I agree Greg, these extra rules are getting out of hand. For rec flyers, the rules need to be easy to understand, provide safety for all and not to be so ornerous that no one will follow it. Rec flying should not be a strain on the brain!

@dickstevens4787

3 жыл бұрын

I agreed

@dougwalls1162

3 жыл бұрын

None of this matters until the FAA starts enforcing their own crap. I reported a fellow 107 pilot for flying at night, over people and vehicles in class delta (at the same time). This pilot DID NOT have a night operations waiver, nor authorization to fly in class D - even in daylight). I showed the FAA his own posted video proving he did all this over and over for profit. The FAA took my complaint, that I made to my local FSDO office over the phone. The result was the pilot was told all the things he did wrong (things he already knew as a 107 pilot for 2+ years) and asked not to do it again. The video is still on his YT page promoting his company. No fine. Not even a nasty letter. The FAA is a joke and all these silly rules and suggestions are simply irrelevant. I would also like to mention that the huge corporation that hired this clown to fly his illegal missions was never even contacted. So again, the FAA is a joke.

@mickeymch876

3 жыл бұрын

@@dougwalls1162 Rattus.

@glennroberts461

3 жыл бұрын

The rules are already easy to follow. AMA put them out over 50 years ago. It's people who don't follow those simple rules that got us all these issues.

@dougwalls1162

3 жыл бұрын

@@glennroberts461 Amen Brother! I've been an AMA Member since 1987!

I'm a long time recreational pilot for RC planes and drones. I'm studying for Part 107 now and will abide by the rules. However, I'm a real fan of FPV flying and the freedom that I feel when I fly this way. From a public safety point of view, I totally understand having an observer and VLOS, but....I bought a drone that easily flies well farther than VLOS and I feel like I should be able to use it in a responsible manner...and I would! Really, who is going to have a FPV setup, goggles, and not use it? I see where all of this is going and I wouldn't want to be a governmental agency in charge of regulating air space and preventing terroristic attacks but I don't want my freedoms trampled on either. Such a quandary!

@mickeymch876

3 жыл бұрын

The whole "terrorist attack with a drone" is just an excuse to control and widen the door to harassment of uavs flyers whether they are hobbyists or commercial. It's much easier for a terrorist to just make and use mortars. One thing for sure, the last thing someone with bad intentions would do is "broadcast" their information via RID regardless of what they used. I've been building and flying helicopters for nearly 20 years for fun. My altitude is usually well under 100', I always fly VLOS and never fly more than 150' horizonal and always fly in front of where I am standing. I don't fly with people around, I don't want the distractions. There is absolutely no justification for any registration, remote ID or any FAA regulations.

@filipetorchiamiranda

2 жыл бұрын

This is a direct result of having an Administrative State as a form of government….

@YorktownUSA

2 жыл бұрын

You have to choose. Freedom or slavery. Pick one.

@filipetorchiamiranda

2 жыл бұрын

@@YorktownUSA we chose a long time ago when Rosevelt was elected and the implementation of the administrative state began. Can we fix it? yeap, but first we need to fix the election system.

Greg you do a great job of explaining all the FAA brings forth and I agree with you 99.99 % of the time. But you do not have to say (don’t shoot the messenger) because all you do is greatly appreciated. Thank you

@Thunderbyrd.

3 жыл бұрын

I think he said it kind of "tongue in cheek" and/or with a sense of humor, but I do agree, most everyone knows these are not his rules/regs.

@felixruiz2838

3 жыл бұрын

What if you don't want to be in a CBO ?

@stanbrown1791

3 жыл бұрын

@@felixruiz2838 Go back and listen to it again. He plainly says you do NOT have to belong to a CBO; you just have to follow their regulations.

@techsystems4075

2 жыл бұрын

@@felixruiz2838 As far as I understood, you don't, you only have to choose one to follow their guide lines. It's not mandatory already.

I agree, the extra rules are overly complex and overreaching, recreational is supposed to be for fun, if there are too many rules and regulations it’s no longer fun! They need to have someone go through and implement the K.I.S.S. principle on the entire document to simplify it to the absolute minimum, eliminate fluff, and throw out restrictions that already fall under another rule or are just unnecessary. If I can’t simplify the entirety of the recreational rules to a single 10pt font printed page front and back with the explanations for each rule then it’s too complex.

@eb4697

3 жыл бұрын

I ageee! Keep it Simple Stupid

@dougwalls1162

3 жыл бұрын

None of this matters until the FAA starts enforcing their own crap. I reported a fellow 107 pilot for flying at night, over people and vehicles in class delta (at the same time). This pilot DID NOT have a night operations waiver, nor authorization to fly in class D - even in daylight). I showed the FAA his own posted video proving he did all this over and over for profit. The FAA took my complaint, that I made to my local FSDO office over the phone. The result was the pilot was told all the things he did wrong (things he already knew as a 107 pilot for 2+ years) and asked not to do it again. The video is still on his YT page promoting his company. No fine. Not even a nasty letter. The FAA is a joke and all these silly rules and suggestions are simply irrelevant. I would also like to mention that the huge corporation that hired this clown to fly his illegal missions was never even contacted. So again, the FAA is a joke.

@mickeymch876

3 жыл бұрын

@@dougwalls1162 "I reported a fellow 107 pilot for flying at night". Rattus.

