Drone awareness

Pinstriper

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Apr 25, 2012
Messages
423
Location
Oroville California
Display Name

Display name:
Pinstriper
I pitched the idea for a story to the local media both newspaper and Ch12 news (cbs) the tv part will be taped tomorrow and air Sunday.. Again this is about educating the drone owners (hopefully)

Here's the drone (awareness) story that was written up yesterday. I was surprised it ran the next day.. As with any newspaper article what we say and how the reporter actually writes it can be 2 differant things and we don't get an option to proof read it before it prints, so if you see any in accuracies it's not my fault ✌️ (you may have to view it on the desktop site to view the photos). http://www.chicoer.com/general-news/20160107/local-pilots-concerned-about-increasing-drone-use
 
Once again, people buying "drones" with no clue as to the law / FAA guidance of their operation.

Here's the problem with these RC models, drones, whatever. I'll use an example of what happened to me about a year ago. I was cruising along at 550 ft AGL when a quad rotor type drone went by my door maybe 75 ft away. Close enough to see his camera on the bottom. Now, what law has this person violated? 400 ft? Nope, that's guidance and not in public law. If he was an AMA member he could have been in violation of their policy because he was within 3 miles of an airport operating above 400 ft. That's not regulatory though and AMA fully supports operations above 400 ft outside of 3 miles from an airport. Interfering with manned aircraft? Well, what would equate to "interfering"? Is there a specified distance? Does the pilot have to take evasive action? Also, I have about 5 different manuals for my RC aircraft and they just give general guidelines for their operation and nothing from the AC, Public Law or AMA rules. Majority of the people buying these things don't take their education any further from reading the instructions.

Too many of these rules are subject to interpretation. It's the pilot's word against the drone operators word. Registering these aircraft will only bring enforcement action after the drone has collided with a manned aircraft. Too late then.
 
Once again it's an attempt to educate the operators about the effects of them in our airspace. I agree there are now laws, but hopefully someone in our area will read that article and think twice I out venturing up too high.. Sadly It's all we got ✌️
 
Last edited:
I once met John Glenn. I wonder if that qualifies me to be a reporter. :D

I think the author did a surprisingly good job with this piece. I know the bar is low, but still.
 
If anyone reads this, be sure not to miss the "About the author" part at the end.

That's funny I didn't notice that lol! But ya I think he did a good job.. Let's see how the tv news does tomorrow lol
 
Last edited:
Ok I was Wrong. My house is in Gateway airport class D. Do you really think I need to call the tower if I keep my Quadcopter below 400ft
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    145.7 KB · Views: 22
Last edited:
At that location? No. But that's just my opinion.
 
Ok I was Wrong. My house is in Gateway airport class do. Do you really think I need to call the tower if I keep my Quadcopter below 400ft

Technically Public Law 112-95 says you need to regardless of altitude. Is 400 ft going to be a factor in your area? Nope.
 
And that airplane that weights 1.8lb and I fly it in gateway class D. The tower is going to get a lot of calls as I have several airplanes I fly close to home.
 
Ok I was Wrong. My house is in Gateway airport class D. Do you really think I need to call the tower if I keep my Quadcopter below 400ft

Depending on how old it is, there may be a geofence program in the UAS that does not allow the unit to even fly.
 
... Close enough to see his camera on the bottom. Now, what law has this person violated? 400 ft? Nope, that's guidance and not in public law...

I read one FAA interpretation that says if you are flying your RC/drone above 400 feet (our within 5 miles of an airport) then your flight is no longer 'recreational' and as a result the Congressional mandate to not regulate hobbyists RC aircraft no longer applies, therefore the RC/drone is an aircraft subject to the full force of all FARs .

I haven't heard if the FAA has tried this argument in court.
 
Well we met with the TV reporter today at the airport, I had lined up a drone to fly and capture some video for the reporter (her suggestion) but when we tried to launch the drone he got this warning on his screen.. Pretty neat how it knew it was at an airport and wouldn't allow flight! Instead we used my Parrot AR2 to get her the drone piece. And yes we notified the airport management
 

Attachments

  • image.png
    image.png
    3.1 MB · Views: 28
I was out flying my drone today. A cop guy stopped by and watched fir about 5 minutes. All I could think about is crap I haven't registered as a drone pilot. I guess I better get to it.
 
Once again, people buying "drones" with no clue as to the law / FAA guidance of their operation.

