Slashdot Mirror

No, this says aircraft without engine driven electrical systems are exempt from even some of the areas I mentioned (e.g. above 10,000 MSL). See FAR 92.215 if you want the exact wording: http://www.flightsimaviation.c.... All (part 91) aircraft aren't required to have transponders unless they are in one of the four areas listed above... aircraft without electrical systems are also exempt from a few more. Many GA aircraft don't even have transponders installed.

You're not quite right for fixed wing, but more importantly for the discussion at hand helicopters have an exemption in FAR 91.119.

That DC10 was designed to hit geese without sustaining damage. You think a 1 kg drone is going to do anything?

Er, no. That's just untrue. See the relevant regulations. Depending on the bird size, the engine has to either not explode or catch fire (for large birds), or continue to operate at 75% power for between 5 and 20 minutes (small and medium birds, flocks of smaller birds) before safe shutdown.

"Doesn't explode or require immediate shutdown" isn't the same as not "sustaining damage". And even though the aircraft would likely survive ingesting a drone doesn't mean it would be good to lose a firefighting aircraft for the time it would take to rebuild or replace the damaged engine.

Another reply has already pointed out the "navigable airspace" limitation. The specific FAA rule is FAR Part 91.119 Minimum Safe Altitudes. Basically 500 feet everywhere, and 1,000 feet over "populated areas".

Back in 1981 the FAA addressed RC operators with Advisory Circular 91-57. It requires RC operators stay under 400', remain in line of sight, and coordinate with an airport if they are within 3 miles of the airport (which is where planes may be under those minimums due to take offs and landings.

This set of rules basically insures vertical separation of RC operators and "real" planes. It's worked for over 30 years, quite nicely. In fact the FAA is quite happy with this for "drone" (really RC quadcopter) operators. Buy one, fly it over your house within the rules, take a video and post it on YouTube for your "hobby" and the FAA is perfectly ok with it, and won't give you a hard time.

Rather, the FAA is drawing a different line here. They have a long history of distinguishing between commercial and private operations, and have different regulations for both. They have generally held in the past that "all commercial operators must be licensed", which in the context of real planes makes perfect sense. But with these new quadcopters this rule has gone screwy. If you take the same video from the last paragraph and provide it to your realtor to help sell your house, suddenly you are a "commercial" operator and can't operate without an FAA License, and oh by the way they have no procedure to license RC operators right now so you can't get one, but you can ask for a one off waver, it may be approved in a few months.

And that's what is stupid here. If it's a RC device, operated by a human, under 400' and in line of site, they should stay out of it. Commercial or hobby shouldn't matter.

The FAA has authority over all "flights" inter- and intrastate. Flights being by ultralight, glider, airplane, rotorcraft, lighter than air and several others that do not include kites and model airplanes. If you want to pilot a hot air balloon from your yard to your neighbors yard you have a pile of FAA regulations to adhere to starting with medical certification. The pilot certification is exclusively the domain of the FAA, there is no state that issues pilot certificates.

If your state says airplanes can't fly over someone's property without permission, it's void. It's no different than the concept of mineral rights which you do not automatically own either, just because you own surface rights. Imagine how impossible it would be for pilots to get the permission of land owners to overfly their property. This is the regulation that applies to property overflights. A flight in a sparsely populated area can't operate closer than 500 feet to a person or property.

A drone outside your window is a nuisance, so at least police power should surely apply to that.

Too noisy was not just a Boeing claim. Early flights were not required to decelerate below mach 1 before reaching land and they sent sonic booms up and down the coast.

Then they stopped doing that and they stopped being "too noisy". Calling them "too noisy" today is incorrect.

Eventually, every single Concorde route required subsonic descents and approaches for this very reason.

Uhhh, more like they required subsonic descents and approaches so they could be handled with normal traffic, and to obey federal law that has been around for a very long time. 250 knots below 10,000 feet, and 200 knots below 2500 AGL.

The only exemptions are "approval of the Administrator" (unlikely), and "minimum safe airspeed", which certainly isn't above mach 1 for the SST.

I would think if you wanted to park a plane in your yard you can probably put whatever weapons on it you want, but if you want to be allowed to take off, well then the FAA might have a few things to say about it.

Would you care to find what the FAA says about it and point it out for me? Because in 19 years of flying, I've never seen the rule that prohibits me from carrying a shuriken, a knife or even a gun of some kind in my own airplane while flying. Even when flying out of public airports (which, in all honesty, is all I've ever flown out of).

No, the FCC ban has been in place for a long time -- at least since the late 80's, even before cell phones became ubiquitous.

And to clarify, the FAA doesn't completely ban cell-phones. The aircraft operator has the option to allow:

Any other portable electronic device that the part 119 certificate holder has determined will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used

If you read the entire regulation, you'll see that almost ANY electronic device is banned unless the aircraft operator has made this determination.

The FAA does, unless the mask can be placed on the pilots face, sealed, and supplying oxygen within 5 seconds.

However, wearing a mask is required if either pilot leaves the cockpit (for a bio-break) above approximately 25,000 MSL.

The rules are here:

http://www.flightsimaviation.com/data/FARS/part_12 1-333.html