Well it's begun and this case will have an impact on all of you in the USA in one way or another. For those that did not hear about it Trappy is facing a $10,000 dollar fine.
The Complaint alleges that on or about October 17, 2011, Mr. Pirker (a Swiss citizen residing overseas) was the “pilot in command” of a “Ritewing Zephyr powered glider aircraft” in Charlottesville, Virginia. Compl. It next asserts that “[t]he aircraft referenced above is an Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS).” As a matter of undisputed public record, a Ritewing Zephyr is in fact a popular type of radio-control model airplane made of a kind of styrofoam and weighs approximately four and a half pounds once equipped with batteries, radio, motor, and other components.
The Administrator alleges that Mr. Pirker’s Zephyr was equipped with a camera, that Mr. Pirker operated the model for the purpose of supplying aerial video and photographs of the University ofVirginia campus to an advertising agency, and that he was compensated by that firm for the video and photographs. 4-6. The Complaint notes that Mr. Pirker does not hold an FAA pilot’s certificate.
The balance of the Complaint sets out a list of allegedly dangerous characteristics of Mr.Pirker’s operation of his model airplane on October 17, 2011. It alleges that he “operated the abovedescribed aircraft at extremely low altitudes over vehicles, buildings, people, streets, and structures.” More specifically, it alleges, inter alia, that he operated the model airplane “through a UVA tunnel containing moving vehicles,” “below tree top level over a tree lined walkway,” “within approximately 15 feet of a UVA statue,” “within approximately 50 feet of railway tracks,” “within approximately 25 feet of
numerous UVA buildings,” and “directly towards a two story UVA building below rooftop level and made an abrupt climb in order to avoid hitting the building.”
Patrick Egan of sUAS News was given access to documents today and he wrote:-
Without a doubt, there is a lot riding on this issue for both the community and FAA. As we have seen in the past, people start to line up on those different sides of those issues with independent views on how the law works, what image the community should portray. Whatever the eventual outcome, we should at the very least have a better understanding and some clarification on how the process is supposed to work, and discern where exactly the U.S. RPAS community stands.
More at http://www.suasnews.com/2013/10/25375/trappys-defence-moves-to-dismiss/
Trappy, along with Chris Anderson is a speaker next week at the Drones and Aerial Robotics Conference
Comments
I agree that this motion should be required reading before anyone posts here:
It addresses allot of the issues that people are arguing about and refutes the FAA's position extremely well!
http://www.kramerlevin.com/files/upload/FAA-v-Pirker.pdf
Well done and absolutely brilliant!
Without getting to the specifics of this case...
Just because the FAA says something or makes a guidance policy does NOT make that statement or policy law, it is a guidance or recommendation only and has no more force than you or I telling someone not to fly.
The US government make the laws not the FAA.
Out of interest, how do I, as a law abiding citizen comply with
"Do I need to get approval from the FAA to fly a model aircraft for recreation?
No. FAA guidance does not address size of the model aircraft. FAA guidance says that model aircraft flights should be kept below 400 feet above ground level (AGL), "
I fly RC aircraft every weekend, none of them are fitted with an altimeter, I can estimate my height but I cannot prove it. so how do I prove myself innocent. Another totally un-enforcable guidance statement.
Actually, I do not know too many people in Charlottesville who are military or retired. From my experience of growing up and spending my whole life in Charlottesvile and the surrounding areas, the majority retirees (my grandparents included) live in either the beautiful areas surrounding Charlottesville or the multitude of rest homes, well outside UVA. Its the people who refuse to retire that cause the problems ;)
This isn't surprising. Charlottesville is one of the most affluent areas of VA. Besides the university, they're mainly known for Monticello and expensive BnBs. Lots of retirees here, and I suspect, lots of them are prior service officers. VA is HEAVY will military and fed govt. employees, always has been. They're only about 100 miles from DC. If there is one thing VA loves to do, it's regulate.
Even in the Tidewater(W'burg), I and had a local 'official' insist I was breaking the law flying in a public/county park(last week). He literally started to site the regulation. I've actually flown here on/off for 6 months and had already checked with the park office. He later came back and said it was allowed after all. Mind you, this was a Tuesday at around 2pm. . . no one was in the park.
