FAA Standards for Rc Helis AKA (UAS)

[Aerial RC Photog]

I briefly read through the UAS CFR's and Standards..
Everything that the FAA uses to regulate RC helicopters,
AIR -160 Estb in 2006 to current. and all Circulars that cover everything from experimental UAS to the average guys like us trying to make a little cash doing what we love doing.
Where we fall under FAA Standards is (U.A.S) "Unmanned Aircraft Systems"
The maintain accurancy with standards, I will not post my findings until tomorrow.
My full time Job with the US. Gov got pretty busy today.:mad:
Couldn't be help,,
I'll post the current Info and answer as many questions as I can. If there are some answers that I cannot answer. I'll call my contact at the FAA for Ya!!:YeaBaby:

[Aerial RC Photog]

He advised me to contact the the FCC to (Federal Communications Center)
as he was also aware that we are using spectrum systems now.
:thumbdown:
I don't think I'll get tmuch help there. Don't really know anyone that works for them.

[Sonny]

I wonder if it's a good idea to stir the soup?

[Aerial RC Photog]

Someone asked if i could get that Info.
So i got it,
It would pretty much be verbatim right out of the Regs.:wink:
I have a invested interest in the whole thing, I'm not really a into self inflicted brain damage by over stressing the brain box reading Regulations.:YeaBaby:

I know it may sound left field, But it's with good intent. :thumbup:

[Sonny]

I get a sence that this whole subject of radio controled helicopters is actually pretty new to the gov. in termes of conseptualy trying to cope with the ramifications.

[Sonny]

Be care full not to stir the soup!

[outspokin1]

LEAVE THOSE GUYS ALONE!!!!
I know I'm shouting, but those guys like to start trouble.

[Pinecone]

As long as you control via direct visual reference, ie you are looking at the heli, the FAA stays out of it.

If you are controlling using a vision system, and especially out of visual contact, you jump into a totally different category and do come under the FAA.

[Aerial RC Photog]

Roger that.. !!
I'll drop all the TECH SPECS tonight, :thumbup:

And in referance to leave them guys alone.!! Not gonna happen.

I have a couple friends over there whos primary concern outside normal bussiness routines, is "Helping a Brother Out"!!

I'm sure theirs some bad stories out there from past experiances, But knowledge is power, Right!!:YeaBaby:

[billyd]

Why are you doing this? To antogonize people?

Do not draw the attention of the beast. The last thing we need is someone to review the laws around our hobby.

If the do-gooders get a hold of this hobby, we are toast. If they don't allow people to smoke in their offices anymore, they can stop you from flying a helicopter in the interests of public safety.

We are on the slope and headed downhill full steam ahead.

[Tonystott]

Randall, this thread probably should be in the Aerial Photography section, as the FAA issue only related to AP for money, not just hobby flying.

But otherwise, keep on looking mate, it would be good to find out exactly what the go is.

[Aerial RC Photog]

I've read the entire FAA UAS Regulations and there are some obvious misconceptions noted in this thread.
I think everyone will be pleasantly suprised to find out what the bottom line is.
And they do not distinguish between AP and Recreational.
There is some guidance and voluntary compliance measures and nothing that harsh.
However. UAS Regulations covering RC Aircraft up to 18,000 lbs and below have varying regulations. Most of them depend on what your using them for. AP is only one part.
I'll post the current Regs and CFR's so that a the slowest type-writter in the class can work it out.
:YeaBaby:

The only people that will have issues with the FAA are the ones Fly Experimental U.A.S using IFR / NAV at 18,000 feet. And I'm sure the colleges that are doing that are well aware of the Certifications.

[Aerial RC Photog]

I see it got moved, Lets me know where I stand on this one.

Last post for me. I'll unsubscribe and drop it. :thumbup:

[WillJames]

If you are going to deal with issues like this, then you cannot wear your feelings on your sleeve. To my knowledge only the AP guys have had to deal with this and not everyone who flys helis for fun and not to earn $$.

