SFAR 107 what you might expect

Patrick Egan has some comments about the upcoming SFAR 107.

Highlights include:-

VLOS = 400’ AGL out to 1500’ laterally.

Small UAS handbook

Manufacturers operations and maintenance manuals

Operations only allowed 5 miles from charted airports. The other bins or “types” will find themselves flying further away.

Written permission from airport manager for operations closer than 5 miles (I suppose that there’ll still be no operating in Class B)

Ground School

Pilot certification (Pilot’s license)

Observer certification

Class 2 medicals for both the pilot and observer

Electronic position and altitude reporting (Self certification okay here.)

No autonomous aids (but not here.)

Aircraft certification, PIC (Pilot in Command) will declare

Some sort of automated web-tool to be developed for registration

Data collection/capture (TBD)

SFAR standards still to be developed by ASTM and other standards groups (another story all together)

And for the nonaffiliated RC hobbyists, you will basically be at the mercy of the ATO as they will be writing the regulations for you.

* This list is meant to demonstrate the tone of SFAR as we’ve not had the privilege of laying eyes on the chiseled granite.

His full article here

No doubt as ever fur and handbags will fly now.

I disagree Rory, emergency services in the UK are training their operators, not a full PPL but courses for the airframe type and autopilot type, In fact the autopilot airframe and GCS are being considered one licenced unit. At the moment its a bit of a fudge but following Australias example, they will have their written CPL(U) exams sorted next year the UK CAA will shortly have a proper defined CPL(U).

As autonomy increases and authorities start getting safety case data fears will be allayed and things relaxed, remember this is the first iteration of the regs. The amazing thing is that the USA has taken so long.

Normal model flying might yet be affected but I almost think that as people have just said it will never happen and they can't do that, they will deserve any restrictions that might come in.

Modern radios with two way telemetry are wonderful for the FAA et al they can now say make your radios failsafe if the aircraft goes above 400'

John is partly right about the laws being forgotten in the future. Obviously the danger now lies in the fact that it will create a whole lot of new rules for people to break and be charged with. Especially if the hit someone or something in the process.

I wonder what happens if you have a flyaway the airframe goes beyond VLOS and hits something all by itself.

I'm going to stop commenting on this as I don't live over there thank goodness ;-)

You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones

Comments

Patrick Egan November 19, 2010 at 8:17am

COA's require a PPL. That's why most police departments feel like they get burned. Yes, AV is working the process like a rib bone and their guys only do a abbreviated ground school. They're lobbying for a bigger envelope and the training and manuals to go with it. In my estimation, there will be a big backlash as first responders will have a hard time justifying the expense vs use. If they can change the Byrne grants so they don't exclude purchasing aircraft AV hit's the jackpot.
T3

Rory Paul November 18, 2010 at 10:31pm

Sorry Gary we are basically agreeing with each other . The "license" requirement listed in the sUAS Arc recommendations if a full PPL to operate a 4lb sUAS. The cost and hours alone will make that prohibitive for any type of large scale adoption of sUAS. I think that there will be a certification or license process which will require operators to learn a subset of the PPL and I think that this initially will be offered through the large manufactures as a means of gaining a captive market.
Moderator

Gary Mortimer November 18, 2010 at 9:32pm

I disagree Rory, emergency services in the UK are training their operators, not a full PPL but courses for the airframe type and autopilot type, In fact the autopilot airframe and GCS are being considered one licenced unit. At the moment its a bit of a fudge but following Australias example, they will have their written CPL(U) exams sorted next year the UK CAA will shortly have a proper defined CPL(U).

As autonomy increases and authorities start getting safety case data fears will be allayed and things relaxed, remember this is the first iteration of the regs. The amazing thing is that the USA has taken so long.

Normal model flying might yet be affected but I almost think that as people have just said it will never happen and they can't do that, they will deserve any restrictions that might come in.

Modern radios with two way telemetry are wonderful for the FAA et al they can now say make your radios failsafe if the aircraft goes above 400'

John is partly right about the laws being forgotten in the future. Obviously the danger now lies in the fact that it will create a whole lot of new rules for people to break and be charged with. Especially if the hit someone or something in the process.

I wonder what happens if you have a flyaway the airframe goes beyond VLOS and hits something all by itself.

I'm going to stop commenting on this as I don't live over there thank goodness ;-)
T3

Rory Paul November 18, 2010 at 8:31pm

This is basically the recommendations of the sUAS Arc. I can tell you now that the pilots certification is going to be dropped as it screws people like AV as it will not let them sell into fire and police on mass. If you need a pilot's license to fly a sUAS at 4lbs their potential market is shot. I suspect that they will object strenuously and come up with an sUAS pilots cert that they administer.
John Hestness November 18, 2010 at 6:18pm

Baseballs, rogue waves, trains, hurricanes, fireworks, volcanos, 400 ton aircraft flying over cities, tornados, lightning, guns, nukes, automobiles, meteors, bridges, floods, how bad are balsa or foam model planes? And if it has a guidance system or a camera is it worse?
Joel November 18, 2010 at 5:36pm

UAV's are a risk. But I don't know of many incidents yet even though there aren't really any laws(hopefully they will keep this in mind). But I am worried that they will restrict it so that it cannot be used by armatures. I hope that i'm wrong....
John Hestness November 18, 2010 at 5:29pm

This reminds me exactly of the state of modems about thirty years ago. At that time you were not allowed to hook up a phone jack or plug in your own phone to the telephone network, and don't even think about plugging in some new fangled computer whatchamacallit.

I bought my first computer modem from a fellow computer club member, but I had to go to the back door after dark with cash, and he gave me a brown paper bag of parts. I swear I am not making this up. This is how out of touch the laws were then and apparently now too.

Well those laws were changed or forgotten a couple of years after it was very clear that nobody was paying any attention to them. I am pretty sure that we are seeing a replay of that all over again. By the time these new regs are passed they will be meaningless.
Joel November 18, 2010 at 2:37pm

I am speechless...

This reply was deleted.