250g Limit... where is the science?

[dryhiker]

Oh, one other thing. I was complaining to my daughter about the FAA rules.

She is a private pilot and works for the Cirrus aircraft co. She listened to my complaints and said that she has been flying at altitude (I don't remember what altitude), and has flown by a drone at her altitude. Clearly there is a problem to be solved. I can only hope for some relief for LOS pilots.

Andy.

 

[bisco]

there's nothing happening here yet. transponders kick in somewhere down the road.

look at the linear actuators horizon uses on line in their umx planes. something like the cub s2 or turbo timber. the board includes rx/esc/servos, very light and efficient.

the biggest prolem is, the lighter you go, the less wind you can fly in. maybe a nice jet or fighter that you can fly really fast would help, and sunrise is usually good.

 

[SSgt Duramax]

Oh, one other thing. I was complaining to my daughter about the FAA rules.

She is a private pilot and works for the Cirrus aircraft co. She listened to my complaints and said that she has been flying at altitude (I don't remember what altitude), and has flown by a drone at her altitude. Clearly there is a problem to be solved. I can only hope for some relief for LOS pilots.

Andy.

How would a transponder fix that? I have a buddy that is a C-130 instructor pilot and he has tales of drone strikes and laser strikes.

Both are probably punk kids who dont realize the lives and high value equipmemt at risk or people with nefarious intentions that dont care.

Thing is, there are already rules against that, and I would bet that 99.9% of near miss incidents are currently a result of illegal drone operation.

Don't get me wrong, it would be a blast in my night fury to climb up and "intercept" a helicopter or a cessna and follow it a couple of miles before returning home. I just cant and know the potential danger, so I wont.

So I guess my point is, the people who already knowingly break 400 feet and go play in "real" air traffic probably wont install said transponder or will disable or alter it to feign compliance.

Now if they were to say for instance "if you want to operate your craft over 400 feet or beyond LOS you need a transponder" that would be different. But that isnt what they are saying. Actually, a transponder seems like a great way to get in trouble for accidentally breaking 400 feet.


Now if there were some type of self enforcement like HAMs do, that would be different, but I dont see how that is applicable, and I dont see my self karening out other enthisiasts unless they are just being obnoxious idiots.

 

[Mr NCT]

Don't get me wrong, it would be a blast in my night fury to climb up and "intercept" a helicopter or a cessna and follow it a couple of miles before returning home. I just cant and know the potential danger, so I wont.

As much as your night fury looks like an armed drone you could get a very interesting response.

 

[SSgt Duramax]

As much as your night fury looks like an armed drone you could get a very interesting response.

I need to print some hellfires for it still.

You know, if they added adsb tracking to the b4ufly app (i downloaded it with good intentions but used it once after my flying place was declared ok) it would alert you if there was a craft at an altitude potentially less than 400 feet heading your direction and you could act accordingly.

 

[Monte.C]

.

 

[quorneng]

I look at it as the 250 g limit exists so rather than question why the challenge is what find out what can be done within it.
Not long back the thought of a commercially produced sub 250g FPV quad would have been considered impossible.
Obviously a very light plane has limited wind handling capabilities but it is possible to make quite sophisticated ones, including scale, that work well in the appropriate conditions.
Having "appropriate conditions" applies to all aircraft its just they are more restrictive the lighter the plane is.

 

[dryhiker]

I am used to "appropriate conditions" in Japan for sure! That has meant sunrise for me since I started to fly in 2016. There was a field near me which had a hill covered with trees on one side. Any wind from that direction would tumble over the trees and cause spontaneous aerobatics. In addition, the field was swarmed with kids anytime later than about 6 am. I can find wind-free times to fly and am used to the early mornings. I am working on a plan for sub 100 gram flight. My first try will be to make a 60% Alpha. I did see that there is a 65g UMX plane available, but I want to stay DIY for now. If I succeed at this 100g quest, then sub 250 should be ok when I return to the US!

 

[dryhiker]

Tonight I had some down time and decided to look up the RC regulations at the FAA website. There is a special category of UAS flier called "Recreational" and the rules are reasonable! The two main rules are that you have to have 2 things with you when you fly, a registration certificate, and a certificate that says you past the TRUST test.

I took the TRUST test first. It is free and is an ok test. You can re-do failed questions until you get them right, so it is really there to ensure that you have the knowledge needed. I took it, passing on the first go, and the whole thing took about a half an hour, including going down some of the links to review information. After passing that I saved the TRUST certificate. I will print that out at the next opportunity.

I also registered. The registration is applicable to all of my planes, not just one of them. I will put the number on the planes and will keep the printed cert in my transmitter case.

Oh, the final requirement is to fly in un-restricted airspace (or get authorization). My flying spot is in unrestricted airspace so that means the new regulations will not impact what I have been doing! I am relieved.

There was one additional note in the FAA website, and that is that aircraft should not have been registered in another country. Because Japan is being slow to approve my registration requests, and because I will want to fly those planes in the US, I will probably drop my plan to register in Japan and will switch to sub-100 gram planes here. I am also uncomfortable with the bulk of Japanese regulations such as the need for a safety spotter at all times, Pre-authorization to fly anywhere, and reporting in the event of a crash. It will be very easy for me to violate those requirements so I will probably just opt out and go with the lightweight planes.

