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

USA Title 14 CFR Part 107 Waivers (Post your approved/rejected)

I just received my second daylight waiver rejection. The first one was rejected out of hand with no specific reason, just a general "you did not provide what we want" (paraphrased) response.

The second one they actually asked for a couple of clarifications, specifically, how was I going to ensure the pilot and any VO were trained in physiological factors related to night vision and "hinted" that it should be a test on Chapter 17 of the AIM. And, they wanted to know specifically what was to be done in the event that a manned aircraft became a factor during the flight.

In my app, I had already incorporated the information regarding night vision in the AIM chapter 17. So in my reply to #1, I took their suggestion and said a test would be administered and reviewed by the
Responsible Person until a 100% approval was attained. Regarding #2, I honestly had to bite my tongue a little regarding cynicism in my response. I wrote them that same as flying full size aircraft, the pilot would always be on alert see and avoid approaching aircraft or inadvertent approach of people in the operational area and would take evasive maneuvers dependent upon the individual circumstance. Whether that would mean a quick descent or an immediate deviation in some direction. (I couldn't help myself and did write that if a full scale aircraft were at or below 400' agl at night and they were not near an airport, they were probably in an emergency off-airport landing situation.)

Well, a few days later I got the rejection with the same "you didn't tell us what we wanted to hear" generalization. I'm of course frustrated, but not surprised. I'm not tasked to fly much at night anyway, mostly for business promo stills. But I would like to be legal.

Over the years I've flown plenty at night and it just seems silly that the FAA is playing a shell game rather than just regulating. And that my night time training for Part 61 was straight forward by comparison to this mess.

Just wanting to get feedback from those of you that actually got an approval?
 
I haven’t heard back from any of the manual authorizations I sent through the portal; some time ago. I guess I’m fortunate to have access to immediate authorization, but I’m still loosing accounts for those construction sites a mile away from the airport (SJC) the published limit at that distance in airmap-LAANC map- is 0 feet...would be nice if they would open up more areas(in the red a mile from the airport ) for low attitude flights at 80 feet and below...
 
I just received my second daylight waiver rejection. The first one was rejected out of hand with no specific reason, just a general "you did not provide what we want" (paraphrased) response.

The second one they actually asked for a couple of clarifications, specifically, how was I going to ensure the pilot and any VO were trained in physiological factors related to night vision and "hinted" that it should be a test on Chapter 17 of the AIM. And, they wanted to know specifically what was to be done in the event that a manned aircraft became a factor during the flight.

In my app, I had already incorporated the information regarding night vision in the AIM chapter 17. So in my reply to #1, I took their suggestion and said a test would be administered and reviewed by the
Responsible Person until a 100% approval was attained. Regarding #2, I honestly had to bite my tongue a little regarding cynicism in my response. I wrote them that same as flying full size aircraft, the pilot would always be on alert see and avoid approaching aircraft or inadvertent approach of people in the operational area and would take evasive maneuvers dependent upon the individual circumstance. Whether that would mean a quick descent or an immediate deviation in some direction. (I couldn't help myself and did write that if a full scale aircraft were at or below 400' agl at night and they were not near an airport, they were probably in an emergency off-airport landing situation.)

Well, a few days later I got the rejection with the same "you didn't tell us what we wanted to hear" generalization. I'm of course frustrated, but not surprised. I'm not tasked to fly much at night anyway, mostly for business promo stills. But I would like to be legal.

Over the years I've flown plenty at night and it just seems silly that the FAA is playing a shell game rather than just regulating. And that my night time training for Part 61 was straight forward by comparison to this mess.

Just wanting to get feedback from those of you that actually got an approval?


Regarding #2, try explaining it like a Procedure. How will the Pilot and VO identify aircraft / obstructions / person on the ground and other UAS , how will that identification be communicated to the pilot so that they can identify the hazard, it's relation to the UAS and....then evasive actions and I would add that flight operations will be terminated until the hazard has been resolved. I do also wish they would publish standards they want met to achieve equivalent levels of safety though.
 
Regarding #2, try explaining it like a Procedure. How will the Pilot and VO identify aircraft / obstructions / person on the ground and other UAS , how will that identification be communicated to the pilot so that they can identify the hazard, it's relation to the UAS and....then evasive actions and I would add that flight operations will be terminated until the hazard has been resolved. I do also wish they would publish standards they want met to achieve equivalent levels of safety though.

Thanks for the tips. I do think they will get around to standards but it may take years (hopefully not).
 
  • Like
Reactions: boefinator
Is it even worth attempting to follow up on authorizations? I've now hit five months on several. I know the wait is long but I'm hearing others getting theirs in half the time. I'm glad others are getting theirs, no sour grapes here but if I attempt to check will that just ensure a longer wait or denial?
 
Is it even worth attempting to follow up on authorizations? I've now hit five months on several. I know the wait is long but I'm hearing others getting theirs in half the time. I'm glad others are getting theirs, no sour grapes here but if I attempt to check will that just ensure a longer wait or denial?
What could it hurt? I filed for a renewal mid-November and was gone on vacation over Christmas and half of January. My CoA expired on 31 December. I called the FAA after I got back and had the renewal in a little over a week after the call. If I hadn't brought it up, I'd still be waiting instead of flying.
 
I applied for a night waiver and got rejected, i got the standardized rejection with no explanation from the FAA as to what was the issue. I went line for line and in detail of the operations. It is for a Police Department and did extensive research before putting in the application.
 
So, I'm also in the rejected group for a 107 daylight operations COW, after putting together what I felt was a very well sorted application.

I find it asinine that the FAA's plan here is to have to you make this up on your own, rather than putting forth an established set of guidelines to follow. They don't make you write an essay on why you think you're safe to fly IFR - they specify training, testing, and procedures. (I'm also annoyed that the FAA is perfectly fine with me in control of thousands of pounds of fuel, metal, and human flesh as it hurtles through the air, day or night, but I'm not trusted to fly my toy helicopter after dark...)

That said, I read through here looking for some pointers and did a lot of searching... is there an actual standard plan out there that I can adjust and submit and actually get approved? I'd be happy to operate under established safe parameters. Would it not be safest if we all followed the same established best practices?

Thanks for any guidance - Dave
 
So, I'm also in the rejected group for a 107 daylight operations COW, after putting together what I felt was a very well sorted application.

I find it asinine that the FAA's plan here is to have to you make this up on your own, rather than putting forth an established set of guidelines to follow. They don't make you write an essay on why you think you're safe to fly IFR - they specify training, testing, and procedures. (I'm also annoyed that the FAA is perfectly fine with me in control of thousands of pounds of fuel, metal, and human flesh as it hurtles through the air, day or night, but I'm not trusted to fly my toy helicopter after dark...)

That said, I read through here looking for some pointers and did a lot of searching... is there an actual standard plan out there that I can adjust and submit and actually get approved? I'd be happy to operate under established safe parameters. Would it not be safest if we all followed the same established best practices?

Thanks for any guidance - Dave
I feel your pain, Dave, and you are preaching to the choir. I don't think too many 107.29 apps are approved the first time. There is no one silver bullet. Folks who used my successful application in 2016 were rejected (WTF right?). The FAA says they don't want to put out the "holy grail" format because folks will just cut & paste and will not invest the time researching and writing ,i.e. learning. Their position is that this will make you a safer operator.

We all did the cut & paste back in the 333 days, guess they figure it was too easy and will not make the same mistake again.All you can do is keep trying and wear them down. :D
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
22,277
Messages
210,655
Members
34,329
Latest member
defenderschool