Every time this subject comes up, people get pretty passionate about it, but normally after a few passionate replys the original poster does not run away because it was suggested it be moved to AP and one of our support people volunteering their time (we have 31) thought he was helping and moved it.

Also, there are MANY full scale pilots and professional pilots on this site that have to deal with the FAA all the time who recreate by flying helis for fun and they might not want someone approaching the FAA representing people not making money with R/C. Just food for thought.

Wow.....

[Aerial RC Photog]

FAA is a big place.
I never wear my feelings on my sleeve either.
And I'm sorry that you feel that way about it. Being passionate is one thing, but being rude is another. I try not to get apples and Oranges confused and I've been pretty successfull at it so far.
I read the rules for Helifreak, and no where did I see the stipulation where when the FAA is brought up it's punishable by termination of a particular forum. And that's where the Rude comes from. Without explanation or reason. I never even go a PM on it.
But I do thank you for somewhat of an attempt to explain why I was wrong.

[Tonystott]

Randall, the forum wasn't terminated, just moved by the moderators to where is probably should live. Don't let it bother you, it wasn't a slight at you.

[Aerial RC Photog]

I'm well aware that the the thread wasn't terminated.
It was terminated from the Main Forum without ryme or reason..

If the moderators though that it was importart enough to move, I felt that I should have gotten atleast a courtesy PM...

Now the thread has turned into a Who's right and Who's wrong.
What a deal. :confused:

P.S.T.P

[DavidH]

The thread was moved by me. It seemed to be about regulations about AP. So I moved it to the proper forum. As for a PM. I move threads every day as do the rest of the support people. There is no reason to send PM's. There was a notice left in the Main Area that the thread was moved. It was a notice with an expiration of one day. Since the thread was active, no need to have a longer time for the notice.

David

[Aerial RC Photog]

Why are you doing this? To antogonize people?

Do not draw the attention of the beast. The last thing we need is someone to review the laws around our hobby.

If the do-gooders get a hold of this hobby, we are toast. If they don't allow people to smoke in their offices anymore, they can stop you from flying a helicopter in the interests of public safety.

We are on the slope and headed downhill full steam ahead.

Sorry I didn't get to answer this question.
Why am I doing this? It's not what I'm doing.
Since your confused by what I trying to do, I'll elaborate a little more on the subject.
There are some proposed regulations key word (Proposed) by the FAA .
On the future of flying RC Aircraft. Currently the way things are written the FAA states that people who do recreational RC flying typically practice safety and normally use good judgement.

There is a lot more to it then that.I've read the entire package that was sent to me and I was trying to pass that along. How many people know where to go to find updates on proposed Regualtion changes. If some one is going to throw a punch at me, I normally like to know where it's coming from. In this case we should all agree. In most cases change has always been met with adversity. Policy and regulation change to flying was the main point of the thread. not "AP".
Out of the slim 32 page documentation that I received, read and understood. AP was barely touched on. The hobby of UAS flight was looked upon as needing more discussions to develope a plan for the growth of the hobby in the US. I'm sure at some point their going to look for a subject matter expert on UAS flight or better yet UAV's There is currently one organization as stated by the FAA who fly's 700 of them. Can anyone guess who that might be?

I sure wished I could have gotten to that point in the Thread before I was booted from the main forum.

In any event, I tried to get a feel for what peoples thoughts were on the matter, and all I got was one Ostritch and the boot.

I won't go there anymore..

[Hangarace]

Really sorry you feel this way. I was interested in what you might have said. Are you a AMA member? If so you do realize that the AMA has a lobbying group that works with the FAA in regards to RC aircraft and their uses. The proposals are always changing and I for one am glad AMA is there on our side looking out for us.

[Tonystott]

Randall, I am very disappointed. You stasted quite categorically that FAA had informed you that there were NO regulations regarding RC helicopters. I believe you still should provide me with the answer to my question, which was "Please point me at the CFR or regulation of the FAA which differentiates between helis and planks".

This is indeed an important issue. While I do not believe FAA is interested in hoby R/C at this stage, they have definitely issued communication regarding commercial R/C flying, which differs markedly from your earlier post.