It's odd, but R/C in general, seems to bring this out in folks. They don't know for sure, but they think this HAS to be illegal somehow. I can absolutely see some muckity muck, with juice at the FAA, make a call just because he was irritated. All it takes is a single complaint by the right person, in the right position, to start the process. In this part of the country, there's a good chance someone with fed ties is going to complain.
@Gary Mortimer
It is the definition in FAR 1 that counts. I would also draw your attention to 8130.34C. Keep in mind this person was not flying the aircraft for recreation, it was a commercial venture.
And http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/uas/uas_faq/
Do I need to get approval from the FAA to fly a model aircraft for recreation?
No. FAA guidance does not address size of the model aircraft. FAA guidance says that model aircraft flights should be kept below 400 feet above ground level (AGL), should be flown a sufficient distance from populated areas and full scale aircraft, and are not for business purposes. 1, 2
If I fly a UAS for business purposes, such as new technology development, am I required to get approval from the FAA?
Yes. There are presently two methods of gaining FAA approval for flying UAS: Special Airworthiness Certificates - Experimental Category (SAC-EC) for civil aircraft, and Certificates of Waiver or Authorization (COA) for public aircraft. 1, 3
Can I fly a UAS under a COA or experimental certificate for commercial purposes?
No. Currently, there are no means to obtain an authorization for commercial UAS operations in the NAS. However, manufacturers may apply for an experimental certificate for the purposes of R&D, market survey and crew training.
You can't just say "Well, we've been permitting this 100 years, but not this time, this time we're going to do something about it."
No because an unmanned aircraft is anything that does not have a pilot on board, can sustain flight and be controlled in three axis. Size or BLOS does not matter. This change happened in 2007. Model aircraft are allowed to fly as they fly under the recommendations of the AMA and AC 91-57 in the USA. HR658 ring fenced model flying within the framework of VLOS. Look out for ASTM F-38 and the NPRM oh also SFAR 107.
@Darrell Burkey
CASA has prosecuted people for taking photos from UAVs and fixed wing aircraft if the operator does not have the appropriate operators certificate. CASA has also prosecuted people for taking aerial photos from fixed wing aircraft when the pilot was a PPL holder. In Australia aerial photography is defined as "aerial work" operations, and require a minimum of a CPL licence. Aerial work also needs to be performed under an Air Operators certificate that has "aerial photography" as a permitted activity.
@Matthew Coleman
Under the FARs, what he was flying is an aircraft. Some countries around the world define what a UAV, and even have different weight classes etc is, the FARs have a single definition of an aircraft which covered everything flies, both manned and unmanned.
His brief is correct that the FARs do not specifically define what a model aircraft is, there are model aircraft that are larger than some manned aircraft, like the Phoenix Models K8b with a wing span of around 20' is larger than the 13' wingspan Cri cri, the words smallest twin engine propeller manned aircraft.
In the brief they have described, and agreed with the FAA what he was flying was an aircraft.
As a remainder, this is what is defined in the FAR 1
Aircraft means a device that is used or intended to be used for flight in the air.
Airframe means the fuselage, booms, nacelles, cowlings, fairings, airfoil surfaces (including rotors but excluding propellers and rotating airfoils of engines), and landing gear of an aircraft and their accessories and controls.
Airplane means an engine-driven fixed-wing aircraft heavier than air, that is supported in flight by the dynamic reaction of the air against its wings.
The is no exclusion for model aircraft in the FARs, something his brief also agrees with the FAA on.
The absence of prosecutions is not a defense, and I have never heard of the FAA ever being challenged in the courts on their definition of an aircraft. That definition is almost universal, as it is derived from the same language as the ICAO Chicago convention.
I am curious to know what everyone means by a drone because I am not entirely sure that Trappy flies one. A random internet dictionary definition:
a.An unmanned aircraft or ship that can navigate autonomously, without human control or beyondline of sight: the GPS of a U.S. spy drone.
It took me over an hour to read, but it is well researched.
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
of 9 Next