"There are 100's of hobbies in the world, and when those hobbies can in there misuse hurt someone they they are regulated."
You mean, like owning a gun...?
You mean, like owning a gun...?
Hobbyists the fun is over
- Thread starter slim.slamma
- Start date
I would not expect to see any further changes to Part 101 sub part E. It is a loophole that Congress created with Public Law 112-95 Section 336. In plain English it states that the FAA will not create any rule or regulations that restrict model airplane fliers. Part 101 subpart E simply puts 336 into the regulations.
Now, before you get all upset with the FAA for writing Part 101, you need to realize it was NOT the FAA that did it. It was Congress and our President that put this into law. And, yes, that does mean it will take a act from Congress to change it. (don't hold you breath on this one)
Model airplane flyers have a long and proud history of safe flying. Part of the reason for this is "The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;" or in other words the AMA. The Adademy of Model Aeronautics for those unfamiliar.
The good news, if you are an AMA member and model airplane flyer, is you can continue to fly model airplanes with virtually no change (other than registration).
The bad news is a drone is not by any means similar to a model airplane flying at a RC aircraft flying club. (Yes, a lot of people have mislead themselves into believing it is.)
The 5 statute miles from any "airport, heliport, seaplane base, spaceport, or other location with aviation activities" is from PL 112-95 Section 336. If you are setting up a model aircraft flying field then this airport requirement is very reasonable.
In fact everything in Part 101 are very reasonable restrictions for any AMA member flying an model aircraft, or even a drone for that matter, at a RC aircraft flying field.
Clearly this is not what drone hobbiest are wanting to do and that is why the FAA was mandated by Congress to write Part 107.
Do not blame the FAA for PL 112-95, blame Congress.
Now, before you get all upset with the FAA for writing Part 101, you need to realize it was NOT the FAA that did it. It was Congress and our President that put this into law. And, yes, that does mean it will take a act from Congress to change it. (don't hold you breath on this one)
Model airplane flyers have a long and proud history of safe flying. Part of the reason for this is "The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;" or in other words the AMA. The Adademy of Model Aeronautics for those unfamiliar.
The good news, if you are an AMA member and model airplane flyer, is you can continue to fly model airplanes with virtually no change (other than registration).
The bad news is a drone is not by any means similar to a model airplane flying at a RC aircraft flying club. (Yes, a lot of people have mislead themselves into believing it is.)
The 5 statute miles from any "airport, heliport, seaplane base, spaceport, or other location with aviation activities" is from PL 112-95 Section 336. If you are setting up a model aircraft flying field then this airport requirement is very reasonable.
In fact everything in Part 101 are very reasonable restrictions for any AMA member flying an model aircraft, or even a drone for that matter, at a RC aircraft flying field.
Clearly this is not what drone hobbiest are wanting to do and that is why the FAA was mandated by Congress to write Part 107.
Do not blame the FAA for PL 112-95, blame Congress.
It's hobbyist fault for not being involved. I think down line it can be some changes. Multi-rotor aren't that dangerous.
Thanks for that break down. It's hard to be mean with you around. Facts
What rule or law are you all referring to that says hobby ops are illegal? Part 107 is only for commercial operations. Hobby ops are not regulated by the FAA, but only by section 336 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. The only thing the FAA says about hobby ops is that they can't endanger the safety of the NAS. Am I missing something here?
http://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Sec_331_336_UAS.pdf
http://www.faa.gov/uas/media/Sec_331_336_UAS.pdf
@slim.slamma Do you have a link? The FAA's website says nothing about flying only at AMA fields for hobby ops. First sentence on their own website is:
"You don't need permission from the FAA to fly your UAS (aka drone) for fun or recreation, but you must always fly safely."
Fly for Fun
"You don't need permission from the FAA to fly your UAS (aka drone) for fun or recreation, but you must always fly safely."
Fly for Fun
FAR 101.41
(b) The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;
There is no nationwide community based organization other than the AMA.
(b) The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;
There is no nationwide community based organization other than the AMA.
So we are taking it upon ourselves to interpret ourselves out of hobby ops? That is not the intent of Part 101. The intent of 101 is to ensure that the NAS is not endangered. The way it is written is extremely poor, and I can see why it causes confusion. Those conditions referenced above are listed under Applicability of Part 101.
