Low Altitude legislation

[RaWine]

I've read some of the threads here just to get some answers to particular questions. But what I wonder is, is will there ever be, or is there ever a chance we could get a low altitude break for our Sparks and other drones of lighter weight..

If I'm under 30 meters or under, am I really a significant threat to airspace given a reasonable distance from air and heliports? Is 5 miles diameter overkill?

I can actually do quite a few photo shots that I like. What about 20 meters? Is that still a problem?

Why can't it be legal to fly the Spark as high as you can throw a small stone and as legal as breathing? Why does anyone have to control that part of airspace especially or even a need to know?. The last bit I would argue to the death, that any answer other than very close quarter flying in forbidden areas actually causes a problem other than noise.

 

[RaWine]

I think I'll amend my post -- I think "no notify flying" elevaton should be possible at at least half the distance you could shoot a rock straight up with a slingshot within 2000 ft distance of anything probably. I don't know exactly what that distance is.

edit -- I will add, I still think it's reasonable not to fly a Spark over a crowd, at almost any height -- unless everyone has signed permission perhaps and willing to be maimed.

 

[RaWine]

...adding one more thought--- regulations started in an era before all these smaller flying machines existed.

That's partially why I think all was designed without as much flexibility as would be nice IMO.

 

[beachcombing]

I've read some of the threads here just to get some answers to particular questions. But what I wonder is, is will there ever be, or is there ever a chance we could get a low altitude break for our Sparks and other drones of lighter weight..

If I'm under 30 meters or under, am I really a significant threat to airspace given a reasonable distance from air and heliports? Is 5 miles diameter overkill?

I can actually do quite a few photo shots that I like. What about 20 meters? Is that still a problem?

Why can't it be legal to fly the Spark as high as you can throw a small stone and as legal as breathing? Why does anyone have to control that part of airspace especially or even a need to know?. The last bit I would argue to the death, that any answer other than very close quarter flying in forbidden areas actually causes a problem other than noise.

What country are you flying in?

 

[RaWine]

What country are you flying in?

US,

I was just thinking the other day, most of trees in my area are around 100ft. Why the heck should I be worried about aircraft or anything below that? Never once seen even a Cessna weaving in and out below the treeline. Helicopters are moving pretty slow when they are getting within range.

Although I can totally understand why regs go all the way to the ground for large aircraft. Not so much for the Spark.

 

[Pappy]

I would like for the FAA to finally tackle the 0-400 foot airspace. In general manned aircraft is allowed to fly down to 500'. This gives a 100' buffer between manned aircraft and UAV's. There are exceptions, see section 91.119 in https://www.faa.gov/about/office_or...re/media/FAA_Guide_to_Low-Flying_Aircraft.pdf . These regs were probably written pre UAV days and need to be updated as well.

There needs to be a clear separation between manned and unmanned aircraft, the only exception is if both manned and unmanned aircraft are flying under ATC in designated areas. The FAA has never declared where private airspace ends and public airspace begins. Declaring this would help on the clashes between those on the ground concerned about privacy and drone pilots. By reducing or eliminating the number of low altitude flying exceptions for manned aircraft would reduce the probability of collisions between manned and unmanned aircraft.

In short the FAA needs to come up with clear regulations to maintain separation between manned and unmanned aircraft and to define where public airspace ends (near ground) and private airspace begins. As a UAV pilot I should have some reasonable expectation that the airspace I'm flying in is reserved for just other UAV pilots only.

 

[beachcombing]

... As a UAV pilot I should have some reasonable expectation that the airspace I'm flying in is reserved for just other UAV pilots only.

Not likely to EVER happen. As a UAV pilot, you are required to see and avoid all other air traffic at all times. UAVs will likely never "have the right of way" in the airspace.

 

[Teq]

100 ft is probably still too high for an exemption near airports. I would like to see thirty feet however since that clears a two story house and most power poles. I would settle for twenty five. I find it frustrating when I can’t even take off and fly just in my back yard (or house - because I get a gps lock indoors).
I’m actually outside of the red zone but the area of location uncertainty often overlaps the red area.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I would like for the FAA to finally tackle the 0-400 foot airspace. In general manned aircraft is allowed to fly down to 500'. This gives a 100' buffer between manned aircraft and UAV's. There are exceptions, see section 91.119 in https://www.faa.gov/about/office_or...re/media/FAA_Guide_to_Low-Flying_Aircraft.pdf . These regs were probably written pre UAV days and need to be updated as well.

There needs to be a clear separation between manned and unmanned aircraft, the only exception is if both manned and unmanned aircraft are flying under ATC in designated areas. The FAA has never declared where private airspace ends and public airspace begins. Declaring this would help on the clashes between those on the ground concerned about privacy and drone pilots. By reducing or eliminating the number of low altitude flying exceptions for manned aircraft would reduce the probability of collisions between manned and unmanned aircraft.

In short the FAA needs to come up with clear regulations to maintain separation between manned and unmanned aircraft and to define where public airspace ends (near ground) and private airspace begins. As a UAV pilot I should have some reasonable expectation that the airspace I'm flying in is reserved for just other UAV pilots only.

First - there is no such thing as "private and public airspace." It's all the same. As a UAV pilot the only thing you could expect is knowing that you are playing in the NAS dominated by manned aircraft and you need to stay out of the way, PERIOD! I suspect you're operating as a hobbyist and the blunt truth is the Feds are not going to overhaul the NAS just to support your hobby. As far as 400' - its a recommendation if you're a hobbyist. There is nothing in 336 or FAR 101.41 limiting your altitude with the exception of staying out of controlled airspace unless you have authorization (Class E). That's mentioned in a 2014 policy letter written by the former FAA Administrator and as far as I know that policy is still in effect.

 

[limesqueezy]

So, even if you're more than five miles away from the closest airport but you're in Class D airspace you need a clearance to fly below 400 AGL? Or you need to find another site?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

So, even if you're more than five miles away from the closest airport but you're in Class D airspace you need a clearance to fly below 400 AGL? Or you need to find another site?

The outer radius of class D is variable, but is generally 4 nautical miles, but to answer your question - yes! You need authorization to fly in any controlled airspace (A,B,C,D and E). Go to pages 15 and 16. As far as I know this is still policy.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/model_aircraft_spec_rule.pdf