Welcome Inspire Pilots!
Join our free DJI Inspire community today!
Sign up

An insightful look at drone legality in the US

I was hoping that this discussion would evolve without acrimony or rancor but I see this is not the case. First off, I have far more than a Private Pilots license, as it happens I am certified to fly multi engine aircraft as well as seaplanes commercially but that is really not central to the matter at hand. As was previously stated, the military drone thing has little to do with the subject at hand. If a little research is done it would be found that the drone operators are trained on extremely complex simulators and not an RC flight sim program running on their parent's computer. It is also worthwhile to note that US Navy pilots can shoot night landings on a carrier with less than 300 actual hours of flight time, why, because they again are trained in simulators that are what is know as 3 axes of motion sims. I am not familiar with the 3 tiered solution that was mentioned but I would be most interested to read it. Perhaps it is similar to real aviation licensure wherein you need to be rated to fly aerobatic maneuvers at air shows for example because of the hazard posed to participants and spectators.
 
FYI all USAF drone/UAS pilots are rated pilots, they went to UPT and earned their wings. Many pilots go straight to preds or reapers without having flown a major weapon system and many come from previous jets. We Air Force pilots don't study the FAR's because we are exempt! That's a fact. Many of our rules are similar and appear that we comply but our regs are different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SanCap
I do not know this for a fact but I assume a USAF drone pilot doesn't need to know a darn thing about airspace classifications or FAA regulations. They are simply trained how to fly then told what and where to go for a particular mission. I do support your 3 tier theory with a stipulation that the UAS operator who has a Pilots License to be at the top of the tier.

Well, as best I can tell the USAF isn't going into great detail about how they train there drone pilots but it would be hard to imagine they have no awareness of civil and commercial aviation. The fact that they have found bringing in newbies is more effective versus retraining other pilots is revealing in itself and suggests that there are some things about flying planes that doesn't translate to drones.

I would not permit a licensed pilot immediate permission for level three drone operations -- not at all! I do not believe that we currently permit drones to be flown around high concentrations of people, but I see this as inevitable at some point down the road. And, when it is I would guess this would require the highest level of classification as would inspection of critical infrastructure like Nuke plants as well as operating bridges. A licensed pilot would require the same higher training certificates as any other drone pilot to perform these missions and being a licensed pilot in no way insures they are qualified without the additional training requirements.

But, in addition to requiring the highest level of drone pilot qualification it would also require the use of drones that are certified for that work. Such drones would have to be among the most reliable and likely possessing certain minimum equipment such as transponders and robust collision avoidance sensors. Much of the talk here has naturally focused on pilot training/requirements, but for me the drones themselves are going to fall into several categories of operation with varying equipment requirements based on the mission. Looking down the road to SAR operations with autonomous drones operating miles away from the pilot the equipment such a drone would have to have will obviously be more than our Phantoms and Inspires. I mentioned this before, but I can see the need for such drones to have:

1. Transponder that reports (lat/lon, altitude, horizontal velocity, vertical velocity, AC serial number and AC type)

2. Short range radar for collision avoidance and AGL measurement

3. Light beacons of minimum brightness with regulated color and location

In addition, such AC would need to have a computerized mission posted to a website for general aviation. So, any AC entering an area where drone operations can be notified automatically while they're flying and provided avoidance guidance as needed. The only exceptions would be police type operations -- you wouldn't want the bad guys knowing when the drone that looking for them is going to be in there area.


Brian
 
  • Like
Reactions: SanCap
I was hoping that this discussion would evolve without acrimony or rancor but I see this is not the case. First off, I have far more than a Private Pilots license, as it happens I am certified to fly multi engine aircraft as well as seaplanes commercially but that is really not central to the matter at hand. As was previously stated, the military drone thing has little to do with the subject at hand. If a little research is done it would be found that the drone operators are trained on extremely complex simulators and not an RC flight sim program running on their parent's computer. It is also worthwhile to note that US Navy pilots can shoot night landings on a carrier with less than 300 actual hours of flight time, why, because they again are trained in simulators that are what is know as 3 axes of motion sims. I am not familiar with the 3 tiered solution that was mentioned but I would be most interested to read it. Perhaps it is similar to real aviation licensure wherein you need to be rated to fly aerobatic maneuvers at air shows for example because of the hazard posed to participants and spectators.

No, the two/three tiered system is fully a concoction of my own doing and merely suggests what I think is likely. A drone pilot being paid to geomap and area in the middle of no where should not be required to have the same level of qualification as someone that is flying a drone over an active bridge while doing an inspection -- the risks are hugely different. And, being a licensed pilot whether that be a Cessna 152 or a multi engine 747, is not sufficient to automatically be granted the right to fly a camera drone over a stadium sporting event -- in order to do that you should have a drone that's certified for such operations and the pilot training certification as well. Being an airline pilot is not enough.

