UAS: The FAA Tightens the Screws

[BigAl07]

In a story titled:
UAS: The FAA Tightens the Screws
Plane-ly Spoken
March 14, 2019 by Mark E. McKinnon

UAS operators will be facing greater oversight and inspections from local Flight Standards District Offices (FSDO) under a new National Policy recently issued by the FAA. The document requires all FSDOs to immediately update their 2019 National Work Program Guidelines to include new Required Surveillance Work Activities. (click the link below for the FULL story)

LeClairRyan Legal Blog Network | Legal Strategies. Business Solutions.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

I've been reading the article, above, and it reminds me of what I was telling you more than a year ago? that here they had become very hard and that we had to have a lot of documentation, that we had to do training for each type of flight every 3 months, etc????? This seems to be going that way.

Here they say it very clearly, for the sake of air safety the UAS are going to be treated as manned aircraft. Last year I was at a congress organized by AESA (the state air safety agency here) and we protested a lot because although they allow us to make certain flights, the requirements to be met to make them are so high that very few can meet them. Not to mention that 90% of drone operators are made up of a single person who pilots, checks, does the paperwork, does everything. We are not companies that have staff dedicated exclusively to doing all that paperwork, personally protest before them indicating that if what they were looking for was that only large companies with staff and resources will fly.

All this with the regulation that was approved in December 2017. When the common European regulation comes into force we will see what happens. We have to be attentive because having one thing in mind, they do nothing but copy each other, in the U.S. they draw a regulation and it is usually replicated in Europe, in Europe they draw a regulation and it is usually replicated in the U.S.. And so internationally with all countries.

In case someone has the slightest doubt that this is going to become enormously complicated, even more so, forget it, we are still at the beginning ?

 

[Phaedrus]

Close reading of this memo indicates that it is really about how to document and what level/number of incidents it takes to trigger the new documentation procedure. I suppose that means that enforcement will be increased, but this looks to me to be more of a procedure rather than a change in policy.

 

[R Martin]

UAS operators will be facing greater oversight and inspections from local Flight Standards District Offices (FSDO) under a new National Policy recently issued by the FAA. The document requires all FSDOs to immediately update their 2019 National Work Program Guidelines to include new Required Surveillance Work Activities.

This is a step in the right direction.

 

[BigAl07]

This is a step in the right direction.

Yes sir and I hope it keeps going and builds momentum and isn't just "Lip Service.

 

[R Martin]

Yes sir and I hope it keeps going and builds momentum and isn't just "Lip Service.

Agreed. The education end of the process just does not seem to work as they expected. There are still far too many operators that are playing fast and loose with the regs or ignoring them all together. Its time the FAA steps up the enforcement end of the process to curb all the reckless behavior.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

I've been reading the article, above, and it reminds me of what I was telling you more than a year ago? that here they had become very hard and that we had to have a lot of documentation, that we had to do training for each type of flight every 3 months, etc????? This seems to be going that way.

Here they say it very clearly, for the sake of air safety the UAS are going to be treated as manned aircraft. Last year I was at a congress organized by AESA (the state air safety agency here) and we protested a lot because although they allow us to make certain flights, the requirements to be met to make them are so high that very few can meet them. Not to mention that 90% of drone operators are made up of a single person who pilots, checks, does the paperwork, does everything. We are not companies that have staff dedicated exclusively to doing all that paperwork, personally protest before them indicating that if what they were looking for was that only large companies with staff and resources will fly.

All this with the regulation that was approved in December 2017. When the common European regulation comes into force we will see what happens. We have to be attentive because having one thing in mind, they do nothing but copy each other, in the U.S. they draw a regulation and it is usually replicated in Europe, in Europe they draw a regulation and it is usually replicated in the U.S.. And so internationally with all countries.

In case someone has the slightest doubt that this is going to become enormously complicated, even more so, forget it, we are still at the beginning ?

I am not worried about the FAA. Thankfully, we don't deal with an external, out of country organization, like the EU (I feel for you). Our FAA made clear from the beginning their stance on a balance between encouraging commercial operations and safety (it's in their charter). Professional UAS operators (most) have little to worry about (unless we join the EU )

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

Agreed. The education end of the process just does not seem to work as they expected. There are still far too many operators that are playing fast and loose with the regs or ignoring them all together. Its time the FAA steps up the enforcement end of the process to curb all the reckless behavior.