@dougwalls1162

3 жыл бұрын

@@mickeymch876 At least complete the quote: "I reported a fellow 107 pilot for flying at night, over people and vehicles in class delta (at the same time). This pilot DID NOT have a night operations waiver, nor authorization to fly in class D - even in daylight)"

@JD730

2 жыл бұрын

@@dougwalls1162 You really have nothing better to do than worry about what another drone pilot is doing? Old saying goes, worry about yourself and not what others are doing. Don't try and be so high and mighty

Thank you for posting this important information Greg. I hope people are smart enough to speak up and make a difference now while they still can.

Another great video Greg!! Thank you for spending time studying this and presenting the information so thoroughly!!

Thank you, Greg! You are the best source of drone info on KZread! I fly drones as part of my job and it's awesome to a knowledgeable person like you to explain these confusing rules. Much appreciated!

The whole CBO concept is an abdication of responsibility by the FAA. We will end up with a patchwork of regulations and anyone who travels will have to study different rules for different communities. The FAA should issue ONE set of requirements for ALL recreational pilots that apply nationwide.

@dkmorgan8039

3 жыл бұрын

I agree whole heartedly! I thought the point was to have consistent regs across the board so as to make compliance easier and confusion less likely. We are now going have a set of rules and regs that look more like the IRS tax code, impossible to know all the rules!

@dougwalls1162

3 жыл бұрын

None of this matters until the FAA starts enforcing their own crap. I reported a fellow 107 pilot for flying at night, over people and vehicles in class delta (at the same time). This pilot DID NOT have a night operations waiver, nor authorization to fly in class D - even in daylight). I showed the FAA his own posted video proving he did all this over and over for profit. The FAA took my complaint, that I made to my local FSDO office over the phone. The result was the pilot was told all the things he did wrong (things he already knew as a 107 pilot for 2+ years) and asked not to do it again. The video is still on his YT page promoting his company. No fine. Not even a nasty letter. The FAA is a joke and all these silly rules and suggestions are simply irrelevant. I would also like to mention that the huge corporation that hired this clown to fly his illegal missions was never even contacted. So again, the FAA is a joke.

@Nine_883

3 жыл бұрын

Yes. This ignorant draft opens the whole thing up for corruption and kickbacks. Who get the CBO and who doesn't will all be about who knows who and who writes the checks. There are all kinds of ways to funnel money into a government officials hands to get things to go your way.

@thomasmaughan4798

3 жыл бұрын

"anyone who travels will have to study different rules for different communities" I disagree. Choose a CBO, such as the AMA, download the guidelines and let that be your guidelines as you travel. No mention is made that the CBO must be local to where you are. It need only be a Community (hobby fliers) not community (Las Vegas).

This looks like bringing Part 107 in the back door to recreational pilots.

@tomme6x3

3 жыл бұрын

this is a secondary reason why I chose to go for my part 107 pilot license- just to be covered in as many directions and in anticipation of updates like this

@gisstudents1098

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, 3.4.3.8 of the Advisory Circular says the FAA wants CBO's to report "Loss of control of the UAS" "Recreational flyer errors" or "Power failures or loss of propulsion." People who fly FPV tend to have a lot of crashes--that's just part of learning. That's why they practice in safe environments away from people. The FAA does not require a damage report under Part 107 except for injury requiring hospital visit, loss or consciousness, or damage to property => $500 to repair or replace (Whichever is cheaper). The drone itself does not count as in this "damaged property" assessment (only if you crash into something valuable--like a glass window). So, if you crash a drone into the ground, water, or a concrete wall--there is nothing to report (just buy a new drone). Yet, the FAA wants CBO's to report even a low battery "power failure" under new guidelines? That would make recreational flying even more highly regulated than commercial drone operations. Ridiculous!

@tombusby2333

3 жыл бұрын

@@tomme6x3 rather than complying to ridiculous regulations, just go out and enjoy the hobby of RC devices, on the ground or in the air.

🤦🏻‍♂️ omg. This is becoming impossible to have fun with a drone. I bought an air 2s a month ago and I'm starting to have second thoughts about it and regret that idea. This is way too much.

Thanks for uploading this video!! Time to spend a few days and break out the ancient technical report writing skills to whittle those sentences down to checklist format

Love this channel. Thanks for keeping us updated 👍

Amazing how a beaurocracy can make something so simple like recreational flying into a monster. I am flying a DJI Mini 2 and only for maybe three weeks now and am learning a lot about it from KZread video’s. After finding your site and other informational sites I am beginning to think what did I get myself into. I took and passed the Trust test. I am glad there are sites like yours. Keep on educating us newbies.

I Just ordered a drone last week,and haven't received it yet. I studied for the recreational Trust certificate and passed and will register my drone when it comes. Certainly I understand the need for safety in all aspects of drone flying. After learning more of the Community guidlines, especially some of the codes in the new advisory circular which was informative to keep new pilots like myself out of trouble, however when I receive my new drone, definitely thinking about sending it back. I thought this endeavor would be simple and fun for me and my family. I am learning that the FAA certainly can make it so complicated and taking away the joy and fun of flying a drone. Over reach ,I think so, my opinion. I know safety is paramount over everything and I agreed to that, but believe let's keep it simple for the recreational pilot.Thanks

Thank You for keeping us informed. Ohh btw. Yesterday I seen a Cardinal flying dangerously over people. Who do I report it to. 🧐😁😆🤪

@Redgascan

3 жыл бұрын

Good one .

@StreetN1ckel

2 жыл бұрын

Lmao clever

@SolarReturn1966

2 жыл бұрын

The Pope! 😃

@ModernDayTemplar606

2 жыл бұрын

@@SolarReturn1966 😂

Thanks for presenting a very responsible, respectful overview.

