NTSB Order EA-5730

[Hoss Cain]

FAA Can Make ALL Drone Flights ILLEGAL, Federal C0URT RULES !

NOV 18, 2014

[John Cralley]

Here is a link:

http://www.natlawreview.com/article/faa-can-regulate-and-fine-drone-operators-ntsb-says

[RC Storick]

Here is a link:

http://www.natlawreview.com/article/faa-can-regulate-and-fine-drone-operators-ntsb-says

I told everyone they would lump it all together. he NTSB found that unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) are “aircraft” for purposes of federal regulations because they met both the statutory and regulatory definitions of aircraft. “An aircraft is any device that is used for flight,” the NTSB stated.[1]

 For example, the Board noted that the FAA has adopted specific operating limitations for special types of aircraft – kites, rockets, and moored balloons – while excluding these types from the full set of regulations applicable to aircraft.  The decision could prompt the FAA to take a similar approach for UAS.

Get ready for another fee. Its all about the money Even including kites into the mix ,10 year old Johnny will need a license to fly it. WAKE UP big brother is taking over.

[Tim Wescott]

FAA Can Make ALL Drone Flights ILLEGAL, Federal C0URT RULES !

I'm not sure that the NTSB counts as a "court", here.  Basically, one group of federal bureaucrats has said that another group of federal bureaucrats has authority over this.  That's like your local grade school's vice principal saying that it's OK for the second-grade teacher to spank a child: yes, it's a higher authority, but it's not that much of a higher authority, and it's one that views itself to be on the same team at any rate.

A real court needs to test existing law on two points, I think: one, if the existing laws covering the FAA actually gives them authority over unmanned vehicles, and if so, two, whether Congress has the authority under the constitution to give the FAA that authority.

[John Cralley]

At least the careless and reckless part may end up in Federal Court on appeal.

The Pirker case is headed back to the FAA.  Although the NTSB upheld the FAA’s authority to regulate careless and reckless UAS operations, the Board also remanded the case to the administrative law judge for a determination of whether the operator, in fact, operated the drone in that manner.  In addition, the drone operator could appeal the NTSB’s decision to a U.S. Court of Appeals.

[Douglas Ames]

The way I see it, the FAA isn't going to split the difference between a News Drone flying over an "Event" vs. some teen with a R/C trainer and a GoPro, hellbent on being the first to post a video on YouTube.

[John Rist]

AS noted:
Although the decision is limited to the interpretation of the “careless and reckless” rule, the NTSB provided insight into its thinking on drones.  For example, the Board noted that the FAA has adopted specific operating limitations for special types of aircraft – kites, rockets, and moored balloons – while excluding these types from the full set of regulations applicable to aircraft.  The decision could prompt the FAA to take a similar approach for UAS.

As stated elsewhere (I think) we fall into the kite category.  None of this will affect control line flying.  However we do depend on the RC segment of the hobby for a lot of what we do.  Without them the AMA would go broke.

[Randy Cuberly]

AS noted:
(snip)
As stated elsewhere (I think) we fall into the kite category.  None of this will affect control line flying.  However we do depend on the RC segment of the hobby for a lot of what we do.  Without them the AMA would go broke.

UUUHHHHhh...Well, Maybe!  Or Maybe, we'll just get a lot more CL fliers like it was before R/C took over commercially.
The commercial guys are going to want to sell something...CL supplies and kits might just get a shot in the arm!

Insurance might be a little cheaper also!

Not that I really think anyone is going to do away with R/C.  They will just tax the hell out of it!

Randy Cuberly

[Brett Buck]

I told everyone they would lump it all together. he NTSB found that unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) are “aircraft” for purposes of federal regulations because they met both the statutory and regulatory definitions of aircraft. “An aircraft is any device that is used for flight,” the NTSB stated.[1]

    I would note that RC and FF models meet the definition of flight, and kites and CL models are not "aircraft" by their definition. Again, I wouldn't make any rash claims about how that theory will be applied in practice.

    BTW, I would have to get someone with legal training to read the ruling but the law (not a regulation) also says that the FAA has no authority to regulate model aircraft. That's an actual law. That, too, doesn't seem to matter to many Federal agencies (or the Executive branch) and won't matter unless someone challenges it.

    Brett

[Will Hinton]

Brett makes the most important point here, "unless someone challenges it."  If we stay silent, the agancies will just keep on "regulating" whether what they decide is legal or not.  There isn't one single agancy of any govrnment that won't try to rule that way until challenged.

[Douglas Ames]

There's also that chance that our dues (AMA) will increase to fund the insurance policy for this new type of "R/C model".

It's highly probable that an injury will occur from an errant Drone rather than a fly-away R/C model, only because most models are flown at club fields or open areas.

[Dave_Trible]

I sure think it would be better for AMA to distance itself from the whole quad copter/drone business.  Incidents should be openly condemned and a clear line drawn between 'us' and 'them' and fight any efforts to lump us together.  We can't control that and can't let them drag us all down.  AMA doesn't need this marriage.

Dave

[Tim Wescott]

I sure think it would be better for AMA to distance itself from the whole quad copter/drone business.  Incidents should be openly condemned and a clear line drawn between 'us' and 'them' and fight any efforts to lump us together.  We can't control that and can't let them drag us all down.  AMA doesn't need this marriage.

Dave, I think that you are conflating quad copters with "drones" (however you may be defining that term).

Any model aircraft that can be radio controlled can be made into an autonomous drone.  Fixed wing, rotary wing, quad copter, blimp -- anything.  Period.

Quad copters just happen to be the easiest thing to make into an autonomous drone -- but it's by no means the only thing.  And when you fly them under visual contact, with a transmitter in your hand, they're basically just a different kind of helicopter.

Given how much fun people seem to have flying them, and how much cheaper and simpler they are compared to helicopters (at least if you don't look inside the electronics), I don't think you're going to get very far trying to tell the AMA that they can support any kind of RC except the kind that happens to have a few propellers pointed up.

[Dave_Trible]

Yes Tim I did conflate that some but not quite like the public and law makers will conflate us with them after a great tragedy happens.  There is I think a distinction between what we do (hobby) vs. toys vs. business interests (sports, news, security, farming , etc., drones).  The AMA should stay in their corner and let whatever befalls the rest to happen without involvement.  They didn't align with the R/C car crowd or ultra light aviation.  Better not to run with herd going over the cliff.

Dave

I should add..you are right.  Nobody at AMA is going to listen. 

[Mike Keville]

There's also that chance that our dues (AMA) will increase to fund the insurance policy for this new type of "R/C model"....

============================================================

If that should happen, I'm outta' there.

[Greg McCoy]

Do these toys have any AMA information or application inserted in the box?

[john e. holliday]

All I know is that when all model plane flying was shut down at Shawnee Mission Park several years ago.  I was the only one allowed to fly a model plane.  Showed the patrol man the lines and the safety thong.   It was demonstrated that even if I turned loose of the handle the plane would still be only so far from me as it crashed.   The radio guys now get to fly in the designated area now with strict rules for flying.   The one day I stopped by to watch I was glad I don't fly radio there any more.  Never seen such careless use of the equipment and planes.   I also don't know how they keep going as I tried to talk to a couple of the people and was ignored.  Guess I have been black balled by the radio club.  Far cry from when I first joined the club as a beginner in RC.