Completely agree with you; once the FSDOs decide to start leaving their offices and begin pursuing drone complaints filed by responsible operators, and stop their policy of not going after complaints unless they come wrapped in a red ribbon things will improve. I think some FSDO staffers need to be retrained in how to investigate (beyond easy ramp checks), perhaps the FBI can help them.

 

[R Martin]

Completely agree with you; once the FSDOs decide to start leaving their offices and begin pursuing drone complaints filed by responsible operators, and stop their policy of not going after complaints unless they come wrapped in a red ribbon things will improve. I think some FSDO staffers need to be retrained in how to investigate (beyond easy ramp checks), perhaps the FBI can help them.

Why not just call you back up and you can run seminars. That should give you a reason to get out of bed before noon each day. ;-)

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

Why not just call you back up and you can run seminars. That should give you a reason to get out of bed before noon each day. ;-)

Work full time? NEVER again, buddy. Life's too short....

 

[R Martin]

Work full time? NEVER again, buddy. Life's too short....

Not there quite yet. It is in sight now though....

 

[Phaedrus]

Completely agree with you; once the FSDOs decide to start leaving their offices and begin pursuing drone complaints filed by responsible operators, and stop their policy of not going after complaints unless they come wrapped in a red ribbon things will improve. I think some FSDO staffers need to be retrained in how to investigate (beyond easy ramp checks), perhaps the FBI can help them.

It seems what they are doing is requiring investigations and documentation, but only when certain thresholds are met:

8. Action. Each FSDO will locally add the following Required Surveillance Work Activities (R-item) to their FY 2019 NPG work programs: a. Conditional R-Item. Conduct one UAS site visit, either Operations (1623), Maintenance (3631), or Avionics (5631), where 5 or more UAS investigations1 occur within Class B, C, or D airspace, or 10 or more total investigations occur in any airspace. Do not enter an “X4XX” code for public aircraft operations (PAO), as that should be indicated in the “National Use” field. (See reporting instructions in Appendix A).

b. Targeted R-Item. Conduct one UAS site visit, either Operations (1623), Maintenance (3631), or Avionics (5631) when notified by Flight Standards Service Office of General Aviation Safety Assurance leadership. Do not enter an “X4XX” code for PAO, as that should be indicated in the “National Use” field.

I think it is a good step, but given their resources it looks like it will take repeated violations or reports of incidents before they finally take the time to look into things.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

I am not worried about the FAA. Thankfully, we don't deal with an external, out of country organization, like the EU (I feel for you). Our FAA made clear from the beginning their stance on a balance between encouraging commercial operations and safety (it's in their charter). Professional UAS operators (most) have little to worry about (unless we join the EU )

The similarity is exactly the same. Europe or the European Union is the one that establishes the regulation and then you are not going to deal with any other country (state) than yours, which will be responsible for the regulation, in its territory, is complied with. It is exactly what to say the federal state and then each of the states where you live. It is expected to come into force in two years at the latest. For now we comply with the regulations of each country.

Right now, if I go to France, I have to comply with the rules in France, which are not exactly the same as the rules that apply to me. If I go to Germany, the same thing happens. When you get the common European regulation, we are all going to have the same regulation in each of the countries, it really is an improvement.

In another forum we are commenting, which seems, AirMap wants to get. That in each state there is a regulation and that they are the guarantors of it. In Europe will be an equal regulation for everyone, and a common airspace for drones.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

The similarity is exactly the same. Europe or the European Union is the one that establishes the regulation and then you are not going to deal with any other country (state) than yours, which will be responsible for the regulation, in its territory, is complied with. It is exactly what to say the federal state and then each of the states where you live. It is expected to come into force in two years at the latest. For now we comply with the regulations of each country.

Right now, if I go to France, I have to comply with the rules in France, which are not exactly the same as the rules that apply to me. If I go to Germany, the same thing happens. When you get the common European regulation, we are all going to have the same regulation in each of the countries, it really is an improvement.

In another forum we are commenting, which seems, AirMap wants to get. That in each state there is a regulation and that they are the guarantors of it. In Europe will be an equal regulation for everyone, and a common airspace for drones.