Very well explained and concise video. Thank you!

No rude comments from me. I very much appreciate being informed through your thoughtful and well-taken points of view. I have a commercial manned aviation license, but I am only a recreational drone pilot that is still learning the nuances of this sport.

Too bad there's no one at the FAA that can read anything intelligently written. These rules are nothing more than a power grab for the large drone delivery companies.

I agree. I continually see another rule here, and additional suggestion there...the common Joe is going to fly regardless. It's hard enough to keep up with all the amendments, suggestions, and changes to the rules. Does the FAA really think all the recreational flyers are keeping up with these? I would dare to say that most are NOT. As a 107, I stop and talk with people at parks who are flying, more-so to see what they have and ideally become jealous of what they have as appose to me. But having been a 107 for a few years now, I have yet to come in contact with someone who is following the rules.

@dougwalls1162

3 жыл бұрын

None of this matters until the FAA starts enforcing their own crap. I reported a fellow 107 pilot for flying at night, over people and vehicles in class delta (at the same time). This pilot DID NOT have a night operations waiver, nor authorization to fly in class D - even in daylight). I showed the FAA his own posted video proving he did all this over and over for profit. The FAA took my complaint, that I made to my local FSDO office over the phone. The result was the pilot was told all the things he did wrong (things he already knew as a 107 pilot for 2+ years) and asked not to do it again. The video is still on his YT page promoting his company. No fine. Not even a nasty letter. The FAA is a joke and all these silly rules and suggestions are simply irrelevant. I would also like to mention that the huge corporation that hired this clown to fly his illegal missions was never even contacted. So again, the FAA is a joke.

@tombusby2333

3 жыл бұрын

Quit bothering others do your own thing and leave others alone.

@EmpReb

2 жыл бұрын

@@dougwalls1162 Which proved MASS non complaince works better than a silly rule.

@JD730

2 жыл бұрын

@@dougwalls1162 Who cares????? Leave others alone. You posted this same comment multiple times on here. You remind me of someone who was bullied badly in school and now you're out for revenge at any chance you get.

I fly slope gliders and have been jumping through these hoops just to keep having fun without legal issues. But I see some places where carve outs for non-powered fixed wing aircraft need to be addressed. It's nearly impossible to fly slope without a occasionally flying over people. Also speed limits could be an issue for people who practice Dynamic Soaring. I haven't accomplished this yet, but practitioners of this aspect have pushed their gliders over 550 mph. Experimentation is an important part of any hobby. And imposing speed limits on non-powered aircraft would have a chilling effect on RC aircraft development and diminish the scope of variety from the hobby. Informative video, glad I got to see it. Thanks!

Also thank you for your opinion at the end. Coming from the hobby and working to be 107, I appreciate you saying it should be simple. If you want people to follow rules make them easy to learn and follow. It the same thing I learned when writing policies for business, if you can make a policy 1 page you can guarantee almost anyone will be willing to read it. Otherwise they will skim it at best and sign it off without caring.

Great job of keeping us informed!

I totally agree with you analysis of keeping it short and simple

Clear, concise explanation, presentation. And, your important opinion is always welcome, brother Greg! Although, I don't see the regs as too complex, we all should agree, it should NOT be associated with Part 107.

I like to see you've done a great job explain this and I agree I think they're making it too complicated for most of the regular people that want to start in this Hobby I just recently passed the trust test it was easy

Thanks for drone updates and ruling on recreational fly.

Submitting comments. Thanks Greg! Keep it up, sir! T :-)

Great video! Thank you for everything you do for the Drone community.

Thanks for the info Greg

Thank you for always providing such great information. I truly believe that safety is important, I’m one of those people who will do everything I can to insure I follow the appropriate rules and guidelines. But it does become very discouraging. I believe they are attempting to make things so difficult to discourage people or as a means of reducing the number of UAS in the airspace. Those who would follow will decide it’s to much trouble and others who do not care to follow the rules will possibly cause issues that create more unneeded regulations. There has to be balance and common a sense approach to the regulations and guidelines created. More UAS pilots need to be a part of the regulatory process. Just my thoughts. Thanks again for the great info. Hope to have my PT 107 soon thanks to your course.

@flybybaby8008

3 жыл бұрын

Spot on Al Tone! I too believe that individualy we have a responsibility for the way we operate our uas vehicles, and unless we want to handover all the control of our intrest/hobby to a government entity(s), we can no longer stand on the sidelines and let it happen simply because it's easier to be a non-particapent than to put forth an effort to make a difference. Instead, these spectators will channel what energies they're willing to expend towards heckling the players, the officials, and the referees for how the game is being played. I lament the way government is trying to run herd on our sport, but instead of bitching and moaning about it, I'm doing something about it, as are you, and engaging in social discourse with as many people as I can get to listen, and encouraging others to do the same before the final legal verbiage has been has been set in stone by the various governmental entities. That's something I can do as an individual, but there is much more that we can do, and much of that can be accomplished by banding together as much as we can to make our voices heard, both as individuals and as a group acting in a cohesive and organized manner. The old adage of there being strength in numbers still remains a powerful tool! Along with cohesiveness is the need for consensus of message, and here where I may be somewhat less well received: with all the diversity among those of us that adore our sport, there needs to be a consensus of what is best for our sport, including how we can best govern ourselves as opposed to having to be dictated to by those who most likely won't have the same interest and passion that we share. Unfortunately it is true, just as it is with other groups that share common interests, there are those that feel they have the right to do whatever they please, however they please, and whenever they please, irregardless of the most unfortunate way it reflects so very poorly on the rest of us. As the old adage continues to hold true, It only takes a few bad aples to spoil the whole barrel, and it's very rare that I attend an outdoor event without myself and others being buzzed and harassed by some thoughtless, inconsiderate, asshole' person's drone, often during an evening concert. It's horrifying the way a crowd will cheer so enthusiastically when someone manages to bring one down and destroy it, yet instances such as this are why our drones are so despised, and why we have such a difficult path ahead of us to reverse the public's negative perception of our sport. But I will continue to try, by introducing and educating as many others as I can to the wonders and joys of our sport!

