Broad new UAS rules proposed today

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
13,968
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
I remember attending some of the NPRM public hearings in the 80’s concerning major airspace changes (I don’t recall the specific issue, but one of the affected airspaces was the Ontario ONT TRSA). All of these meetings were well attended and some were convention-sized. In every meeting, there was absolutely NO show of support. Speaking out loudly against the change was all of the GA pilots, all of the commercial and professional pilots, all of the related pilot unions and organizations (including AOPA and EAA), airline reps, airport managers and/or owners, individual Air Traffic Controllers, ATC professional organizations, airline representatives, the military, and even some of the regional FAA staff. The proposed rule was adopted and implemented as published.
Yup, in most cases, they are required to solicit and consider input. They are not obligated to accept changes to proposals based on a majority input, or anything else.

It is common for federal regulatory agencies to explain why they did or did not revise a proposal based on formal comments. Recall the discussion about the creation of LSA in the final ruling published in the Federal Register. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2004/07/27/04-16577/certification-of-aircraft-and-airmen-for-the-operation-of-light-sport-aircraft


BJC
 
Last edited:

BBerson

Light Plane Philosopher
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
15,350
Location
Port Townsend WA
The burden should first be on the FAA to provide evidence for the need for removing existing freedoms.
The FAA failed to do that with the Light Sport rule, in link above.
The FAA simply said it would be inappropriate to continue to allow heavy and two seat aircraft without certification. No evidence was provided of any problems caused because of the weight of the aircraft in the previous years when operated within the exemption rules.
If those existing exemption weight rules were ignored in the past, the proper remedy is enforcement in individual cases. Much like speeding rules on highways and every other federal rule. Not the wholesale destruction of the ultralight industry as occurred. The FAA rejected USUA and went with almost everything EAA wanted. Paul Poberezny was pushing for ultralight certification as early as 1984 in his columns. I just read about that today in the archive.
 
Last edited:

pwood66889

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
1,952
Location
Sopchoppy, Florida, USA
From the EAA on that proposal today:
"EAA is in the process of dissecting the pieces of this NPRM, as they affect both
manned aircraft and the traditional model community. More information and specific
guidance on how to appropriately respond to this proposed rule will be provided soon,
to ensure all voices are heard in a manner that will have the most impactful outcome
on the decision-making process."
They want it extended past 60 days, and for over 300 pages I agree!
 

Bille Floyd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2019
Messages
529
Per the document - The FAA is planning on outsourcing this whole thing.

I bet you a Zukker that someone has the resources to track all of this.;):oops:

There will also be an ASTM, or similar, group set up to craft the standards.
YEP -- and that would be the NSA ; I worked for them
in the early 70's. Google and facebook, are NOT the highest intelligence
gathering organization's, in the world (.)

9/11/01 was the onset , (under the pretense for: "the war on Terror")
giving permission for that agency, to do Domestic intelligence gathering
on USA citizens . That agency is More than equipped , to identify
and triangulate, the source of transmission, needed to fly an FPV
vehicle ; and they also have the capability to identify potential
users of such a devise , (before it ever even gets in the air)
but i ain't telling Ya how !


Fire fighting aircraft, grounded by drones , even the ones that fly
autonomously, can be tracked (with EASE) ; and if the fines AND jail-time
were large enough , (then people would not wanna do that anymore).

Here's an example why people don't care :

Texting while driving : Big fines , when caught , would limit the number
of people doing it ; but the fines aren't Big enough !

Bille
 
Last edited:

Bille Floyd

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2019
Messages
529
Wow, the FAA is pissing off a wholeeee lot of people.
...
And why do Ya think , that could have happened ?
Could it possibility have bin because of those Yahoo's
who think it was funny, to post a shot of a drone, flying
over a passenger jet ? Or maybe , grounding fire fighters
from dropping water on forest fires ? Did you think this
type of total disregard for peoples safety , was gonna just
go on forever ; without some serious repercussions ?

