Gaftopher
Gary Mortimer's Avatar
Nottingham Road South Africa/Bedford UK
Joined Feb 2007
3,869 Posts
@flyandi you are utterly right that's just what's happening
Gary Mortimer is offline Find More Posts by Gary Mortimer
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 01:56 AM
Rocky Mountain High and Higher
PROACE's Avatar
Joined Jan 2002
877 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by outngo View Post
What about FPV flying for non-AMA members?
Looks like your going to be an AMA member in the end if you enjoy flying your FPV planes and standard RC planes.

I am already learning to fly small RC helis to combat this nonsence of a Government attack on toy airplane modelers.
I am an AMA member but I won't roll over since I live quite away from any AMA sites. Yep, I don't have to renew but probably will because of their youth programs.
And BIG Government can bite me! Sorry but I served 30 years in the Military and I vote, so I can B!tch about it.

It is what it is and I guess we can wait and see. Things can change, if we inventually start voting for an administration that will listen BUT most importantly keep writing your state representitives. They get paid to do a job (sometimes wonder) and only keep that job if you vote for them. Let them know you can't support them if they don't support you.

Sometimes I think I am the only one who actually writes my rep. I haven't seen or looked for anyone else doing it over this issue.

Actually the AMA does great things for the youth here in U.S. and elsewhere and that is a good justification to be a member.
PROACE is offline Find More Posts by PROACE
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 02:49 PM
Registered User
Joined Nov 2012
6 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by prelator View Post
Well yeah, but that doesn't make any sense with what we know then. The same description is in the December rule making report, and that says it's the same rule making project that has been going on since 2009 which was supposed to be about all SUAS use. Unless this means the FAA has just given up on doing a rulemaking on commercial SUAS for now and has changed this one to only be about model aircraft? That doesn't make any sense though.

I don't think that's the case either, since this isn't a new thing. Looking back at the old DOT rule making reports, I'm seeing that exact same language in the abstract at least as far back as January 2012:


It's definitely the same rule making. Model aircraft regulations have always been part of it, but I've never seen anything before suggesting it was ONLY about model aircraft.
I hope you're right, but the fact that the document only references model aircraft suggests that the rules will only cover them. You're right that it wouldn't make sense for them to skip over regulations for non-recreational uses. In fact, the FAA was mandated by Congress to release guidelines for allowable use of sUAS systems back in August of 2012 (Section 333 of the 2012 FAA Reauthorization/Reform Act):

"Notwithstanding any other requirement of
this subtitle, and not later than 180 days after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall determine if
certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the
national airspace system before completion of the plan and rulemaking
required by section 332 of this Act or the guidance required
by section 334 of this Act."

This is distinct and different from the regulations for model aircraft use since minimum requirements for these are mandated by Congress in a different section (336). Also, Section 333 allows the FAA to set specifications and requirements for the use of these other sUAS systems, without any restrictions:

"(1) which types of unmanned aircraft systems, if any, as
a result of their size, weight, speed, operational capability,
proximity to airports and populated areas, and operation within
visual line of sight do not create a hazard to users of the
national airspace system or the public or pose a threat to
national security; and
(2) whether a certificate of waiver, certificate of authorization,
or airworthiness certification under section 44704 of title
49, United States Code, is required for the operation."

Which in theory would allow the FAA to set limits on these craft so onerous or expensive that no normal individual or organization could comply with them. But Section 336 does set clear limits on what kind of restrictions the FAA can impose on model aircraft, including prohibiting them from issuing rules that would forbid them from flying. Unless the FAA decrees that you can only fly at AMA-approved fields, which they technically have the right to do (hope they'd be ready for the deluge of protests they'd receive), these limitations would essentially be the same as those in AC 91-57, which have been the general guidelines for 30 years now. And unless they include non-model aircraft in these rules, we'll have the same situation we've had for six years now: fly an sUAS for recreational purposes and you're OK, fly it in exactly the same manner for commercial/educational/research purposes and you're flouting FAA dictates.

Rules are due to be submitted to the OMB by early March for approval by June, so presumably somebody will extract them by late March / early April with an FOIA request. Then we'll know for sure. My guess is that they're going to try to punt completely on non-recreational use (commercial/research) on this go-round, and maybe get around to it with the full drone regulations due by 2015. Hope I'm wrong, since there's several research/non-profit projects I'd like to use an sUAS for.
leszekmp is offline Find More Posts by leszekmp
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 03:11 PM
FPV Desert Beta Test Center
Mesa, Arizona
Joined Nov 2006
2,432 Posts
Perhaps I'm only restating the obvious but my take is that amateur models and all other sUAS will have separate NPRM's and regulations. It may be that the amateur model NPRM will be first just because it is simpler.
Gary Evans is offline Find More Posts by Gary Evans
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 03:19 PM
FPV Browncoat
prelator's Avatar
United States, CO, Parker
Joined Mar 2011
1,517 Posts
Has that always been the plan then? As far back as I can see, the abstract of the SUAS regulations being developed has always referenced recreational modeling. Yet I've been under the impression these were the general commercial SUAS regs being developed and they would just have a section on amateur modeling. Was I wrong about that? Has the coming NPRM always been ONLY about modeling?
prelator is offline Find More Posts by prelator
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 03:26 PM
FPV Desert Beta Test Center
Mesa, Arizona
Joined Nov 2006
2,432 Posts
There has not to my knowledge been any FAA statement that there would be multiple NPRM's but that appears to be what they are doing.
Gary Evans is offline Find More Posts by Gary Evans
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 04:20 PM
OSUFPV - KF7VFT
Corvallis, OR
Joined Apr 2010
1,770 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Evans View Post
There has not to my knowledge been any FAA statement that there would be multiple NPRM's but that appears to be what they are doing.
Hm, I agree. Looks like they are doing this NPRM only on modeling. But
when/how are the commercial regs going to be decided?