I am happy to say that in the US system, being over 250 grams is not a big deal due to the Recreational category.

 

[bisco]

are you saying that in the us you can fly models over 250g in unrestricted airspace just by passing the trust test?

 

[JasonK]

are you saying that in the us you can fly models over 250g in unrestricted airspace just by passing the trust test?

no, you have to past the trust test to fly at all (and you can't actually follow the requirements it poses as there are no CBOs yet), register with the FAA, label your 250+g craft with your registration and still follow all the rules (which will include remote ID when that rolls out)

The 250g limit only impacts if you need to register/put your registration number on the drone and, in the future, if it has to have remote ID on it.

 

[Matthewdupreez]

I need to read it

Being handed this book by a friend at work one day 30 years ago literally changed my life.

 

[Flying Monkey fab]

Tonight I had some down time and decided to look up the RC regulations at the FAA website. There is a special category of UAS flier called "Recreational" and the rules are reasonable! The two main rules are that you have to have 2 things with you when you fly, a registration certificate, and a certificate that says you past the TRUST test.

I took the TRUST test first. It is free and is an ok test. You can re-do failed questions until you get them right, so it is really there to ensure that you have the knowledge needed. I took it, passing on the first go, and the whole thing took about a half an hour, including going down some of the links to review information. After passing that I saved the TRUST certificate. I will print that out at the next opportunity.

I also registered. The registration is applicable to all of my planes, not just one of them. I will put the number on the planes and will keep the printed cert in my transmitter case.

Oh, the final requirement is to fly in un-restricted airspace (or get authorization). My flying spot is in unrestricted airspace so that means the new regulations will not impact what I have been doing! I am relieved.

There was one additional note in the FAA website, and that is that aircraft should not have been registered in another country. Because Japan is being slow to approve my registration requests, and because I will want to fly those planes in the US, I will probably drop my plan to register in Japan and will switch to sub-100 gram planes here. I am also uncomfortable with the bulk of Japanese regulations such as the need for a safety spotter at all times, Pre-authorization to fly anywhere, and reporting in the event of a crash. It will be very easy for me to violate those requirements so I will probably just opt out and go with the lightweight planes.

I am happy to say that in the US system, being over 250 grams is not a big deal due to the Recreational category.

I think you missed a lot of stuff that is in the law but not being enforced yet due to the FAA not having their .... um, stuff.... together. Once things are ready you will either have to fly on a reservation called an FRIA or have a transmitter on each of your sUAS's, both of these choices cascade your requirements to no end.

Here are the coming requirements as they stand today with supposed dates: https://www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/remote_id/fria

 

[BayDesigns]

An interesting thing to consider is that RemoteID will not in any way deal with the issues that the FAA wants to solve. If someone wants to break the rules in the air, that’s not the type of person who will willingly submit to the RID requirement. There’s no enforcement mechanism for the RID requirement, and without RID, there’s no enforcement mechanism for rule breakers, except in the few cases where they would get reported. It’s not as if the FAA is running around with patrol cars trying to catch RC pilots.

 

[JasonK]

An interesting thing to consider is that RemoteID will not in any way deal with the issues that the FAA wants to solve. If someone wants to break the rules in the air, that’s not the type of person who will willingly submit to the RID requirement. There’s no enforcement mechanism for the RID requirement, and without RID, there’s no enforcement mechanism for rule breakers, except in the few cases where they would get reported. It’s not as if the FAA is running around with patrol cars trying to catch RC pilots.

correct.

 

[bisco]

Isn’t it all about drone deliveries?

 

[CappyAmeric]

Isn’t it all about drone deliveries?

Several things at work, driven by government bureaucracy, and ignorance (I know, I repeat myself) . DHS thinks people are going to use drones for nefarious purposes. The issue with that is DHS does not understand that bad actors don't worry about the rules. Also, drone delivery companies want to know that when they are operating they don't hit recreational drones. IOW, the concerns are driven by absolute ignorance, and the decision makers in the FAA seem to be clueless, IMHO.

Think of it like the "gun control" debates: government thinks that laws will keep bad things from happening, instead of understanding that bad people don't care what the law is. Just like a law cannot make guns magically disappear, a law cannot UN-invent the DIY drone. IOW, laws are for the "little people" like us who are just trying to legally navigate the myriad ways our "betters" try and control us.

 

[Piotrsko]

Along those above thoughts, what would prevent me from doing a hazadrous and foolish thing with a flying device in the first place? Placing a stop sign on my residential street has had no effect preventing accidents at that intersection but did stop the neighbors constant whining

 

[bisco]

that's when you need the cops. without enforcement, laws are useless. if the faa doesn't plan an army of electronic police with scales, it's pointless.
at best, they'll proly try to protect important airspace, but unsuccessfully.
in the meantime, they'll catch a few inocents and make an example of them

 

[Flying Monkey fab]

that's when you need the cops. without enforcement, laws are useless. if the faa doesn't plan an army of electronic police with scales, it's pointless.
at best, they'll proly try to protect important airspace, but unsuccessfully.
in the meantime, they'll catch a few inocents and make an example of them

Not necessarily innocents but from what we've seen that's it. Big fine,lots of public shaming,just hoping lots see and are scared.