So do I understand you are not required to file NOTAMS any longer with a COA?
NO that's not what I was saying (assuming you were replying to me). I'm talking about flying under my 333 I had to file NOTAMs. When I fly under Part 107 NOTAM is not required.
Your COA will guide you on what you do or do not need to do. Remember it's a legal document and does not have "Grey Area".
Just for reference this is what I see as FAA policy. Let me know what you interpret this to mean?
That's for a Section 333 Exemption. Most have now expired and very few are being renewed simply because most everything the vast majority of us do can now be done under Part 107 or a Public Use COA. If you require a flight that can't fall into one of those 2 sections (including Waivers etc) then you can file for a Section 333 Exemption. Some people have stated that 333's are going/gone away but that's not true. We have had and utilized the Section 333 Exemption for many years to allow manned aircraft to operate in situations that we can not meet the regs (such as modifying the plane for specific operations not intended by the manufacturer).
Hi Tom, When you are granted a COA, it will specifically state what you are required to do within the COA itself. Generally you do not need to file a NOTAM. Just read your COA to see what is required.
BINGO! The COA is your guide and it's wording is very specific and not to be mixed/matched with other approvals such as Part 107 or Section 333's. You fly by one document or the other.
Thanks, Guys! Guess it wouldn't hurt to file a NOTAM anyway. I often see them on the FAA map. There is still a lot of confusion out there on what is mandated in flying our drones.
NOTAMs are a GREAT idea if done correctly. There was a time when I saw UAS operators putting a NOTAM up over their base area day after day after day
(when they were not going to be flying but being lazy or trying to show Air Superiority over other UAS operations)... completely missing the point of the NOTAM and wasting a valuable resource.
