[NSRCA-discussion] Update - UAS Registration Frequently Asked Questions | AMA Government Relations Blog

Sat Jan 16 01:07:12 AKST 2016

Yes, just don’t ask and don’t tell…

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of John Pavlick via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 7:33 PM
To: 'General pattern discussion' <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Update - UAS Registration Frequently Asked Questions | AMA Government Relations Blog

And to that end I PROMISE not to shoot anyone unless they actually break into my house. Now is it OK if I buy some 30 round mag’s for my AR-15? LOL

John Pavlick

Cell: 203-417-4971

Integrated Development Services

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ed Alt via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 7:09 PM
To: Dave Lockhart
Cc: General pattern discussion
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Update - UAS Registration Frequently Asked Questions | AMA Government Relations Blog

But Dave, did you like your doctor?  The promise was "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor".

On Jan 15, 2016, at 7:06 PM, Dave Lockhart <davel322 at comcast.net <mailto:davel322 at comcast.net> > wrote:

I have lots of video promising I can keep my doctor……

From: NSRCA-discussion [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org] On Behalf Of Ed Alt via NSRCA-discussion
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2016 6:42 PM
To: Peter Vogel <vogel.peter at gmail.com <mailto:vogel.peter at gmail.com> >; John Gayer <jgghome at comcast.net <mailto:jgghome at comcast.net> >; NSRCA List <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> >
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Update - UAS Registration Frequently Asked Questions | AMA Government Relations Blog

Anyone get that on video?  It's just hearsay until they put it into their regulations.  Meanwhile, we're signing up to a promise not to exceed 400'.  It would be nice to have that video for the trial.  lol

  _____  

Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:39:07 -0800
To: jgghome at comcast.net <mailto:jgghome at comcast.net> ; nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 
Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Update - UAS Registration Frequently Asked Questions | AMA Government Relations Blog
From: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 

Yep.  This was brought up directly with the FAA guy at the AMA Expo, he indicated that they got the 400' thing wrong and will be working to clarify their guidance.  The guidance on the web site right now is for people not flying under an approved set of rules from a community based organization like the AMA.

Peter+

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 3:32 PM, John Gayer via NSRCA-discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> wrote:

This is what the AMA says about the 400 foot barrier on the FAQs page:

Q: Am I permitted to fly above 400 feet? What if I had to check a box saying otherwise on the federal registration website?

A: Yes. AMA members who abide by the AMA Safety Code, which permits flights above 400 feet under appropriate circumstances, and are protected by the Special Rule for Model Aircraft under the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act. Checking the box on the federal registration webpage signifies an understanding of the 400 foot guideline. This is an important safety principle that all UAS operators need to be aware of, and is the same guideline established in AC 91-57 published in 1981. However, the placement of this guideline on the FAA website is intended as an educational piece and more specifically intended for those operating outside of AMA’s safey program.  We have been in discussions with the FAA about this point and the agency has indicted that it will be updating its website in the next week to make clear that this altitude guideline is not intended to supplant the guidance and safety procedures established in AMA’s safety program.

Sounds clear, right? No 400 foot barrier need apply.
However, the following is what you have to "read, understand and follow", according to the FAA.

Acknowledgement of Safety Guidance

*	I will fly below 400 feet
*	I will fly within visual line of sight
*	I will be aware of FAA airspace requirements:  <http://www.faa.gov/go/uastfr> www.faa.gov/go/uastfr
*	I will not fly directly over people
*	I will not fly over stadiums and sports events
*	I will not fly near emergency response efforts such as fires
*	I will not fly near aircraft, especially near airports
*	I will not fly under the influence

 <http://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/model_aircraft_operators/> Learn More

[ ] I have read, understand and intend to follow the safety guidance.

Under the "learn more" link, we find the following:

Model Aircraft Operations Limits

According to the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 as (1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use; (2) the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based 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; (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…with prior notice of the operation; and (6) the aircraft is flown within visual line sight of the operator.

*	 <http://www.faa.gov/exit/?pageName=More%20information%20about%20safety%20and%20training%20guidelines&pgLnk=http://www.modelaircraft.org/> More information about safety and training guidelines
*	 <http://www.faa.gov/exit/?pageName=Visit%20knowbeforeyoufly.org&pgLnk=http://www.knowbeforeyoufly.org/> Visit knowbeforeyoufly.org

This implies that the 400 foot barrier is not a limit for model aircraft and also refers you back to the AMA FAQs above.  Since the "learn more" link eventually refers you back to the AMA position on 400 feet under the "more info about safety"  link, it very fuzzily appears to be supporting the position that we can still fly pattern without lying to the FAA even though we appear to be agreeing to such a limit in the "Acknowledgement".

Guess I'll register.

On 1/15/2016 3:56 PM, Patternpilot One via NSRCA-discussion wrote:

Here is what I got from Mark Radcliff just after  midnight Monday morning.

He was at the Expo.  It has been posted all over Facebook.

http://amablog.modelaircraft.org/amagov/2016/01/11/update-uas-registration-frequently-asked-questions/ 

Sa.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

_______________________________________________
NSRCA-discussion mailing list
NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 
http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

-- 

Director, Fixed Wing Flight Training

Santa Clara County Model Aircraft Skypark

Associate Vice President, Academy of Model Aeronautics District X

Treasurer, National Society of Radio Control Aerobatics (NSRCA)

<image001.jpg><image002.jpg>

_______________________________________________ NSRCA-discussion mailing list NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org <mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>  http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20160116/76f5f9e2/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 735 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20160116/76f5f9e2/attachment.png>