The FAA bought into the idea of requiring a pilots license as a stop gap measure but eventually they will have to accept that this new flight regime will dictate a different set of requirements though there will be a great deal of overlap.

Your comment about simulator training is an excellent point and I suspect that for higher level drone operations it will be required that the drone operator must have a certain number of simulator hours performing that type of mission. As I see it the most demanding missions will require the highest level drone operator qualifications AND mission specific simulator training AND drones that are specifically certified for that mission type.

There are many drone missions that are not yet being done but within a decade we can expect many new mission types to be going on. My incomplete list of likely missions are:

1. Autonomous SAR beyond LOS (line of sight)
2. Police surveillance of events and crime scenes
3. Cargo transport (large and small)
4. Autonomous mapping and imaging beyond LOS
5. Fire-fighting (wildfires)
6. Crop dusting
7. Air sampling
8. Weather measurements (think hurricane hunters)
9. Autonomous camera platforms for major events (sports. concerts, etc)
10. Remote supply by airdrop

The FAA hasn't come to terms with these potential mission types beyond the military related things now being done like the border watch with Predators. It is almost a given that all the things I list above will happen at some point and it will require a new set of rules than are now being contemplated. Being a licensed pilot is an advantage and a disadvantage and my point was not to cast aspersions on you but I'm frankly tired of the persistent argument from licensed pilots that only they should be permitted to do these things. Being a licensed pilot is more than necessary to fly a geomapping mission in the boonies and being a licensed pilot is not sufficient, by itself, for many of the missions I outlined above.


Brian
 
  • Like
Reactions: SanCap
The FAA bought into the idea of requiring a pilots license as a stop gap measure but eventually they will have to accept that this new flight regime will dictate a different set of requirements though there will be a great deal of overlap.

...being a licensed pilot is not sufficient, by itself, for many of the missions I outlined above.

Brian

Being a licensed pilot is not a stop gap measure. It is a requirement, whatever the FAA decides on commercial use of UAS it will include being a licensed pilot, perhaps a licensed drone pilot, but none the less a licensed pilot.

All pilots, even student pilots, must be licensed before they can fly solo. This includes vetting by the TSA. This will not change, licensed UAS pilots, will be vetted by the TSA as well and will carry a pilot's license.

What I disagree with is the constant attitude that the FAA is somehow trying to restrict drone usage. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are indeed trying to work with us.

The 333 exemption is the stop gap. By doing this they are allowing us to fly commercially TODAY, not at some distant future. By allowing the 333 exemptions they are trying to work with us. In fact they made the license requirements as least restrictive as is possible allowing ANY pilot license, light sport, private and commercial to be sufficient for commercial operations. That was pretty broad of them. What they could not, and will never do, is wave the pilot license requirement for commercial drone operations.

Model aircraft is the one and only exception because of its long standing and proud history of safely flying RC model aircraft. At Lakeland airport in Florida the RC aircraft runway is right next to the main runway and RC aircraft and manned aircraft safely fly side by side.

What commercial drone operations are not is model RC aircraft. We do not fly at a closed field far away from unsuspecting persons and private property. The fact that we can fly BVLOS has opened up a huge can of worms. If it was not for this fact every drone operator would keep his drone within VLOS for fear of loosing the drone. While we are still required to do this there are unlicensed drone pilots that will continue to break these rules long after Part 107 is finalized, under the disillusion they are operating a model aircraft. An UAS is not a model aircraft and certainly does not share the model RC aircraft tradition of safe operations.

The FAA does not have an easy task, just look at your long list of possible items that can be done with a drone, and you have not even touched on personal transport. We all know the biggest problem with Uber is the drivers, so lets eliminate them.

No, the FAA does not have a easy task in the coming years, the technology is moving far too quickly. Let's just hope they get some of it right and allowing 333 exemptions is a good start.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SanCap
The FAA and others may well call someone with commercial drone permits a pilot and I have no problem with that. I also think that to qualify as a drone pilot you will need a ground school and have certification for the type of drone you are to fly. But, I do not think, going forward, that one will be required to have a manned pilot rating though having that should go a long way towards getting a drone pilots license.

And, given the great range of mission types that a drone pilot might be involved with there is going to have to be additional ratings and certification for mission types that differ sufficiently from the one(s) a drone pilot currently has. Again, you should not be required to have the same ratings to do geo-mapping in the outback as you should if you're flying a camera drone at a stadium sporting event with 50,000 people.

