RunRyder RC
 26  Topic Subscribe
WATCH
 24 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3      4     NEXT    >> ] 18712 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterMain Discussion › FAA comes down with aggressive position on model aircraft
06-24-2014 04:52 PM  3 years agoPost 21
sabooo

rrVeteran

Allentown, PA area

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Sponsored pilots don't get paid to put on demonstrations, they get paid to answer questions and wear ugly shirts and promote products. They fly for free to get away from people for 5 minutes of peace at events.



I was going to take up Origami, but someone said the local club folded.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 04:58 PM  3 years agoPost 22
gwrightrrVeteran - Champaign Il - My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Reps would also be attached to another plane, wrapped helically around an axis.

""""""
Flights conducted incidental to, and within the scope of, a business where no common
carriage is involved, generally may operate under FAA’s general operating rules of part
91. See Legal Interpretation to Scott C. Burgess, from Rebecca B. MacPherson, Assistant
Chief Counsel for Regulations (Nov. 25, 2008). Although they are not commercial
operations conducted for compensation or hire, such operations do not qualify as a hobby
or recreation flight because of the nexus between the operator’s business and the
operation of the aircraft.
"""""""

Of course all the reps and sponsored pilots that have a current commercial pilot's license would be OK, as they would be operating under part 91.

Gary Wright

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 05:47 PM  3 years agoPost 23
philip 01

rrElite Veteran

ft worth

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Quote from a friend
I think I can explain the situation (I am a lawyer). The FAA released "advisory guidance" on their website. Advisory guidance is not binding, like a statute would be, but they tend to show the direction the agency is heading in. The Pirker decision was made by an administrative law judge--these judges are usually the first to review a case regarding an agency regulation. They make "quasi-judicial" decisions--the agency is not strictly bound by the decision, but it does have value in that lawyers can rely on it as precedent. The decision can be appealed, but it continues through the administrative law process. Only after all of these administrative remedies are exhausted can it be reviewed by an actual federal district court. That's where truly binding decisions are made.

The bottom line is that the FAA didn't like the Pirker decision, so they are making that clear through this advisory guidance.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 05:55 PM  3 years agoPost 24
sharam

rrElite Veteran

Northern California - Fly at Morgan Hill Field

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

philip 01, thanks for the concise explanation!

Verba volant, scripta manet

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 06:00 PM  3 years agoPost 25
philip 01

rrElite Veteran

ft worth

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Facts and Data always out weigh speculation.....

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 06:10 PM  3 years agoPost 26
revmix

rrKey Veteran

NJ

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Facts and Data
Public Law 112-95 ; Feb-14-2012
Sec. 336 Special Rule for Model Aircraft

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 07:41 PM  3 years agoPost 27
AirWolfRC

rrProfessor

42½ N, 83½ W

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

As usual, the FAA has their head where the sun don't shine.

Let's see now, I fold up a piece of paper with a company logo on it and toss it into the air. I get paid a free lunch for my efforts.
. . . technically the FAA wants to be able to fine me for doint that ? ? ?

I'd be bringing this before the same judge that slapped them down before.

The FAA is just too stupid and too arrogant to follow the Judicial rule making process.

As for Public Law 112-95 ; Feb-14-2012

SEC. 336. SPECIAL RULE FOR MODEL AIRCRAFT.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law
relating to the incorporation of unmanned aircraft systems into
Federal Aviation Administration plans and policies, including this
subtitle, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model
aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft
, if—
(1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational
use;
(2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a communitybased
set of safety guidelines and within the programming
of a nationwide community-based organization;
(3) the aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds
unless otherwise certified through a design, construction,
inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered
by a community-based organization;
(4) the aircraft is operated in a manner that does not
interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and
(5) when flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator
of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport
air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located
at the airport) with prior notice of the operation (model aircraft
operators flying from a permanent location within 5 miles of
an airport should establish a mutually-agreed upon operating
procedure with the airport operator and the airport air traffic
control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the
airport)).
(b) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall
be construed to limit the authority of the Administrator to pursue
enforcement action against persons operating model aircraft who
endanger the safety of the national airspace system.
(c) MODEL AIRCRAFT DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘model
aircraft’’ means an unmanned aircraft that is—
(1) capable of sustained flight in the atmosphere;

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 08:33 PM  3 years agoPost 28
revmix

rrKey Veteran

NJ

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The FAA is just too stupid
like the Gov. "in doGma we trust"

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 08:57 PM  3 years agoPost 29
HeimD

rrVeteran

the great southwest

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Of course all the reps and sponsored pilots that have a current commercial pilot's license would be OK, as they would be operating under part 91.
Are you serious? An actual Commercial rating (fixed or rotary wing)? Got a link to where it says that regarding factory team pilots, reps, etc?

