OT: FAA NPRM for r/c aircraft and drones

[CSKeller]

Anyone here fly model aircraft or drones? I have been flying model aircraft for nearly 40 years. In the last 20 years I mainly fly model sailplanes and I have been a towman for the US F3J(r/c soaring,thermal duration, launched by hand towing) World Championships 4 times.

I really love modeling and it inspired me to go into the Air Force and become an engineer. I love it as much as cycling but I really believe the FAA is going nuts with their latest notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

The FAA NPRM is EXTREMELY restrictive and I believe it will kill model aviation in this country. They want to require what are essentially transponders on all models heavier than 250 grams which must be connected to a cell network before flight with your license info, GPS info, altitude, heading, speed, etc. and the connection must be transmitted throughout flight.

They are also requiring all transmitters and 'transponders' be 'FAA certified' and no homebuilt models can be used and only equipment bought through a 'authorized FAA certified dealer can be used. That would essentially make all r/c equipment currently used obsolete.

Model aviation has been in existence for more than 100 years. The model aviation community has operated safely and responsibly alongside the full-scale aviation world with no problems the entire time.

Model aviation has also been a great way to encourage people towards aviation, space and other STEM careers. I wonder what would have happened if people like the Wright brothers, Charles Lindbergh, Neil Armstrong or Burt Rutan (Scaled Composites--Spacehip 1, 2 and Virgin Galactic) and so many others if they weren't inspired by flying models?

I am working on my comments to the FAA and my Senators and Congressman. Is anyone else distressed about this gross overreach of the government??

[unterhausen]

I thought it wasn't quite that draconian, but I'm having trouble finding good information about it due to a lot of misinformation and panic.

DJI seems to think they have it handled, and I figure the Chinese will step up and provide solutions so it won't be too expensive.

I really wish the weight limit was more reasonable, like 2 pounds. Half a pound is a bit low.

[HenryA]

This is sad. I hope you can fend them off for a while longer. At the least it would seem appropriate that in out of the way places these regulations would not apply, but only in congested areas.

[unterhausen]

I imagine this came up because of the Gatwick shutdown.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatwic...drone_incident

While searching, I found out that protestors try to shut down Heathrow with quadcopters occasionally

[oldpotatoe]

Really not that surprising is it? Done near misses vs aircarft have seen a YUGE upward spike as drones become cheaper and more common. Not surprised they lump R/C aircraft along with drones. Yup, the many are being punished for the stupidity of a few.

[unterhausen]

they are actually more concerned about the 1st person view pilots that have long-range radios and fly by video. Have been for years.

The thing about sightings is that it's really difficult to tell what you are seeing when you are whizzing around in your airline seat. Vast majority of drone reports are actually plastic shopping bags.

[Mark McM]

This seems topsy-turvy. The proposed regulations are reported are even stricter than for full-sized aircraft.* I can see there being need for restricting drone (and RC aircraft) flight near airports or other congested or restricted airspace, but not out in the middle of nowhere.


*Current regulations for regular aircraft only require transponders when flying over 10,000 ft, or near large airports. And manned ultra light aircraft don't even have to be registered.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

This seems topsy-turvy. The proposed regulations are reported are even stricter than for full-sized aircraft.* I can see there being need for restricting drone (and RC aircraft) flight near airports or other congested or restricted airspace, but not out in the middle of nowhere.


*Current regulations for regular aircraft only require transponders when flying over 10,000 ft, or near large airports. And manned ultra light aircraft don't even have to be registered.

Well, I know it gets complicated but anytime in class A, B or C airspace, you need a transponder..regardless of altitude, surface to 4000-10,000 ft. Pretty much anywhere except for some out west, mostly unpopulated areas. YES, Class G and E, no transponder required(nor a radio...either..)..below 10,000 feet. BUT, there are a LOT more drones than GA aircraft. Plus, in a drone, you can 'see' only in front of you, if video flying...Can't 'see' that bugsmasher off your right wing, "constant bearing, decreasing range"...

PLUS, when I was flying Cessna 172s, even tho in uncontrolled airspace, I always squawked 1200 even if not required.

BUT, a few airline guys crow about a near miss with a 'drone'..not surprised the FAA does this kinda heavy handed requirements..Largely un enforceable as well...with the current fleet of drones 'out there'...

[Mark McM]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

Well, I know it gets complicated but anytime in class A, B or C airspace, you need a transponder..regardless of altitude, surface to 4000-10,000 ft. Pretty much anywhere except for some out west, mostly unpopulated areas. YES, Class G and E, no transponder required(nor a radio...either..)..below 10,000 feet. BUT, there are a LOT more drones than GA aircraft. Plus, in a drone, you can 'see' only in front of you, if video flying...Can't 'see' that bugsmasher off your right wing, "constant bearing, decreasing range"...

PLUS, when I was flying Cessna 172s, even tho in uncontrolled airspace, I always squawked 1200 even if not required.

BUT, a few airline guys crow about a near miss with a 'drone'..not surprised the FAA does this kinda heavy handed requirements..Largely un enforceable as well...with the current fleet of drones 'out there'...

At lower altitudes, the vast majority of airspace is E or G. How many drones fly above 18,000 ft (Class A airspace)? Classes B, C & D are only around larger airports, and I agree that drones should be restricted here (just as there are restrictions on other aircraft in these airspaces). If anyone is flying a drone around JFK or LaGuardia, then law enforcement should come down on them hard. But why put such draconian restrictions on some farmer in the middle of Kansas using a drone to monitor his corn fields?

