New FAA Rules
- Thread starter CoastalBird
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2014
- Messages
- 668
- Reaction score
- 209
Media Advisory – DOT and FAA Announce New Rules for Unmanned Aircraft Systems
https://www.faa.gov/news/media_advisories/news_story.cfm?newsId=18294
Have a listen at 10am EST this morning
https://www.faa.gov/news/media_advisories/news_story.cfm?newsId=18294
Have a listen at 10am EST this morning
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2014
- Messages
- 668
- Reaction score
- 209
Thx for the heads-up, I live in the UK, but always interested in others countries rules and regs.
Well, I tried calling in and it says there is no conferences at this number at this time. Maybe the number has chaged, or its not Eastern Standard Time. Sorry for the mis-information. 
Here is the press release, with a pdf link to the actual proposal. Honestly, it seems awfully fair at this point...
https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=18295
https://www.faa.gov/news/press_releases/news_story.cfm?newsId=18295
As long as they don't charge us money to fly it seems fair. The government does not need any more money.
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2014
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 2
- Location
- Fort Lauderdale, FL
- Website
- www.clipshot.com
heres the actual FAA document (leaked)
FAA pdf.
http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/SmallUAS_US_DOT_FAA_-_Regulatory_Evaluation.php
Actually looks v favorable to me
It is encouraging. Remember, these new rules are for commercial use of UAV's. Nothing is changing for us recreational users, which is a relief!
I'm reading through it, too. So far, it seems pretty reasonable news for recreational users. And while there are costs for commercial use, they aren't impossible.
I agree with everything EXCEPT 2 things: Must maintain visual, and restricted night flying. Though I think making slight changes in the rule would improve safety overall. I see that the process for regulations started YEARS ago, but perhaps a quick "snap-shot" of what today's technology brings may suggest to the FAA that technology CAN and DOES make things safer... they just have to ask for it.
MAINTAIN VISUAL:
With technology advancements, why not include exceptions to the rule allowing technology to make it safer:
- Must have live video feed, or,
- Must have craft telemetry relative to flight status, or,
- If none of the above, must have visual.
Describe what you (FAA) would make you feel safe and let technology come to the rule. In the rationale section, the FAA didn't allow it because miniaturized solutions didn't exist. Well... they can be if the manufactures knew what the FAA wanted.
Think of it in a practical sense. You just passed all the requisite testing to show competence, registered the craft, however,
- to inspect a bridge (example given by the FAA) you still won't be able to fly the craft. (You're on top of the bridge, craft is under it.)
- to fly around a property for real estate (example given by FAA) with trees, you will not maintain 100% visual, thus you cannot fly in that area
NIGHT FLYING:
Though I see the practical sense for hobby flying (currently hobby craft night flying isn't restricted at this point?), for commercial use, there HAS to be a reason why someone would risk a night flight.
- Search and rescue: From first hand experience, the public doesn't call for a lost person in the woods until THEY sense the urgency... usually darkness falling. Air support comes in with best value with its use with FLIR and Thermal video since ground crews have limited / no light for first person vision. This also ties into flying without visual of the craft.
I would suggest a "craft lighting requirement" to assure the device has proper safety lights for everyone.
LASTLY
By implementing the above advancements, it would entice the hobbyist to get their UAS certification to enjoy the advanced privileges, all while increasing safety and generating revenue.
Those are off the top of my head.
MAINTAIN VISUAL:
With technology advancements, why not include exceptions to the rule allowing technology to make it safer:
- Must have live video feed, or,
- Must have craft telemetry relative to flight status, or,
- If none of the above, must have visual.
Describe what you (FAA) would make you feel safe and let technology come to the rule. In the rationale section, the FAA didn't allow it because miniaturized solutions didn't exist. Well... they can be if the manufactures knew what the FAA wanted.
Think of it in a practical sense. You just passed all the requisite testing to show competence, registered the craft, however,
- to inspect a bridge (example given by the FAA) you still won't be able to fly the craft. (You're on top of the bridge, craft is under it.)