"101.41 Applicability
This subpart prescribes rules governing the operation of a model aircraft (or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft) that meets all of the following conditions as set forth in section 336 of Public Law 112-95:"
A strict interpretation would mean that only operations that meet all conditions listed in section 101.41 are governed by part 101.
Understandably, what the FAA means is that hobby ops should abide by all of those conditions in order to be a "hobby" op.
So then let's go to the next section, assuming we can get past this interpretation.
"101.43 Endangering the safety of the National Airspace System.
No person may operate model aircraft so as to endanger the safety of the national airspace system."
So the only rule under part 101 is that hobby ops shouldn't endanger the safety of the national airspace system.
Can anyone who works for the FAA clarify this misunderstanding?
"101.41 Applicability
This subpart prescribes rules governing the operation of a model aircraft (or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft) that meets all of the following conditions as set forth in section 336 of Public Law 112-95:"
A strict interpretation would mean that only operations that meet all conditions listed in section 101.41 are governed by part 101.
Understandably, what the FAA means is that hobby ops should abide by all of those conditions in order to be a "hobby" op.
So then let's go to the next section, assuming we can get past this interpretation.
"101.43 Endangering the safety of the National Airspace System.
No person may operate model aircraft so as to endanger the safety of the national airspace system."
So the only rule under part 101 is that hobby ops shouldn't endanger the safety of the national airspace system.
Can anyone who works for the FAA clarify this misunderstanding?
The more successful tactic appears to be the "No Landing or takeoff" ordinance cities like Miami are using to thwart drone operators, As for part 107, If licensing modified folks behavior for the better we wouldn't have idiot bikers racing on I95 etc. the only thing 107 accomplishes is a means to tax operators who are already trying to operate safely as they would like to recoup their investment. I'll remain a hobbyist and use my money for replacement parts and a Mavic Pro.
107 gets you permission to fly at 1500 agl 100 miles from the nearest airport. Not bad for some studying and 150 cash.
If you can't comply with 101 then you must adhere to 107. 101 is strictly for flying at Ama fields.
She might didn't say anything that I personally wanted to hear but it's pretty clear. Before 107 I twisted and turned regulations to my liking that's over.
The lady in the utube video works directly with the faa to prosecute hobbyist.
If you can't comply with 101 then you must adhere to 107. 101 is strictly for flying at Ama fields.
She might didn't say anything that I personally wanted to hear but it's pretty clear. Before 107 I twisted and turned regulations to my liking that's over.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2016
- Messages
- 366
- Reaction score
- 153
- Age
- 55
So, maybe I can help clear up some confusion here, with the disclaimer that I Am Not A Lawyer, and any advice I give here is taken at your own risk; consult your own attorney. I have here in front of me the ASA's FAR/AIM 2017 Edition, which includes the newly-minted Part 107. I also have a printed copy of the AMA's rules and bylaws, to include the Academy of Model Aeronautics National Model Aircraft Safety Code, which you agree to follow upon becoming a member. All of that is available here:
http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/memanual.pdf
First, let's review again the 14 CFR Part 101, Subpart E:
(b) The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;
So, this part "operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines" does NOT mean that you can only fly at an AMA sanctioned event, and doesn't require that you even be a member of the AMA... only that you follow their guidelines when you, say, fly in your backyard.
When they say "programming of a nationwide community-based organization" this is probably where the confusion comes in.
To quote from [Docket No. FAA-2014-0396] Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft, available here: https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/model_aircraft_spec_rule.pdf
The FAA is issuing this interpretation because we have received many inquiries regarding the scope of the special rule for model aircraft in section 336 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and the FAA’s enforcement authority over model aircraft as affirmed by the statute. ...
...See Advisory Circular 91-57, Model Aircraft Operating Standards (June 9, 1981)...
...Section 336(a)(2) requires model aircraft to be operated within a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization. Congress explained that it intended “nationwide community-based organization” to mean, in part, a “membership based association that represents the aeromodeling community within the Unites States; [and] provides its members a comprehensive set of safety guidelines that underscores safe aeromodeling operations within the National Airspace System and the protection and safety of the general public on the ground . . . .” U.S. House, FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Conference Report (to Accompany H.R. 658), 112 H. Rpt. 381 (Feb. 1, 2012) (discussion of special rule for model aircraft). Based on this language, which provides context to Congress’ use of the term “nationwide community-based organization,” the FAA expects that model aircraft operations conducted under section 336(a) will be operated according to those guidelines...