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

At lower altitudes, the vast majority of airspace is E or G. How many drones fly above 18,000 ft (Class A airspace)? Classes B, C & D are only around larger airports, and I agree that drones should be restricted here (just as there are restrictions on other aircraft in these airspaces). If anyone is flying a drone around JFK or LaGuardia, then law enforcement should come down on them hard. But why put such draconian restrictions on some farmer in the middle of Kansas using a drone to monitor his corn fields?

Like I said, a few airliner reports plus there ARE some people being stupid in public with drones.

Sure, but how? Airline driver sees a drone..he then reports it...really no way for law enforcement to find the thing or the guy flying it. No radar paint of the thing.

FAA? who knows..See how well they did with the 737max?

[merlinmurph]

Guess there aren't many R/C pilots here.

I got into R/C late in life in 2005 and really got hooked into gliders. After about 6 years, I stopped flying for various reasons, one of which was cycling. I hope to get back to flying gliders soon. I cannot describe how cool it is to catch a thermal, stay in it, and watch your plane go up, and keep it up for awhile.

From a glider pilot's perspective, the proposed rules are way over the top. After painstakingly building an 11 oz. 60" wingspan hand-launch glider, you want me to put a transponder in it? This plane will never go out of eyesight (at least on purpose) and gets pretty small at 500 ft. Nobody should be scared of that plane.

The consensus of my club is that R/C soaring would die with a 400 ft. ceiling. Typical planes have a 3m+ wingspan, are launched with an electric winch, and leave the towline at ~400 ft. The whole idea is to find lift and go up from there, so you can see what a 400 ft. ceiling does to us.

I wasn't aware of the proposed radio requirements. Suffice it to say that people have a lot of money invested in their radio gear and to deem it illegal is asking too much.

What's frustrating is that nobody had a problem with R/C planes until drones showed up and FPV (First Person View) became available. FPV allows one to fly the aircraft using an onboard camera so the pilot doesn't need to see it. These are the problem aircraft - control them.

I was over 50 when I started flying R/C, and learned so much while doing it. Building a balsa plane and then watching it fly is a fantastic experience. I learned electricity basics. I learned about thermals and the river of air. I would hate to see the R/C hobby die because of this fear-mongering administration.

[CSKeller]

There are a few random reports of 'drone sightings' near aircraft but there has never been any collisions or accidents with manned aircraft caused by model aircraft or drones!

The FAA supposedly has done a risk and threat assessment but it can not be found not are they providing it...most likely because they never performed one in the first place or the findings do not support their agenda.

The FAA is simply being bought by the likes of Google and Amazon and DHL to control the airspace and take away freedoms of U.S. law-abiding, responsible citizens that pose no threat or risk to manned aircraft.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[CSKeller]

It is fascinating that ultra-light manned aircraft have far less regulations and requirements than what is being proposed for r/c aircraft and drones...

Wildlife (birds) and careless or incompetent pilots of full-size aircraft have done far more damage, killed people and downed aircraft, but I have yet to see any evidence of damage caused by a model aircraft or drones to manned aircraft.

Larger drones and pilotless aircraft are already carefully regulated to fly within controlled airspace along side manned craft.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[oldpotatoe]

After painstakingly building an 11 oz. 60" wingspan hand-launch glider, you want me to put a transponder in it? This plane will never go out of eyesight (at least on purpose) and gets pretty small at 500 ft. Nobody should be scared of that plane.

As a guy who used to be on the other side(as a pilot), a pilot has NO IDEA what that thing was that just whizzed by their aircraft. I have ducked and dodged flocks of birds(if you see them)..hitting something like that, particularly in a jet, can bring it down.

What's frustrating is that nobody had a problem with R/C planes until drones showed up and FPV (First Person View) became available. FPV allows one to fly the aircraft using an onboard camera so the pilot doesn't need to see it. These are the problem aircraft - control them.

Not sure how..license required to buy one?

I would hate to see the R/C hobby die because of this fear-mongering administration.

The FAA is under fire already..Not surprised they take this heavy handed approach..Today's FAA Administrator is also 'acting' Sec of Transportation..that's pretty dumb, IMHO, but par for this bunch..

The FAA supposedly has done a risk and threat assessment but it can not be found not are they providing it...most likely because they never performed one in the first place or the findings do not support their agenda.
The FAA is simply being bought by the likes of Google and Amazon and DHL to control the airspace and take away freedoms of U.S. law-abiding, responsible citizens that pose no threat or risk to manned aircraft.

Yup..

[merlinmurph]

Originally Posted by oldpotatoe

I have ducked and dodged flocks of birds(if you see them)..hitting something like that, particularly in a jet, can bring it down...

What's a jet doing at 500 ft. above residential areas, nowhere near an airport? Is there a minimum altitude?

I don't think people are aware of the safety precautions taken at an R/C club field, particularly with powered planes. You have a designated flying space not above people, a limited number of planes in the air (typically 4?), strict procedures when taking off and landing, etc. Then, you have some idiot drone pilot flying their thing in park above hundreds of people. Doesn't make sense.

I seriously doubt longtime pilots will adhere to any of these new rules. They are not the problem. Besides, anybody who actually wants to do real harm (i.e. the people these rules are targeted for) will totally disregard any of these new rules. It's just stupid, total fear mongering.