@AlToneTech

3 жыл бұрын

@@flybybaby8008 very well said! As with anything there is a part we can all play in this on many levels individually to be a stronger collective voice. Thanks

Thank you for this information!

Awesome video!

Thank you for the important info.

Hey thank u for the inf.Great video

Greg..... You were awesome all these years with all the info we need it to exist in FAA rules..... 👍 Thanks This is the end with drones for me..... I lived in constant fear of the f!? *! FAA...even in my own back yard.... Good grief 😖.... I'm done.....

Excellent description.

Thanks Greg. Very true that if it’s too difficult, people will not follow it. The FAA like all government entities, create more and more restrictions in the name of safety. Flying RC aircraft has been a very safe hobby for many years and does not need all of these regulations.

You know, my eyes have glazed over. I have been a member of the Academy of Model Aeronautics since 1955. The number of incidents between model aircraft and full scale aircraft and/or humans or animals or property can literally be counted on one hand since the AMA began in the 1930’s. I spoke with Paul at the FAA drone zone and at the outcome of our conversation, he said, and I quote: “I hope these rules will encourage more people to get involved in model aviation.” I literally, spontaneously laughed out loud. I mean, like, REALLY???

It is because people that I see flying their drones like a-holes that the good people are suffering. Make sure to take the TRUST test too. It is very easy. it took me all of 10 minutes to pass it.

@dougwalls1162

3 жыл бұрын

None of this matters until the FAA starts enforcing their own crap. I reported a fellow 107 pilot for flying at night, over people and vehicles in class delta (at the same time). This pilot DID NOT have a night operations waiver, nor authorization to fly in class D - even in daylight). I showed the FAA his own posted video proving he did all this over and over for profit. The FAA took my complaint, that I made to my local FSDO office over the phone. The result was the pilot was told all the things he did wrong (things he already knew as a 107 pilot for 2+ years) and asked not to do it again. The video is still on his YT page promoting his company. No fine. Not even a nasty letter. The FAA is a joke and all these silly rules and suggestions are simply irrelevant. I would also like to mention that the huge corporation that hired this clown to fly his illegal missions was never even contacted. So again, the FAA is a joke.

@tombusby2333

3 жыл бұрын

@@dougwalls1162 you should be ashamed making claims against other drone pilots

@dougwalls1162

3 жыл бұрын

@@tombusby2333 I know right? I should ignore all the rules and allow clowns to fly dangerously and illegally. Gotchya. And we know how you fly now don't we? Dumbass.

@tombusby2333

3 жыл бұрын

So what constitutes flying like a holes, are you talking bando bashes or what exactly?

@dougwalls1162

3 жыл бұрын

@@pbshooter100 I know I'm going to hell for reporting a commercial pilot flying recklessly. To be clear, I am 100% pro FAA making logical rules. I am also 100% pro FAA ENFORCING their own rules. I know, I know... I'm asking too much of the FAA. I would sure love to know all the levels of me being wrong. Go ahead, let's hear it Shooter! I reported a bad actor that was violating half a dozen rules. How was that wrong on so many levels you don't know where to start?

I think you are absolutely correct. When the rules become too complex (as if they aren't complex already) the new flyers aren't going to read and learn, let alone FOLLOW, them.

Great video!

I find it amusing that you can drive a 2 ton vehicle (car or truck) that you pass a test once when you are 16 and never have to do recurrent training of any kind and the DMV does not randomly publish rules without notifying the general public but yet the FAA can publish rules and it is the pilot s responsibility to find these rules and keep up with them. I think that if you have registered your drone recreational or otherwise they should notify you. Thanks for the updates and great vids as always.

spot on Greg, as usual.

Thanks, Greg!

Good analysis and mark-up of the draft. Some initial thoughts: * Many/most rec pilots will ignore/not know of the cloud of rules suggested in this draft. * FPV pilots will be unable to fly around structures and remain in compliance. * Thus, many in the FPV community will perceive this as an open attack by the FAA on their activity. * Sadly, those in the FPC community who perceive a threat to the viability of doing FPV may be correct. The hobby could be rendered too regulated or risk burdened to continue. * It has been estimated there were 19,379 gun violence deaths in the US in 2020. Meanwhile, there no known deaths resulting from recreational UAS devices. Yet, the government chooses to impose a whole new regulatory cloud on recreational UAS devices. 🤡 Our tax dollars at work. 😒

@faethe000

3 жыл бұрын

Get your part 107 and this won't be an issue.

@edruttledge342

3 жыл бұрын

@@faethe000 On a personal level, I have had the Part 107 cert for over two years now. Moving onto reality, an FAA effort to micro-regulate the vast majority of recreational PIC's will be, IMHO, as successful as its certifying the 737 MAX to fly. Further, the FPV community, which has demonstrated a cohesiveness and impact beyond its size (and of which I am not a part) is probably about to crank up a robust resistance campaign.