To be qualified to fly a camera drone at a stadium sporting event or other high value/threat location would demand more of the pilot than a real estate team flying over terrain that may become a sub-division. There are many drone mission types that we can conceive of that have no manned equivalent and many drone missions that do have a manned equivalent are so different as to make them completely different.

So, I accept that the FAA may well call everyone that flies a drone a pilot and everyone with a commercial rating would therefore have a drone pilots license, but there will be people that become drone pilots without being rated to fly a manned airplane of any type.


Brian
 
It is unlikely that the FAA will adopt a two/three tier system like you suggest, if for no other reason the additional cost of administrating the additional rating such a system would require. Remember the FAA does not charge for their pilot services. You pay for an aircraft and instructor for training. You pay a third party to proctor a written test. You pay for a third party pilot examiner (designated by the FAA) to test a pilot, but the FAA administration of all of this is at no charge. The FAA does not charge the operator anything for a 333 waiver, the only fees involved are lawyer fees if you hire one.

Far more likely that the FAA will come up with a system where you are either qualified to fly a drone commercial or you are not qualified.

Having a sport pilot license or higher does not establish that you have the flying skills to fly a drone. It does establish that you have a certainly level of knowledge about regulations, airspace, NOTAM, TFR, airworthiness, preflight preparation, weather, etc. The FAA has currently taken the view that this knowledge is the only FAA requirement for a commercial UAS operator. Currently, the only way the FAA has of establishing that a pilot has this knowledge is what is call the Airman Certification Standards which results in a Light Sport License at a minimum. The current pilot license requirement for a commercial UAS operator is not to establish your flying skills, it is to insure you are knowledgable on these subjects.

The way the FAA controls the limits of what a pilot is allowed to do is not by testing his ability. Instead they create regulations that a pilot is obligated to follow. If you do not follow the regulation you can end up with is called a "pilot deviation" which can result in the lost of your flying privileges and/or fines.

There are not any FAA policemen patrolling the skies making sure that pilots are following the rules. FAA inspectors are not likely to show up at a UAS job site with a tape measure. Instead if an infraction results in a incident or accident they may charge and/or fine the pilot with CFR 14 91.13 - Careless or Reckless Operation.

I would expect them to come up with UAS regulations that more closely follow their long established currently procedures which is more about accident investigation (again done by the NTSB rather than the FAA) rather than oversight.
 
Just wait until the FAA sends you "The Letter" like we received. It will put the brakes on your concept of, I don't need this or that and I can fly anywhere mentality. Yes my wife and I have paid an good amount of money to work towards being legal. We feel its worth the aggravation when the companies who require a qualified aerial photographer/videographer have people who have went the distance to do whats right are the ones who can legally get paid. The others who don't can fly around the beaches and sand dunes and video mx'ers for free...:)
 
kcobello, I agree with your perspective on this. To fly a commercial UAS legally it does take you additional time and expense to be legal. Anyone looking at a 333 waiver will see there are several hoops that they must jump through to do a commercial UAS flight. All of these requirements result in additional time which also equates to extra expense.

It is unfair for someone to do everything legally and then have to compete with someone that is happy to do it illegally and therefore does not have the same expense and time invested. Clearly illegal operator's cost are much lower than the legal operator making it very difficult to compete against an illegal operator.

It is really no different than an unlicensed pilot buying a manned aircraft (which they are allowed to buy legally) and then fly it without having an license, medical, flight reviews and other training and recurrency expenses that a legal pilot must pay for. They would probably get by for awhile as no one really asks to see any of these documents, at least until there is an issue, then the FAA will come down pretty hard on that individual.

When the FAA finds out about an illegal commercial UAS operation it should, and eventually will, be no different. The FAA must do this to protect the interest of legal UAS operators.

Someone stating they have no intentions of following the FAA regulations, or that feels that they do not apply to them, is no different than someone stating that they never follow the speed limit outside of their own State because the other State laws do not apply to them. In aviation we do not have "cops of the air" and we rely on "see something, here something, say something" and these individuals need to be turned in by the UAS community whenever they find illegal operations occurring. General Aviation already has this mentality for manned operations, the UAS community must be no different.

The UAS community must adopt this simple "do it legally, or don't do it" approach to anyone posting on a board or whenever an illegal operator is discovered. We need to educate wherever we can such as knowbeforeyoufly.com If they continue to operate illegally they must be reported, for the sake of all the rest of us whether we have a 333 waiver or if we a just a recreational user.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
22,277
Messages
210,655
Members
34,327
Latest member
Thomasovinido