And then there is Amazon :
their rich enough to buy , ((ALL)) the airspace in the USA ;
and their lawyers are going to use those near mishaps , as
evidence for controlling that airspace. Once that land-Grab
has bin made ; next up will be to get rid of all those Hang gliders
Paragliders , sailplanes, and ultra-Lights , and eventually
GA aviation altogether. Those Amazon packages of chineese
junk, being delivered on time; are WAY more important than
the people getting in the way or their flight paths.

If there is anyone on this forum that really wants to
do something about this situation of our RC airspace
getting locked down ; there is only ONE voice that can
actually react in a positive way , and that would be the AMA.
If you care , the AMA has the lawyers and money to put
up a good fight ; so please join this club , and make your
voice be seen.


Academy of Model Airplanes
https://www.modelaircraft.org/

Bille
 

BBerson

Light Plane Philosopher
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
15,350
Location
Port Townsend WA
Not just US, Canada arrested an exec from Huawei:
" US officials have said in the past that Huawei, the telecommunications company, and other Chinese companies could pose a security threat."
 

Hephaestus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
2,338
Location
YMM
Not just US, Canada arrested an exec from Huawei:
" US officials have said in the past that Huawei, the telecommunications company, and other Chinese companies could pose a security threat."
*cough* That **** huawei executive was arrested by Canada because the USofA had an arrest warrant out for her. See the extradition gong show for details... lol
 

lr27

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
3,822
The thing that gets me is that there are billions of birds in the USA, and they fly every day. Some are quite large, and some fly quite high. I haven't flown much, and I've never seen anything RC anywhere near our altitude, but I've seen a hawk from pretty close at 3,000 feet or so. Any excuse for going after my RC gliders that invokes safety is completely bogus. BTW, that 400 foot radius is around 33 wingspans for one of my models.
 

pictsidhe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
8,812
Location
North Carolina
Huawei and DJI are being targeted for political and commercial reasons. Anyone who knows anything about IT would realise that there is absolutely no way in a very hot place that all those DJI drones would be sending their pictures back to China without someone noticing the traffic.
Yes, they can and no doubt have been used for espionage, by individuals. It doesn't matter who makes them...
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
9,874
Location
USA.
The thing that gets me is that there are billions of birds in the USA, and they fly every day. Some are quite large, and some fly quite high. I haven't flown much, and I've never seen anything RC anywhere near our altitude, but I've seen a hawk from pretty close at 3,000 feet or so. Any excuse for going after my RC gliders that invokes safety is completely bogus. BTW, that 400 foot radius is around 33 wingspans for one of my models.

I have seen hawks at 8,000 ft AGL.
 

lr27

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
3,822
If we can believe Wikipedia, canadian geese have been sighted at 29,000 feet! I'll admit I'm skeptical. Apparently four figure altitudes are more common. OTOH, bar headed geese migrate over the Himalayas, though I guess the FAA doesn't have to worry about them.

I think a goose at 29,000 feet would be frozen, and capable of destroying almost any aircraft. ;-)
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
15,821
Location
Memphis, TN
When I worked for a regional airline, one of our turbo props hit a flock of geese at about 17,000. Broke one of the left engine mounts off the nacelle and cratered all the leading edges. They were all scrapped but one. Radome totally gone. Out of curiosity we tried to knock some dents out. With a sledgehammer. Got it to move about 1/2 inch. A couple of us tried. Seen some others.
 

Pops

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
9,874
Location
USA.
I have said this before, but the strangest thing I have seen at altitude, don't remember the altitude for sure, but heading west in Iowa on nice bumpy VFR day so maybe 4500 or 6500 ft. Looked like a huge flock of birds ahead, then I was dodging corn shucks and stocks from a dust devil that had picked up the corn debris after the corn fields had been cut.

Had to "duck" to miss hawks many times at 3000-4000ft. Have had one bird strike. Flying an Ercoupe and hit a small bird like a sparrow with the prop.
 
Last edited:
Top