@faethe000

3 жыл бұрын

@@edruttledge342 I'm curious what kind of resistance campaign a bunch of hobbyists could levy against the FAA

@edruttledge342

3 жыл бұрын

Well ... this could be a "watch and learn" opportunity then (?)

@mickeymch876

3 жыл бұрын

The RC aeronautics hobby has already been devastated by the FAA and the introduction of new technology. Just go on KZread, how may recreational pilots do you see posting their favorite flights with rc helicopters and rc planes? How many manufacturers and hobby shops can you still go to for parts? If you look you will probably see a few videos, most of those are the Alan Szabo or Curtis Youngblood types that are professionals selling a product. Now we have the FAA taking 3D helicopters, scale planes, 3D planes etc. that took hundreds of hours, thousand of dollars to build and years to learn the flying skills needed to fly and lumping them in with FPV and camera quads. If I'm going to fly one of my helicopters I'm not putting on remote ID or making changes so these a$$holes can harass me. Not going to happen. I fly safe because that's how I fly, I have insurance because things do happen but they are my choice. Fly near people? Flying a helicopter or plane near people is a distraction and a good way to crash. I also see these people that seem proud of themselves for turning other people in, proud to be a rat. The FAA bringing out the worst in the worst. RC planes and helicopters without cameras should have been left out from day one like we were promised in 2012. Congress and the FAA lied. Congress and the FAA are both complicit in destroying a hobby that many people loved and enjoyed for decades, some their entire lives and have spent tens of thousands of dollars over the years. Time for them to FO. I also fly quads with cameras but that is a different hobby. There was a point were I said "enough" with the unconstitutional and ridiculous gun laws in many states, in particular NJ. I still exercise my right to bear arms and I will not submit to government oversight and ignorance where RC aeronautics is concerned. The government passed that point the day they required "registration". Enough is enough.

Thanks, Greg.

Very good information thanks for breaking the CBO and 44809 I like it to be as simple as possible cause not everyone who flies will understand it same as those are supposed to enforce the rules they would like it to be simple as well

Had my drone maybe 2 months for hobby and man now I wish I have not even spent money on it.

Good information

The FAA seems interested in creating a hurdle high enough to discourage interest in STEM as well as aviation in general. Children are the future of aviation and it's incredibly unlikely that most will be willing / able to grasp the concepts of airspace and etc. Why couldn't the recreational have included a carve out of 200 ft elevation limit (for example)? I understand not flying your drone to the moon, but what are the chances you're interfering with general aviation at

@timlubbers2884

3 жыл бұрын

The rules is already there ... 400' because manned aircraft have a low limit of 500' unless landing ...

It has been my belief the FAA is trying to remove recreational fliers by attrition.

@ZaxFrank

3 жыл бұрын

They may diminish the numbers a bit via. regulation, but they will never "remove" recreational fliers. Many will simply choose to ignore the rules they don't agree with, under the assumption that they have little chance of being caught.

@Paiadakine

2 жыл бұрын

I agree.

I am so glad that I ran into this video. I had no idea that all this was at hand, I just recently bought two drones and was hoping to be able to fly them with my grandkids... Now I'm starting to see that it is a lot for children and honestly I am afraid to fly my drone I think I just might send it back to the vendors...

Very informative video. I really think all drones should come with a warning right on the box "FAA rules and guidelines must be observed for operation". Gone are the days you impulse buy one of these things and think you're just going to go launch it anywhere without penalty or fines. Safety First, but consumers should be warned these are not toys.

I agree with Greg's summary about Recreational + CBO Guidelines should not equal Part 107. But it seems that is the direction this is taking. My feeling is this will either motivate more Recreational flyers to go for Part 107, or they will simply decide to ignore the new Guidelines.

This can't be stopped, slowed down or changed in any meaningful way. It's a continuing process to phase out the ability for anyone to fly drones without a "Commercial" license. The hobby definitely has a shelf life. What will happen? People will just fly anyway. Fines? Probably, but not without some serious parallel lawsuits. I fly responsibly, and will continue to fly as long as I can. Many of these rules are common sense, except for those who want to fly irresponsibly anyway.

*Outstanding job keeping everyone informed of this stuff* . Let's be totally honest...no 'Recreational' flyer is reading through any of this documentation. Most barely read the directions or instruction manuals before lauching a quad. As someone who has their part 107 (and as many others who will agree), it's tough keeping up with this stuff. And, let's be honest there is so much MORE TO COME! BVLOS (Beyond Visual Line of Sight) will be a whole other can of worms (after Remote ID is fully launched of course). Companies like Skyward give just a glimpse at what's to come.

Thank you

Something the AMA pushed from the beginning was that they should be allowed to use their rules as being sufficient for RC flying (not just drones). It appears that this is, in essence, an attempt by the FAA to acquiesce to that position while still maintaining tighter control for pilots operating as professionals. I agree with Greg that this could get out hand. However, as he also points out there some good points to this proposal.

you are absolutely correct; i completely agree with you

I think the topics are correct: the CBO could do a one page summary in bullett points of the Do/don’t to make it easy.

Why doesn't the FAA just expand 44809 to include the regulations they want and leave the whole CBO variability and approval process out of it? It won't be long before everyone in the community figures out which CBO has the most lenient guidelines acceptable to the FAA for their approval. Everyone will then just say they are following the guidelines of XYZ Association. I am betting that any CBO that ignores ANY of the FAA's " recommendations" will find themselves unapproved. It's all getting too nuts. RECREATIONAL has to remain the operative word, otherwise, what's the point?

