JARUS rules
- Thread starter kloner
- Start date
that's why I described it as "linked above"
ProPilotWannaBe
Member
Now... who said what when? lol
stitch1615
Member
If you bother to read this you will see that many of us, perhaps all of us, are already breaking several rules set forth by the FAA.
In some cases it makes it a felony.
It is wise to educate yourself to see just how to avoid having Big Brother or Big Sis come knocking at your door.
They are being very tolerant at present but once they learn it all themselves we'll see our high cost toys shelved to the display rack if we are not willing to play the game.
They are already talking about "airworthiness certification" which would add perhaps thousands to our already high cost.
Having been involved with the construction of several "Experimental" aircraft I can tell you it is a sticky business. It's doable but its a PITA.
My point is, play safe. Stay off their radar. If you choose to be a commercial venture, good luck with that.
I guarantee you that there will be an overall ban when the first civil or commercial aircraft is brought down by a quad copter no matter the reason.
Last edited by a moderator:
ProPilotWannaBe
Member
First, I have not read any of the attachments, so forgive me if what I'm going to say contradicts the content you guys have read.
BUT...
A friend of mine that is loosely tied to the FAA process told me that the process the FAA was planning for commercial use of a UAS system weighing less that xyz weight (I thought he said 54 lbs), was only going to require the operator to register the configuration of his aircraft, the allowable operators, and maintain certain records such as flight time, aircraft maintenance of configuration changes, and that it was *not* going to require any kind of qualifying of requirements of the aircraft. He was stating that the FAA understands that the lighter end of the UAS spectrum was small operators with small(er) budgets and that they intend of fomenting that industry through light regulations.
Again, all of this was word of mouth from my friend, and if these regs state otherwise, it's more than likely I misunderstood him, or it has evolved beyond his loose involvement.
BUT...
A friend of mine that is loosely tied to the FAA process told me that the process the FAA was planning for commercial use of a UAS system weighing less that xyz weight (I thought he said 54 lbs), was only going to require the operator to register the configuration of his aircraft, the allowable operators, and maintain certain records such as flight time, aircraft maintenance of configuration changes, and that it was *not* going to require any kind of qualifying of requirements of the aircraft. He was stating that the FAA understands that the lighter end of the UAS spectrum was small operators with small(er) budgets and that they intend of fomenting that industry through light regulations.
Again, all of this was word of mouth from my friend, and if these regs state otherwise, it's more than likely I misunderstood him, or it has evolved beyond his loose involvement.
gtranquilla
RadioActive
Unfortunately not all risks can be controlled......
consider geese, at over 10,000 feet ASL that have brought down aircraft......
You might someday be able to put a transponder on a MR, but you can't put them on all the geese!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_strike
Not saying I disagree with proposed safety measures.... but all within reason!
consider geese, at over 10,000 feet ASL that have brought down aircraft......
You might someday be able to put a transponder on a MR, but you can't put them on all the geese!!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_strike
Not saying I disagree with proposed safety measures.... but all within reason!
stitch1615
Member
There is a whole lot of conjecture and "ifs" written between the lines of your response which pretty much sums it up. :cold: We have no idea what the FAA will do but I hope your friend is correct. :upset:
It partly allays my fears because I sure can't afford to buy enough batteries to fly anything that weighs anywhere close to 54 pounds. :tennis:
If recent history tells us anything we do know the FEDS have a nasty habit of saying one thing and actually implementing another. :dejection:
We'll have to wait and see. :frog:
stitch1615
Member
My son flys for USAir and also flys RC. Geese are considered a natural disaster.
There is nothing natural about a FPV RC model flown by an inconsiderate pilot who ignores the current rule of 400 feet.
Ignoring current regs/rules will only bring about more restrictive regulations.
ProPilotWannaBe
Member
Totally agree! I phrased it that way on purpose because of the uncertainty involved. I was just trying to provide some info that was given to me.