Hence my request for the source of the information, to remove any contradictions.

I can understand why some people get all sensitive regardig hobby flying and the FAA, as I suspect they too realise that changes are inevitable in due course there as well, like it or not.

[iflybyu77]

I think one thing needs to be realized. UAS/UAV and aerial photography operations are seen as one in the same by those looking to regulate it. Additionally, I don't believe what you were reading, Rhandall, had ANYTHING to do with general r/c aviation, which again is why it would be moved to the AP forum where it IS pertinent. Your audience isn't in the main forum anyways, so don't get yourself all bent out of shape. It's here, in the AP forums.

[ErichF]

Here is a collection of email coorespondance I had with the two top guys at the FAA regarding UAS operation in the NAS:

Erich -- I appreciate your checking. The Federal Register Notice calls out
2 ways to fly UAS in the NAS. Obtaining a COA or an Experimental
Airworthiness Certificate. That's it. No mention of altitude, weight,
etc. The visual line of sight operation still requires a COA. In
addition, we have an agreed upon COA with the JFACC for allowing a UAS
(predator) to fly during disasters, if the COA is activated.

Not sure who/where you are flying in a couple of weeks, but if it's outside
of restricted airspace you need a COA.

Doug
K. Douglas Davis
Manager, Unmanned Aircraft Program Office, AIR-160
work (202) 385-4636
cell (202) 345-0164




"Freymann, Erich
\(PMF\)"
<FreymannE@arrowm To
aker.com> Kenneth D Davis/AWA/FAA@FAA
cc
05/02/2007 04:47 Bruce Tarbert/AWA/FAA@FAA, David K
PM May/AWA/FAA@FAA, Ardyth
Williams/AWA/FAA@FAA
Subject
FAA Policy Ref UAS and RC Aircraft











Mr Davis, et al:

I work for a DoD contractor in support of the Army Research Lab and
USSOCOM. We participate in variety of experiments utilizing some small UAS,
including Raven, Pointer, Buster, CyberBug, and a few Off the Shelf models
we have converted to autonomous operation. We have operated these systems
in accordance with past and current FAA policy, only in military restricted
airspace. Our DoD customers sponsor our activities while operating in these
areas. We have also operated in a COA established for the operation of the
Raven SUAS over Camp Roberts, CA, in accordance with current FAA policy for
operation in the NAS.

Recently, we purchased a Bergen Observer Radio Controlled Helicopter. This
helicopter is a purpose-built aerial photography platform manufactured by
Bergen RC Helicopters, designed for various aerial imaging missions. This
aircraft is not equipped with autonomous capability, and is strictly
controlled via visual reference from the ground. Given that, by nature of
the operation, the Practice of See and Avoid is in full effect, and that
all other reasonable measures to provide an equivalent level of safety
concerning public over flight, terrain and cloud clearances are met, are we
under obligation to only operate this helicopter under the same provisions
we are for operating autonomous UAS beyond visual range?

Some of several scenarios we wish to operate this helicopter include using
the platform for disaster assessment (ex, post-hurricane), airborne
short-range data-link/comms repeater, and FEMA/DHS sponsored events such as
the exercise planned in Indianapolis in two weeks (Nuclear strike
scenario). While we understand that operating our Autonomous UAS like the
Raven in this type of environment goes against the current FAA policy
without a COA, how does the operation of our line-of-sight helicopter
flying below 300 feet AGL impact the possibility of these operations?

Rumors are flying all over the internet about the issue of RC aerial
Photography, with several opposing interpretations. I would appreciate to
hear an interpretation from the “horse’s mouth”, so to speak, on the
commercial operation of visually controlled and monitored Radio Control
Aircraft under DOD/Government sponsorship within the NAS. It is not our
intention to cite AC 91-57, as it does not apply in our situation. However,
the numbers provided in AC91-57 are good ones to work by, and I think as
long as all reasonable efforts are made in the name of safety and
see-and-avoid are accomplished, the scope of the current FAA policy
concerning UAVs does not apply to RC aircraft, commercial or recreational.