The concern I have, is when there are multiple CBOs in a area, what guidelines will apply if they differ? It seem like an over-reach and the inconsistency between differing CBO. Almost getting to the point to get the commercial license seems the way to go. The other potential issue, is if the CBO restrict areas where they can fly (i.e. their flight areas), and that essentially restricts where one could fly if the CBO defines areas (where they potentially could charge to use). Doesn't getting the commercial license (Part 107) bypass all this complexity, where the rules are specifically defined by the FAA and without the ambiguity of the recreational flyers?

I think that the FAA ought to now require that all commercial and passenger transport aircraft CANNOT fly over populated areas or cities. Commies!

@tomsummers8976

3 жыл бұрын

Exactly : )

@borgonianevolution

3 жыл бұрын

Fathom this batman.... All the shit they are dumping on us to NOT be able to do is exactly what "Drone delivery" WILL be doing every freaking flight. Supposedly all this is for safe integration of the air space... they are all corrupt morons and exactly NONE of this is for safety. Its all about commercial dollars and lobbyist lining the politicians pockets. NOTHING more.

@stephensmith60

3 жыл бұрын

@@borgonianevolution My sediments, exactly! And Power!!!

Great video Greg. Totally agree with you. In their efforts to regulate the airspace, the FAA have removed much of the distinction between commercial and recreational flying with more and more regulation being introduced as time passes. FPV racing for example has a proven safety record and should not need to have strict rulings about the need for observers (recommendation would do). Safety regulations are being introduced into areas of the hobby where there have been few if any accidents. To my knowledge, no risk assessment has yet been made public for UAVs. "It's just a matter of time before we have major drone disasters" is not a good enough argument. (Meanwhile, yet another light plane crash takes a handful of lives) I fully support geo fencing and ads-b in brand name drones. Considering the masses generally buy this sort of equipment (with just the enthusiasts building 'fly anywhere' devices), the industry has, by and large, created its own safeguards. Why do we need more regulations including remote ID in the recreational sector? The FAA is very concerned at the number of restricted airspace breaches by drones. It has to be asked how many of these really were recreational UAVs (or UAVs at all). In the case of remote ID, would the perpetrators be stupid enough to have it enabled? I don't think so.

I agree with you about the rules should be simple. I'm a new drone flyer and if they make things so complecated people will, like you said, not want to read pages and pages of do's and don'ts. As a new flyer I plan on flying safely but having too many restricktions why would I want to fly. I do plan in the future to go for part 107 but at this point in time I'm just looking to have fun and get tyo know my drone better.

I completely agree, that while safety is a valid concern, the FAA should be careful not to take the fun right out of recreational flying. Like you mentioned, there could be resistance or rebellion against rigid rules, and there may be a number of people who decide flying is just not worth it, and walk away. Stay with guidelines, keep it simple, keep it easy to follow.

This is a great video. Isn't it funny that it's much easier to get a handgun gun license.

@ChaoticOrcPaladin

3 жыл бұрын

10 years ago it took an 8-hour class and a shooting test to get a concealed license in Texas. Now you just strap on and roll. Not loving it. Also, strap-on. Teehee. Sorry.

@ZaxFrank

3 жыл бұрын

Georgia is one of the most permissive States for handgun licensees. The law requires that the applicant submit his/her fingerprints, under go criminal background checks via. the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and the Federal Bureau of investigation, and pay a fee that can approach $100, depending on your County. Although some claim that the FAA is overstepping its bounds with the regulation of recreational fliers, I can assure you that I spent a lot less time and money getting my USA registration number and passing the TRUST exam than I did for my firearms license.

Greg, I have a simple question (I think). If you are certified under Part 107, is there ever a reason to fly under 44809? Thanks. ~gjl.

The additional rules on AGL guidance are insane! The 400AGL is for positive VLOS control. LAANC/ALOFT and B4UFly outline very well the flight regulations and flight restrictions around the area. Also, you should be able to fly 400 ft above the PIC (Pilot in Command)

Greg, I live in a gated Senior's Community that covers several sections of prairie, eventually 6000+ homes with facilities and a city park. Can we file for a CBO for the community to allow us flight within the fenced borders for recreational flying without having a fixed runway/airfield for other than drone aircraft? It seems like you have to be an AMA facility to be a CBO and allow all types of aircraft?

@PilotInstitute

3 жыл бұрын

CBO doesn't necessarily mean AMA, although the AMA will likely become a CBO. WIth that said, the requirements for becoming a CBO are listed in 3.1.1 so take a look at that. You will need to be a 501c3 organization first.

Thanks Greg! It sounds like Community Based Organizations (CBO) will be adding much more restrictions in the areas they take responsibility for. I’m thinking that Cities and Municipalities or other Government agencies (BLM, State Land Department’s) could also be included in approved CBO’s? Regardless - People who don’t follow rules won’t care , read or follow these rules anyway.

Hi Greg,do the weight limits apply to other rc aircraft?

Hi Greg! I see that the comment form includes a section to specify the page and paragraph for each comment. Do you know if that is required in order for a comment to be considered? I agree with you 100% that the requirement that recreational flyers fly under CBO guidelines makes 44809 and Part 107 so similar that's it's difficult to identify the differences between them. That thought occurred to me even before I reached the end of your video where you expressed the same opinion. I would like to submit a comment to that effect, but since it's a general comment about the overall implication of the proposal, I'm not sure if the FAA would just ignore it since it's not in reference to a specific page and paragraph. Any guidance you can provide would be appreciated! Thank you!