Ok so the FAA says you can fly Part 101 if you adhere to AMA's or some other organization's guidelines. Nowhere do they say you have to be a member. Let's look at AMA's rules, to see if you can only fly at AMA sanctioned events if you DO follow their "rules":
1. Model aircraft will not be flown:
(a) In a careless or reckless manner.
(b) At a location where model aircraft activities are prohibited.
Nope, you just have to follow their rules (which generally mirror Part 107). If an LEO or an FAA inspector shows up, however, it'd be good to have an AMA card, a logbook, and a ops manual to smooth things over. Let alone a Part 107 cert.
Cheers
I'm a little upset because after 2 years it should be no confusion. Part 107 was not good for business who's gone purchase a karma now? Nobody wants to fly in a field
If the fun was still LIT my stocks would be flying thru the roof Dji would've announced the i2 but noooo the Faa had to get their cut. Big corporations is making money but not the little guy.
If the fun was still LIT my stocks would be flying thru the roof Dji would've announced the i2 but noooo the Faa had to get their cut. Big corporations is making money but not the little guy.
In my earlier post I repeated information given to me but which further investigation shows to be at least partially erroneous.
While flying at Oleta State Park here in Miami on 10/2 a Miami Dade sheriffs helicopter buzzed the area then called the park rangers stating that I had to cease operations because drones could not be flown from the park, while Miami Dade Parks and Recreation parks do have prohibitions on drone flights no such language exists in the rules for Florida's State Parks (Florida State Park Rules | Florida State Parks). It is also not a no fly zone. Of course me being the obnoxious sob I am I did compose a message to the Miami Dade Aviation Department.
Hello,
While flying my drone on October 2d at Oleta State Park, below 200' ft (most of Florida is at sea level plus or minus a few feet), one of your aircraft buzzed the area I was operating in ( even then I was four feet off the ground discharging my battery) and called the park telling them drone flights are restricted there. This is absolutely erroneous, I have been given permission by the rangers and have been flying there for quite awhile. Further the airspace is absolutely not a no fly zone nor were any FAA flight restrictions in place at the time of my flight. I am a retired firefighter and respect the guys have a job to do, kindly insure they know the correct information and not simply make them up on the fly. I will continue to fly my drone there pursuant to FAA and Florida State Park regulations which your pilots can easily acces online.
Florida State Park Rules | Florida State Parks
To the wonderful members of of this forum I apologize for not researching information prior to posting.
While flying at Oleta State Park here in Miami on 10/2 a Miami Dade sheriffs helicopter buzzed the area then called the park rangers stating that I had to cease operations because drones could not be flown from the park, while Miami Dade Parks and Recreation parks do have prohibitions on drone flights no such language exists in the rules for Florida's State Parks (Florida State Park Rules | Florida State Parks). It is also not a no fly zone. Of course me being the obnoxious sob I am I did compose a message to the Miami Dade Aviation Department.
Hello,
While flying my drone on October 2d at Oleta State Park, below 200' ft (most of Florida is at sea level plus or minus a few feet), one of your aircraft buzzed the area I was operating in ( even then I was four feet off the ground discharging my battery) and called the park telling them drone flights are restricted there. This is absolutely erroneous, I have been given permission by the rangers and have been flying there for quite awhile. Further the airspace is absolutely not a no fly zone nor were any FAA flight restrictions in place at the time of my flight. I am a retired firefighter and respect the guys have a job to do, kindly insure they know the correct information and not simply make them up on the fly. I will continue to fly my drone there pursuant to FAA and Florida State Park regulations which your pilots can easily acces online.
Florida State Park Rules | Florida State Parks
To the wonderful members of of this forum I apologize for not researching information prior to posting.
Thanks for the update!
Trying to get everyone to start singing from the same page is going to be the biggest challenge.
Trying to get everyone to start singing from the same page is going to be the biggest challenge.
That's just simply not true. As an AMA member, I can fly anywhere it is legal to fly and/or allowed by the landowner including my own backyard. I know. I have a 600' runway out my back door that overlooks 200 acres with the sun at my back. I've been flying here for 25 years.
OK i could very well be wrong. At the end of the it's better to be safe than fined.
What is true is that only AMA members and invited guests (for a limited number of times as defined by the local club) may fly at AMA fields.
The PoPo only thought my flights were unauthorized, wrong!
Also Popo's have no authority as far as airspace, they can arrive with an FAA official to provide security but that's about all.
Similar threads