- to fly around a property for real estate (example given by FAA) with trees, you will not maintain 100% visual, thus you cannot fly in that area
NIGHT FLYING:
Though I see the practical sense for hobby flying (currently hobby craft night flying isn't restricted at this point?), for commercial use, there HAS to be a reason why someone would risk a night flight.
- Search and rescue: From first hand experience, the public doesn't call for a lost person in the woods until THEY sense the urgency... usually darkness falling. Air support comes in with best value with its use with FLIR and Thermal video since ground crews have limited / no light for first person vision. This also ties into flying without visual of the craft.
I would suggest a "craft lighting requirement" to assure the device has proper safety lights for everyone.
LASTLY
By implementing the above advancements, it would entice the hobbyist to get their UAS certification to enjoy the advanced privileges, all while increasing safety and generating revenue.
Those are off the top of my head.
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2014
- Messages
- 668
- Reaction score
- 209
Glad for all the USA fliers, I know some people won't like the restrictions, but at least the FAA have thought about it and haven't done a blanket ban like the Netherlands. These rules are almost the same as UK's restrictions.
I don't like the regulation but understand that it's required. Like you said I would rather have some rules than a ban.
Can wait for this proposal to become the rule.. let's all keep our fingers crossed.
Maintaining LOS could virtually shut down the nascent commercial drone industry. Nice going, FAA.
Proposed drone courier services like Amazon Prime Air and others will be prohibited under these LOS rules. And believe you me, there will be BILLIONS more lost in corporate profit and tax revenue based on large courier operations than just some realtors being able to snap video of a house or a farmer checking his corn field. The real money in drones will come from delivery of products to consumers, which is why huge companies like Amazon and Google have already spent millions developing the idea.
Luckily, the FAA doesnt make laws in America --- Congress does. Just wait until all these politicians start hearing from big business about how much tax money they are losing out in the years to come because of a LOS rule. Then we'll see how much power the FAA really has. Won't be much!
Proposed drone courier services like Amazon Prime Air and others will be prohibited under these LOS rules. And believe you me, there will be BILLIONS more lost in corporate profit and tax revenue based on large courier operations than just some realtors being able to snap video of a house or a farmer checking his corn field. The real money in drones will come from delivery of products to consumers, which is why huge companies like Amazon and Google have already spent millions developing the idea.
Luckily, the FAA doesnt make laws in America --- Congress does. Just wait until all these politicians start hearing from big business about how much tax money they are losing out in the years to come because of a LOS rule. Then we'll see how much power the FAA really has. Won't be much!
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2014
- Messages
- 93
- Reaction score
- 59
But keep in mind these rules aren't final. There's a 60 day comment period and then it could take up to 2 years before they finalize the rules. A lot can change in that time, and in the mean time, they don't have enforceable regs against commercial flight beyond requiring safe operations as they do with hobbyists (see dronelawjournal.com).
After reading the proposed regs, it looks like they categorize 2 different types of UAS - micro and small. The micro ones are allowed to fly over people.
"Proposes a microUAS option that would allow operations in Class G
airspace, over people not involved in the operation, provided the
operator certifies he or she has the requisite aeronautical knowledge to
perform the operation."
Class G airspace (under 1200 ft)
Anyone know the clarification between the two, and which category the Insprire 1 would fall into?
I wouldn't consider flying it close to people anyways, but sometimes it would be nice to take pictures that are straight overhead (from a high altitude).
"Proposes a microUAS option that would allow operations in Class G
airspace, over people not involved in the operation, provided the
operator certifies he or she has the requisite aeronautical knowledge to
perform the operation."
Class G airspace (under 1200 ft)
Anyone know the clarification between the two, and which category the Insprire 1 would fall into?
I wouldn't consider flying it close to people anyways, but sometimes it would be nice to take pictures that are straight overhead (from a high altitude).
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2014
- Messages
- 34
- Reaction score
- 8
- Age
- 52
Dose anyone know how much they will be charging for the certification to fly the drone ? And if they are charging I guess I will have to sell my inspire1
You're worrying about something that isn't even here yet. Cross that bridge when you get to it.
For the time being, fly your Inspire 1 and enjoy!
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Sticky