@PilotInstitute

3 жыл бұрын

If the comment is for all pages, just write all pages in the page section. They ask for the page number so it's easier for them to get to the actual page so they can look up the issue.

They should just take drone out of stores at this point. Most adult, much less kids, are NOT going to be aware of or care about any of this, and could be facing THOUSANDS of dollars in fines. That might be the governments plan.

@mastertoastmaker

3 жыл бұрын

The FAA (or other federal government org) should at a minimum require that when selling a drone, the seller needs to provide resources regarding all applicable regulations. The seller (some random guy at Target) doesn’t need to explain the rules, just notify the buyer at the time of purchase.

@tombusby2333

3 жыл бұрын

@@mastertoastmaker why do you roll over and piss yourself because the bully wants your milk money, stand up for your freedom before it is all gone.

Very informative video, Greg. Government at its finest by making simple things more complicated than it should. I used to work on military programs in contracts/proposals for many years. Whether it's Air Force, Navy, or Army programs they try to cover every angle in their proposal verbiage that you need a lawyer to try to understand what they actually need. When it's all said and done, we ended up what was a 200-page proposal to 800 pages. Sounds like the FAA is no different. LOL!

If an individual lives in a area that has many valleys and hills what method does one use to determine where the ground level is if they are in the valley, hill or in between?

@PilotInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

There isn't a perfect solution in this case. It's all about knowing what the aircraft looks like at a certain height and knowing how high the terrain around you is.

I think that the Government uses overly-broad language so that they can use it as a catch all later. I agree that they need to define *exactly* what the new "guidelines" are. I'm not an FPV flyer, so I really can't fathom what the guidelines will mean for that part of our flying but I certainly agree that micro managing will cause people to either ignore the guidelines or leave the hobby. Safety is important though, so I encourage that focus.

Make the guidelines, maybe rewrite 44809 to align them with Part 107; get rid of CBO component. Probably not legal anyways, but an FAA concession to well-meaning advocates or commercial transport drones companies (we don't need them in big cities).

I'm confused about the direct line. of sight rule and the 400'AGL restriction. I have a MAVIC 2, and have noticed when it exceeds 100' AGL directly above me, it is already out of sight. At 400' AGL it is definitely invisible. How many drones are visible at 400' AGL? If the FAA is concerned about always having the drone visible, where did the 400' AGL restriction come from?

Could you please share the FAA guidance with your highlight and annotation on Google Drive?

I feel an important topic to bring up is Shielded Operations. (Flying below tree line and in and out of coverage) The proposed guidelines effectively eliminate freestyle flying. But when done correctly, freestyle in or around buildings and trees is completely safe. There needs to be allocations for this type of flying. Otherwise we will lose a lot of members in our community.

Curious about the status of the fpv VO suggestions. Most of these pilots, imo, won't follow this guidance. Many are short distance flyers where this becomes a burden to fly.

@PilotInstitute

3 жыл бұрын

Absolutely. I believe there's a disconnect between VLOS guidance for most FPV ops and for other VLOS ops with traditional UAS.

Greg...would appreciate if you could explain...if you know ...who will be on these CBOs?...Will it be a group of fellow drone operators?..or will it be people who don't want anyone flying a drone?...or a combination of the two groups?

@PilotInstitute

3 жыл бұрын

CBOs are pro drones. They will be non for profit organizations who help people learn how to fly.

I totally agree that recreational flyers just need some simple rules and that they will not read pages and pages of hard to understand legal descriptions. With age has become the realization that many, if not most, people will do the right thing if it is well defined and easy to follow. I understand Part 107 is more complicated and for those that want to do more, or want to use their drones for commercial purposes will read and follow the stricter guidelines in order to maintain their Part 107 status. Something I want to do so I can volunteer my drone at the small local fire/police departments. The FAA has never adhered to the K.I.S.S. principle in their rule making, in fact I believe they never back up and look at the rule as a whole or they would realize how unwieldy it is and that few will ever read or follow it because it is so huge. Thank you Greg for another head-up!

So ground level section that’s mentioned it’s only clarifies man made structures so if you fly it from a top of a hill or a mountain is ok?

@flybybaby8008

3 жыл бұрын

Interesting point Jesse, just another that needs futher clarification. General aviation has a minimum operational attitude of 500ft above the ground, not above sea-level (except in the immediate areas of controlled airspace such as airports, densely populated areas, certain restricted government areas, etc). Thus the minimum agl clearace remains relatively constant (as agl values do have to take into account such pesky things as trees, boulders, small buildings and such), where as altitude above sea-level is, for our intent and purpose, based upon a fixed elevation, that being zero. So elevation clearances remain limited to 400ft maximum agl, while general aviation has a 500ft minimum agl, which leaves us with a constant 100ft buffer zone no matter where we are standing. This is why nearly all developed areas with multiple multi-storied buildings fall under the classification of controlled airspace. The one thing I seriously ask of my fellow modelers is not to give up because some changing rules and regulations. By simply giving up this activity/sport/hobby we so enjoy without fighting to retain it, we are simply giving the Government another victory by simply rolling over without offering any resistance, the exact complaint I'm hearing from most of you. It may not be an easy task, but I ask you; what is worth having, including our drones as well as our very freedoms and democracy, are not worth fighting for? Unchecked Government WILL GLADLY take anything we are willing to simply give them, and unchecked will continue to do so with impunity!!!