What are your thoughts/comments?

Respectfully Submitted,
Erich Freymann
UAV Technician / Test Pilot
Advanced Surveillance UVT



Erich,

You bring up two separate issues: The need for a COA and the need for
Certification.

For any operations not in Restricted Airspace, if you have a government
agency that you are supporting, you might want to encourage that agency to
apply for a COA - You may then be able to support that agency. Bruce
Tarbert can provide great insight into that approach. Two important points
about COAs: You can not apply (an agency must), and you do not have the
right to decide when and how you operate - That is between the agency and
the FAA.

As for the Experimental, Rich Posey's and David Higginbotham's office are
responsible for managing the Special Airworthiness activities. They have
two documents they can send you that would initiate the process: Program
Letter template, and a Safety Checklist template. I would suggest giving
David a call and discuss the process. His number is:


(202) 267-3498




If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

Regards

James

James Sizemore
Certification and Systems Engineering Lead

Federal Aviation Administration
Unmanned Aircraft Branch/AIR-160
800 Independence AVE., SW
Washington DC 20591

(202) 385 - 4631
james.sizemore@faa.gov



"Freymann, Erich
\(PMF\)"
<FreymannE@arrowm To
aker.com> James Sizemore/AWA/FAA@FAA
cc
07/31/2007 07:52
AM Subject
UAV Experimental Airworthiness
Certificate










Mr. Sizemore:


We are operating an R/C Helicopter to test various sensors, optics, and
procedures for VTOL UAVs. The helicopter is a commercial off-the-shelf
model manufactured by Bergen R/C Helicopters. We have access to Avon Park
Air Force Range to conduct our contracted flight ops for the Army Research
Lab; however, this requires a 2 hour drive and extensive planning and
coordination with Avon Park Range Operations. I would like to apply for an
Experimental Airworthiness Certification for our helicopter in order to
conduct limited operations for maintenance and operator training near our
facility in Tampa, FL. All official contract operations of the aircraft
would still be conducted inside military restricted airspace.

I am aware that the FAA recently granted such a certificate to our
colleagues at Cyber Defense Systems, Inc in nearby St. Petersburg, FL. We
would like to follow their lead in properly addressing the issue of UAV
operations in the NAS. How do I begin the application process?

Thank you for your assistance.

Respectfully,

Erich Freymann
UAV Technician / Test Pilot
Advanced Surveillance – UVT
WinTec Arrowmaker, Inc.
813-805-2714


Erich,

Although you have not entered into the formal process, I'm including an AFS
gentleman on this email that I work very closely with on ECs. He may be
able to provide some more insight. It should be noted that until the
specifics of your application are provided, he and the rest of the "normal
EC Team" won't be able to do specific assessments.

My suggestion is to make application as soon as possible and work the
details while you wait for your turn in the process.

James




"Freymann, Erich
\(PMF\)"
<FreymannE@arrowm To
aker.com> James Sizemore/AWA/FAA@FAA
cc
08/01/2007 07:35
AM Subject
RE: UAV Experimental Airworthiness
Certificate










James,

Since it's an R/C helicopter, at least ONE of us has to have an FAA
Private Pilot ROTORcraft rating, or will just a private pilot, SEL
suffice?

I can't see how having a full-size, manned rotorcraft rating would be of
any benefit to flying a rotor-wing UAS of this size, but size is
something the FAA is having issues with. We operators of small and
micro-UAS are unrealistically grouped with Global Hawk, Predator, and,
as in this case, Fire Scout. It's my understanding the rationale for
requiring a rated pilot on site is for traffic awareness,
communications, and "rules of the road". All rated pilots should be
competent to satisfy those three concerns.

By the way, I just heard an ugly rumor that the FAA is considering
requiring all UAS operators and observers to upgrade to a Class 2
medical, rather than the currently required Class 3. Is this true?

I haven't seen the documents show up, yet, but it's still early in the
day. No hurry.