Here's the problem with these RC models, drones, whatever. I'll use an example of what happened to me about a year ago. I was cruising along at 550 ft AGL when a quad rotor type drone went by my door maybe 75 ft away. Close enough to see his camera on the bottom. Now, what law has this person violated? 400 ft? Nope, that's guidance and not in public law. If he was an AMA member he could have been in violation of their policy because he was within 3 miles of an airport operating above 400 ft. That's not regulatory though and AMA fully supports operations above 400 ft outside of 3 miles from an airport. Interfering with manned aircraft? Well, what would equate to "interfering"? Is there a specified distance? Does the pilot have to take evasive action? Also, I have about 5 different manuals for my RC aircraft and they just give general guidelines for their operation and nothing from the AC, Public Law or AMA rules. Majority of the people buying these things don't take their education any further from reading the instructions.

Too many of these rules are subject to interpretation. It's the pilot's word against the drone operators word. Registering these aircraft will only bring enforcement action after the drone has collided with a manned aircraft. Too late then.

What was your relative position when the drone went by?
 
What was your relative position when the drone went by?

I was heading approx 360 between 500-550 on the radar alt. First noticed it at 1 o'clock level. Thought it was a bird. As it approached 2 o'clock I said no it's a kite. As it went to 3 o'clock and 75 ft ish, I said nope, that's a quadcopter. Actually seen vids on YouTube from a quadcopter in the same area. I check back periodically to see if he's got me on it. No luck yet.
 
I registered mine last week.. It's asshats like this that are to blame..

I've never liked flat billed hat dudes. And I'm sure everyone loves quadcopter videos filled with the buzz of 4 props for 9 minutes on end. Edit, man, edit! Put a stoopid flatbiller dubstep song in there, at least. :rofl:
 
I was heading approx 360 between 500-550 on the radar alt. First noticed it at 1 o'clock level. Thought it was a bird. As it approached 2 o'clock I said no it's a kite. As it went to 3 o'clock and 75 ft ish, I said nope, that's a quadcopter. Actually seen vids on YouTube from a quadcopter in the same area. I check back periodically to see if he's got me on it. No luck yet.
So he was on your right, and you were either converging or overtaking him. Either way, he had the right of way, and you should have passed behind him or to his right. Since the NTSB has decided quad copters are aircraft, shouldn't we apply 91.113?
 
**** drones and man buns
 
So he was on your right, and you were either converging or overtaking him. Either way, he had the right of way, and you should have passed behind him or to his right. Since the NTSB has decided quad copters are aircraft, shouldn't we apply 91.113?

Not quite. UAS model aircraft are always required to give way to manned aircraft.
 
I'm aware of such proposed rule in Part 107. Is there something in the current FARs to that effect?

It's in Public Law 112-95 which the FAA used for their basis of operating rules for UAS aircraft.
 
Can't find it there either. Can you show me?

Section 336 under model aircraft. The article of the thread makes reference to it as well. Along with the 400 ft guidance.
 
Last edited:
Section 336 is a limitation on the FAA's power to regulate model aircraft that comply with certain guidelines. It doesn't say that all UAS must comply with those guidelines. And it isn't regulatory.
 
Section 336 is a limitation on the FAA's power to regulate model aircraft that comply with certain guidelines. It doesn't say that all UAS must comply with those guidelines. And it isn't regulatory.

No, the FAA has already stated on record that a UAS model aircraft in violation of 336 right of way would be subject to enforcement action.

Whether or not you believe they have the ability to enforce this, I don't care. Just saying that I am not required to give way to a UAS.
 
I've never liked flat billed hat dudes..

Is that what "asshat" means? lol

To be fair this guy is in an open area on a clear day. He could certainly see and even hear if there were an aircraft anywhere near. The real asshats are flying these things over people's back yards and on approaches to airports.

and no, nobody is gonna watch 9 minutes of this except him and even him probably no more than twice. YouTube is great and can be great entertainment but it is also filled with so much crap it's unbelievable. What are these people thinking?
 
Drone world is selling all kinds of accessories.. and range extenders..
drone_zpsserkxpru.jpg
 
No, the FAA has already stated on record that a UAS model aircraft in violation of 336 right of way would be subject to enforcement action.

Whether or not you believe they have the ability to enforce this, I don't care. Just saying that I am not required to give way to a UAS.
A UAS not giving right away to all other aircraft does not fit within the model aircraft exemption and would be subject to the FARs and thus the operator could be subject to an enforcement action for violation of any number of FARs. But that doesn't mean that other aircraft don't have to follow the right-of-way rules when encountering a UAS. It's possible for two aircraft to be violating different FARs at the same time and place. That may change once Part 107 is adopted.
 
Back
Top