Do you see the VLOS rules applying to commercial part 107 as well?

@PilotInstitute

3 жыл бұрын

There are specific rules for part 107 for VLOS. We actually just posted a video about this today: kzread.info/dash/bejne/dKmTr8evocqrodY.html

I have a question about something that happened in Colombia South America. I’m a recreational drone pilot, and have study aviation, like ground school and now again. Well I have the DJI MAVIC 2S , here I am flying in the Andes mountains and my drone on my site, so I did not see or noticed what happened until a week later that I’m reviewing the videos and I see 3 long white things flying down over the trees and one actually gained speed as it moved forward, I want to say they were base jumpers. But all 3 in white and looked like beds or long tubes. No arms, legs or helmets can be seen. Now I say should they be required to have a transmitter to show their location or be marked on a map as a zone of BASE jumping. Or the person have like what the S2 drone has. To report my location and the drone location. Thank God I was not in their way.

VLOS. Following a grey red or green spot in the sky during the day without a strobe is damn near impossible. As soon as you take your eye off of it, it goes into stealth mode. Someone needs to come up with a delay switch for strobes. Mine hurts my eyes when I turn it on.

Looking at 107 certificate. Why do I need to know ZULU time and read a sectional map of an airport I cannot fly at. I am afraid this is going in the same direction. Yes there should be entry level training. Your trust certificate number should be required to activate an new drone but that is all that should be required for recreationally.

Greg I am BRAND SPANKING NEW to this and Drones. How do I find CBO's in my area to know what there guidleines are??

@PilotInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

There are currently no approved CBO with the FAA. Head over to ftca.flitetest.com/ and follow their guidelines for now.

It was the requirement to follow CBO guidelines that persuaded me to go ahead with Part 107 certification. As an example of a CBO, the AMA (Academy Of Model Aeronautics) has stringent requirements and simply does not, or at the time did not, envision citizens flying pretty much anywhere they pleased. You would have to fly at an AMA sanctioned model airfield for instance. AMA rules are certainly safety conscious and designed to prevent spectators from being injured by fast moving, fixed-wing model aircraft that sometimes can be rather large, 6 foot wingspans or more.

250-gram Drone Weight Threshold: I just bought a DJI Mini 2. I am going to use it for recreation. The idea of the Mini 2 is for it to be under the 250-gram threshold. My question: If the accessories I put on the Mini 2 push the total weight over 250 grams, what do I do? Do I just need to register it? Does it change the operating requirements? Thank you.

First. Curious of the scope of the CBO coverage. Hope I'm not missing some thing someone else brought up. Are we talking areas encompassing a city, a county, the state? Whats going to prevent people outside the recreational drone group registering and take over a CBO to forward rules to prevent drone flying. If I fly out at the farm, am I going to have to follow some CBO's rules?

@PilotInstitute

3 жыл бұрын

CBOs will likely be nationwide. Think about them as a national club, kinda like AMA is right now. You will eventually decide on a CBO that represents your value, the type of flying you do, and that has guidelines you can live with. They will be rules that you follow in addition to 44809. I foresee we will have half a dozen to a dozen CBO to choose from, some will specialize in quadcopters, some in FPV, some in fixed wing RC, etc...

@warrenparsons4665

3 жыл бұрын

​@@PilotInstitute That kind of defeats the "Community" in CBO. I was under the impression these were going to be local club like entities. How are you ever going to be able to enforce national scope rules. You might as well put every one under part 107 then.

@paulctx

3 жыл бұрын

@@PilotInstitute So, maybe there will be one CBO whose guidelines say "fly safely" and the whole country can choose that as their CBO? Does the FAA have to approve the guidelines? Does the FAA have to approve changes to the guidelines after they are approved once? I'm hoping for a loophole here...

@PilotInstitute

3 жыл бұрын

@@paulctx Yes the FAA has to approve the guidelines. Whether or not they will be clear as to why a CBO was rejected or not is a different story. We will see if not having ALL of the guidelines from the AC is ground for not getting approved.

Thank you so much for making this video. Flying models were around prior to manned flight and has a safety record beyond reproach. There are also more model pilots than manned pilots in the US. So why is there no representation of any kind? This is so very very sad.

So what if all the potential CBO's (whoever they may be) organize together and refrain from applying as an FAA Recognized CBO? Then there would be no additional guidelines to follow because there's no FAA recognized CBOs.. Yeah, I know... that won't happen.

Bought cool affordable DJI drone from Amazon (yay), then starting watching videos like this on KZread about all the rules I have to learn now, then boxed up drone and sent back to Amazon. Screw all of this, buying a GOPRO instead and taping it to a kite.

Starting on top of a building? Does that apply to mountains as well?...

@PilotInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

Mountain is considered terrain. Not the same as a building.

I’ll send my comment to FAA. ? Do you think the Part 107 exam will be updated to reflect the changes in AC 91-57C? You often mention the old language that is present on the exam. Ex: “contact ATC for authorization “

@PilotInstitute

3 жыл бұрын

AC 91.57C is only for recreational flying, not for Part 107.

Hi I would like to buy a Dji mini 2 that weighs less than 055 lb. I read that it does not need to register with the FAA and neither is the test true? Thanks

@PilotInstitute

2 жыл бұрын

The mini 2 won't need to be registered but all other rules still apply, including needing a TRUST exam and follow all the rules in USC 44809.