Thanks for your clarifications,

Erich

-----Original Message-----
From: James.Sizemore@faa.gov [mailto:James.Sizemore@faa.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2007 7:13 AM
To: Freymann, Erich (PMF)
Subject: RE: UAV Experimental Airworthiness Certificate





The way they have been working it is that if you have a PIC (Pilot in
Command/Charge) that is a certificated pilot, you are covered. So,
someone on site has to have it, but not everyone.

Hope that helps. Keep me posted on the "Official Documents".

James




"Freymann, Erich

\(PMF\)"

<FreymannE@arrowm
To
aker.com> James Sizemore/AWA/FAA@FAA


cc
07/31/2007 12:26

PM
Subject
RE: UAV Experimental
Airworthiness
Certificate

















James,


Thanks for your support. It was nice talking to you this morning.

I reviewed the documents you sent, and am awaiting the official ones
from Rich or David.

I can see many items on both documents that do not apply to our system,
mostly with command, control, and communications. These are strictly
visual range, direct manual radio control only.

One deal breaker we may have concerning "pilot qualifications":

" b. Pilots must be qualified/certificated in the appropriate type of
aircraft, i.e., rotorcraft, powered lift, fixed wing, etc. "

Does this mean my crew and I would have to go out and get manned
rotorcraft ratings to fly our 25 pound RC helicopters? Is there weight
exclusion for this? As it stands, I'm the only rated pilot in the group
- PPSEL, Inst...no rotorcraft. We all do have class 2 or 3 Medicals,
however. Part of the reason for getting this certificate is to
facilitate crew training.

We will be sending my crew to a week-long dedicated RC helicopter school
for initial training. Is this something I would put into the document
response? As I said on the phone, I've been flying these for a couple
decades now.

If this is a standing requirement, then we will have to drop the
application, as it would be too cost prohibitive. It would also be a
major issue with most other applicants as few UAV programs have fully
rated manned aircraft pilots on staff, especially university programs.

Thanks,

Erich



-----Original Message-----
From: James.Sizemore@faa.gov [mailto:James.Sizemore@faa.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 10:44 AM
To: Freymann, Erich (PMF)
Subject: Re: UAV Experimental Airworthiness Certificate





Erich,

Here's the two documents you'll need to complete for the process. Rich
and/or David should be officially sending these two you shortly. If
not, I
would suggest giving them a call.

If you have any questions please call.

James


(See attached file: UAS Program Letter 18 JUL 07.doc) (See attached
file:
Safety Checklist 18 JUL 07.doc)


James Sizemore
Certification and Systems Engineering Lead

Federal Aviation Administration
Unmanned Aircraft Branch/AIR-160
800 Independence AVE., SW
Washington DC 20591

(202) 385 - 4631
james.sizemore@faa.gov







"Freymann, Erich

\(PMF\)"

<FreymannE@arrowm
To
aker.com> James Sizemore/AWA/FAA@FAA


cc
07/31/2007 07:52

AM
Subject
UAV Experimental Airworthiness

Certificate

















Mr. Sizemore:


We are operating an R/C Helicopter to test various sensors, optics, and
procedures for VTOL UAVs. The helicopter is a commercial off-the-shelf
model manufactured by Bergen R/C Helicopters. We have access to Avon
Park
Air Force Range to conduct our contracted flight ops for the Army
Research
Lab; however, this requires a 2 hour drive and extensive planning and
coordination with Avon Park Range Operations. I would like to apply for
an
Experimental Airworthiness Certification for our helicopter in order to
conduct limited operations for maintenance and operator training near
our
facility in Tampa, FL. All official contract operations of the aircraft
would still be conducted inside military restricted airspace.

I am aware that the FAA recently granted such a certificate to our
colleagues at Cyber Defense Systems, Inc in nearby St. Petersburg, FL.
We
would like to follow their lead in properly addressing the issue of UAV
operations in the NAS. How do I begin the application process?

Thank you for your assistance.