If WX is below VFR mins, do they need to have an Instrument rating to put on a demo flight, too?

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 09:02 PM  3 years agoPost 30
gwright

rrVeteran

Champaign Il

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

"Flights conducted incidental to, and within the scope of, a business where no common
carriage is involved, generally may operate under FAA’s general operating rules of part
91. "

reps and sponsored pilots would be operating under part 91.

Gary Wright

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 09:52 PM  3 years agoPost 31
AirWolfRC

rrProfessor

42½ N, 83½ W

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

A Judge has already ruled against and put the FAA on notice that model aircraft do not come under their control.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/06/us/drone-pilot-case-faa/

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 10:46 PM  3 years agoPost 32
BrainDrain_dx

rrKey Veteran

Wichita KS

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

FAA claiming "models" flown by goggles are no longer models. Probably so they can win the case.

KDS Agile 7.2/5.5 Chase 360 - SkyHero Spyder/Spy/Little Spyder
Sponsored by my Visa

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-24-2014 10:51 PM  3 years agoPost 33
AirWolfRC

rrProfessor

42½ N, 83½ W

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The FAA has yet to learn that they can NOT do whatever they want.
Just because they want to change what to call something does not make it so.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-25-2014 01:06 AM  3 years agoPost 34
airdodger

rrElite Veteran

Johnston USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Boy how backwards the country has become, those people in the FAA work for us if we don't like what they propose they still answer to us, don't forget that. When they push too far there will be a groundswell and heads will roll. We also don't need to be told what to do, when to do it and how to do it, we are adults,we don't answer to them, they answer to us. Let me know when that changed.

Chris

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-25-2014 01:23 AM  3 years agoPost 35
HeimD

rrVeteran

the great southwest

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

reps and sponsored pilots would be operating under part 91.
But ONLY if they have a current FAA Commercial rating per your previous post, right? What about the guys (i.e. the vast majority) who don't? According to you they'd need that rating.

Hmmm...maybe not such a bad thing... I have all my ratings up to and including ATP in both fixed and rotary wing. Maybe I can be a pro sponsored pilot after all if this true and the current pros who don't get that rating go bye-bye.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
06-25-2014 03:12 AM  3 years agoPost 36
Chris Bergen

rrElite Veteran

cassopolis, MI USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Maybe an A&P license will be required to work on them!!

Chris D. Bergen

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-25-2014 03:29 AM  3 years agoPost 37
Rodney Kirstine

rrApprentice

Caldwell, ID - USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Response from the AMA.

http://www.modelaircraft.org/files/...pretiveRule.pdf

Rodney
Team Synergy Field Rep, Rail Blades

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-25-2014 03:51 AM  3 years agoPost 38
earlwb

rrNovice

Grapevine, Texas

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

With all the idiots and yahoo's out there doing stupid and illegal stuff already with the things, what do you all expect? Yes you may be doing things Ok, but there are many others who aren't. Then you have those who think they are better than anyone else and they can do it anyway. I am really surprised they haven't banned FPV's or UAVs already or worse. The government tends to react and react harshly to such actions going on. Heck it is getting bad as we now have someone doing something stupid or illegal almost every day now and it is getting reported in the news. The public themselves all see it as a threat now and Congress won't spend a lot of time reacting to what the public wants. Quite a few local cities and towns have already banned all RC activities within their city limits. Every time some idiot does something stupid it is just another nail in the coffin.

I just hope us regular RC plane and heli flyers don't get banned from flying along with all the FPV or UAV folks.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-25-2014 04:50 AM  3 years agoPost 39
Stephen Born

rrElite Veteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I have all my ratings up to and including ATP in both fixed and rotary wing. Maybe I can be a pro sponsored pilot after all if this
I'm sure, as you will be the only pilot left.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
06-25-2014 12:10 PM  3 years agoPost 40
HeimD

rrVeteran

the great southwest

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I'm sure, as you will be the only pilot left.
Eh, you never know. Bert Kammerer has at least his Private rating.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 24 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3      4     NEXT    >> ] 18712 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterMain Discussion › FAA comes down with aggressive position on model aircraft
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 26  Topic Subscribe

Saturday, June 23 - 1:18 am - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online