Not the same; our country will never yield to the whims of an external foreign organization. If I were doing business in Europe, it makes sense. All aviation here is managed by the FAA, not the states. And we don't surrender aviation rule making to any non-US body. It's an American thing. Is just our way. Don't really looking to get into a whole EU/Brexit type of discussion. No offense intended.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

Not the same; our country will never yield to the whims of an external foreign organization. If I were doing business in Europe, it makes sense. All aviation here is managed by the FAA, not the states. And we don't surrender aviation rule making to any non-US body. It's an American thing. Is just our way. Don't really looking to get into a whole EU/Brexit type of discussion. No offense intended.

English isn't my language, but I didn't think I explained myself so badly. It is not a question of giving in to anyone, they copy each other's rules, that is what I have said.

Speaking of the USA, for now it is the FAA that controls the regulations in the whole country, but there are intentions and projects so that the states have control over it. We have commented on this in another forum, look for some information about AirMap. Your compatriots have told me, not that I say so.

Anyway, just so you know, the regulations are agreed internationally, it's not strictly an American issue, even if they have full power in their territory. Then each country enforces it in its own sky.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

English isn't my language, but I didn't think I explained myself so badly. It is not a question of giving in to anyone, they copy each other's rules, that is what I have said.

Speaking of the USA, for now it is the FAA that controls the regulations in the whole country, but there are intentions and projects so that the states have control over it. We have commented on this in another forum, look for some information about AirMap. Your compatriots have told me, not that I say so.

Anyway, just so you know, the regulations are agreed internationally, it's not strictly an American issue, even if they have full power in their territory. Then each country enforces it in its own sky.

Your English is fine. The FAA control over our airspace is memorialized in the acts and laws passed by our Congress. Those laws make it clear that no state will be permitted any legal control over any US airspace; otherwise it turns to chaos. I don't ever see any foreign organization being allowed by Americans to set aviation rules in US airspace. Our air regulations are ours and not patterned after any other country. I've been an aviator since 1969, yes, there is an International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), a UN agency created to established international ( read= US) standards.

Under our Constitution, Article II, “executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America,” which means federal agencies' authority comes from the President. IMHO, I don't see the Executive branch yielding that authority to the states, ever. Our system of government is very different from the EU model. Our national airspace is strictly an American issue...

We agree, mostly.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

Comrade, look up information about AirMap and what they're after. I think the system as you have it now is the right thing to do, but there are private interests that want to change it.

Comparing it with Europe, in this sense, is a similarity, I think, precise, because like you there, each state has its own competences and I think that each state has them on air safety is a serious mistake. In Europe each country now has them, the idea is that the European Union is going to implement a common one which I believe will be beneficial.

Another thing is the type of regulation they implement, more and more changes are going to happen, all thanks to the brainless. If everything works correctly they will not harden them but I believe that as things stand, it will get much worse still. I would like to be wrong, for our sake. Security, yes, but don't let them crush us

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

Comrade, look up information about AirMap and what they're after. I think the system as you have it now is the right thing to do, but there are private interests that want to change it.

Comparing it with Europe, in this sense, is a similarity, I think, precise, because like you there, each state has its own competences and I think that each state has them on air safety is a serious mistake. In Europe each country now has them, the idea is that the European Union is going to implement a common one which I believe will be beneficial.

Another thing is the type of regulation they implement, more and more changes are going to happen, all thanks to the brainless. If everything works correctly they will not harden them but I believe that as things stand, it will get much worse still. I would like to be wrong, for our sake. Security, yes, but don't let them crush us

" AirMap and what they're after"
Irrelevant, a private business desires will not overrule the US federal government.
"because like you there, each state has its own competences "
No, they do not. The FAA does. Some may want to but they can't.
"Security, yes, but don't let them crush us"
Agreed...

Our aviation system is the best in the world. We invented aviation.

 

[R.Perry]

The way I read this if we are flying legally, then we have little to be concerned about. The FAA has plenty of incompetent and irresponsible operators to deal with.
You want to get a visit by the FAA, take a job flying around a active college, or any other school for that matter. They may just observe your operation and if it is legal my never have a chat with you.
I do hope it gets to a point where people will be forced to play buy the rules or get out of the game.

 

[Bob]

There is a lot of talk about illegal activities here in the US. My question is as an operator that follows the rules what are we doing about it as it appears we are the ones complaining about the illegal activity this is not something I see in the news on a daily basis so what illegal activities are we referring to and if we want to put a stop to it what can we do?