Respectfully,

Erich Freymann
UAV Technician / Test Pilot
Advanced Surveillance - UVT
WinTec Arrowmaker, Inc.
813-805-2714

[Aerial RC Photog]

I think one thing needs to be realized. UAS/UAV and aerial photography operations are seen as one in the same by those looking to regulate it. Additionally, I don't believe what you were reading, Rhandall, had ANYTHING to do with general r/c aviation, which again is why it would be moved to the AP forum where it IS pertinent. Your audience isn't in the main forum anyways, so don't get yourself all bent out of shape. It's here, in the AP forums.

Yes they are, :thumbup:
But there is one thing that seperates the two.
Civilian / Military.

I am very familiar with both. Civil is where the FAA comes in.
And the other I'm not authorized to talk about.
The FAA currently has (NO REGULATIONS) seperating AP (Aerial Photography) or Just Cruising around wasting nitro on RC Rotor Wing. All they care about from what I've read is that. Your flying a 1.02 lb TREX450 or a 8.045 Lb TREX600E or a TREX600N 7.75 lb empty weight around. Cameras do not matter to them in any way shape or form. I beleive the Term used by a Name I'm not going to mention, was, Damn that's bigger than a Goose. Reading between the lines, I got the impression, don't be stupid around scale Air Craft a Live person flying.

The rules for Planks are the same with one exception. If it's got a motor and can carry a passager your in a whole other category.

I'll give a brief recap of what I got, I'm actually burned out on the topic. And would rather Hit the Head and brush my teeth with a Jack Hammer..

1.) Don't operate Aircraft is the presense of spectators until you have a successfull flight and proven air worthy

2.) 400 Ft is you MAX Alt

3.) 3 Miles from a Airport Call the Tower

4.) Give the right of way to Full-Scale

UAS can range from 6" to 246 feet and weigh 4 Ounces to over 25,600 lbs

The code your going to get hammered with SOON is Title 14 CFR
Oh by the way (CFR) Stands for (Code of Federal Regulations)

On the public record regarding UAV's,, Yep their is over 700 of them Bad Boys catching guys spanking Donkeys and playing with AK's and a few other things

And Interim policy because their still working on how to regulate the growing population is Policy 05-01. This is used for evaluating applications for certificates of waiver for Authorized (COA's) in National Air Space.

FAA concerns for UAS's are Personal safety and and Airborne vehicles.

Oh and pretty soon for The chosen few who have UAS's out side my budget for flying, Guess what,, FAA needs some of your cash to print you a Good House Keeping seal of Approval.. "Forest Gump your my Hero tonight"!!

Oh, and your also going to be required to have a P.I.C Oberver team in the near future to Fly any UAS Aircraft.

Another Key point for the Guys with the Big Bucks,, Get it up over 18 K and pick up a IFR at your local Walmart,,,

Just off the top of head, for more Info
Check out these reads at you local Book Store,
UAS Policy (05-01)
(14 CFR ~ 91.319)
14 CFR ~ ~ 21.191 and 21.193 and 21.195

(AC) 91-57 is your Fat and SKinny book,,, that's my suggested reading.

And here's some more
Don't forget your subject matter experts AIR-100 AIR-200 AFS-400
Unmanned Air Craft guys Program Office AIR-160

PS: Aircraft Noise restrictions are amplified in Parks, Schools, Hospitals, Churches. etc... Pretty much every place I don't carry my side arm..
I think the if your in a A-10 no one is really gonna give a Crap...

There it is,, Didn't miss to much,, Not much simplification,, I tried,, but I got tired of getting beat to death with all the Stooped A$$ e-mails you didn't see here on the Web Site,,, REF: (SUPPORT GUYS)
I'm not pissed at helifreak, just mad as Hell at the @^#$*%((*^%*$&#%^@ crap that was shot to e-mail over the whole thing.
I tried to keep that on the down low.. But I'm done, cooked and fried, on the subject. And no I'm not giving up the names of the individuals that sent the e-mails. I'l work that one out on my own. They were probably RR Gyps..........:mad:

[ErichF]

Apparently you didn't read one bit of my emails with Doug Davis.