-Blues
Blueshy is offline Find More Posts by Blueshy
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 05:24 PM
Rocket Programmer
jasmine2501's Avatar
United States, AZ, Mesa
Joined Jul 2007
25,419 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueshy View Post
Hm, I agree. Looks like they are doing this NPRM only on modeling. But
when/how are the commercial regs going to be decided?

-Blues
Last year a law was passed denying the FAA regulatory power in the model aviation world. So, how is that possible? The AMA made a big deal out of that issue, and acted like it was the "end of FAA meddling" in our hobby. So, were they wrong?
jasmine2501 is offline Find More Posts by jasmine2501
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 05:29 PM
OSUFPV - KF7VFT
Corvallis, OR
Joined Apr 2010
1,770 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasmine2501 View Post
Last year a law was passed denying the FAA regulatory power in the model aviation world. So, how is that possible? The AMA made a big deal out of that issue, and acted like it was the "end of FAA meddling" in our hobby. So, were they wrong?
No, congress passed a law denying the FAA from regulating models with
restrictions. The exemption for models had certain clauses and requirements in
order to be exempt. One of them was that the plane flies in accordance with a
set of community based guidelines (read AMA). So, basically, if you fly under
the AMA's rules you will be exempt. However, there still has to be a set of laws
for those who will not fly under AMA rules. But it seems evident to me that
these rules will be far more restrictive than anything the AMA has, or will, put
out. Nevertheless, these rules have to be created because the FAA is still only
operating under AC91-57 which is not even a law (the FAA claims it gives
authority to fly), it's still an advisory.

-Blues
Blueshy is offline Find More Posts by Blueshy
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 06:55 PM
Registered User
San Marcos, CA
Joined Aug 2009
2,851 Posts
Hmm.. considering all the other "issues" we currently have in the US, I wouldn't be surprised if this will moved and moved and moved .... and in the meantime they will punch out more advisories ...
flyandi is offline Find More Posts by flyandi
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 07:20 PM
OSUFPV - KF7VFT
Corvallis, OR
Joined Apr 2010
1,770 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyandi View Post
Hmm.. considering all the other "issues" we currently have in the US, I wouldn't be surprised if this will moved and moved and moved ....
Well, congress has also mandated that the FAA get their sh*t together by a
chosen date (I think it's by the end of 2013?). So they can't keep pushing it
back. Whether or not an FAA with it's back against the wall creating regulation
is a good thing for us is up for debate.

-Blues
Blueshy is offline Find More Posts by Blueshy
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 07:24 PM
Registered User
San Marcos, CA
Joined Aug 2009
2,851 Posts
Well.. congress doesn't get their own sh*t together but that's another discussion .. so I will be not surprised if there will be one or two more extensions in this whole debate ..

We will see.. at this point it is a waiting game.
flyandi is offline Find More Posts by flyandi
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 07:32 PM
FPV Browncoat
prelator's Avatar
United States, CO, Parker
Joined Mar 2011
1,517 Posts
I think we're getting confused by the wording here. This is what the AMA had to say about the NPRM in the January issue of Model Aviation:



Looks to me like the NPRM is still the main SUS regulations and it may or may not touch on model aircraft as well. I still don't think it's a whole separate regulation just for model aircraft. The deadline the DOT rulemaking report of final publication by the end of 2014 also coincides with the deadline in federal law for legalizing commercial SUAS.
prelator is offline Find More Posts by prelator
Reply With Quote
Old Jan 08, 2013, 07:38 PM
Rocket Programmer
jasmine2501's Avatar
United States, AZ, Mesa
Joined Jul 2007
25,419 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by prelator View Post
I think we're getting confused by the wording here. This is what the AMA had to say about the NPRM in the January issue of Model Aviation:



Looks to me like the NPRM is still the main SUS regulations and it may or may not touch on model aircraft as well. I still don't think it's a whole separate regulation just for model aircraft. The deadline the DOT rulemaking report of final publication by the end of 2014 also coincides with the deadline in federal law for legalizing commercial SUAS.
OK that's why I can't be a politician... I'd be fined every week for swearing. I'd be good in Parliament
jasmine2501 is offline Find More Posts by jasmine2501
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Poll Proposed U.S. FPV Guidelines - Max Range Gary Evans FPV Talk 65 Aug 10, 2008 02:27 AM
Poll Proposed U.S. FPV Guidelines - Max Weight Gary Evans FPV Talk 16 Jul 30, 2008 01:30 PM
Poll Proposed U.S. FPV Guidelines - Max Altitude Gary Evans FPV Talk 52 Jul 30, 2008 01:05 PM