Hawg97

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About Hawg97

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I thought I'd post this for the benefit of others. I received an authorization the other day with a wonky "No Fly" zone. It was difficult to read on the hazy aerial photo the FAA used to show it. Fortunately, I was able to upload the coordinates to Google Earth that shows the specific area overlaid on quality imagery. Was also able to find a data file that puts US Airspace on Google Earth too - there are some things that are a little off, but its a great tool to use with your sectional for planning purposes. http://ef.engr.utk.edu/ef105-2012-01/modules/excel2/excel-googleearth.php http://3dairspace.org.uk/airspace.html
  2. I actually included that in my request and finally got my authorization that contained that requirement. The thing is - these radios are line of sight. They work great in the air, but not so much while on the ground with buildings and trees between you and the tower. I mainly listening for traffic already in the air and hope I can occasionally get the tower. Again, a requirement that sounds great but, may in fact not be the solution everyone thinks it is.
  3. Wow. Let me re-phrase: If you need to fly commercially and legally (and I'm not suggesting anyone fly illegally) sooner rather than later, AND your issue is with airspace - file for an Airspace Authorization. If you want results similar to what was mentioned (I.e. an actual approval or response) - file for an airspace authorization. If you are looking for a waiver from certain airspace rules - so you don't have to request an authorization every time you need one, file it if you want. Don't expect a response soon. Or ever. Or, who knows? To clarify further - If you need some other type of approval - seek a WAIVER. Because that's the only choice your given. And, as Ed mentioned they aren't being released. I've been told they aren't even being processed. Ed is probably more accurate since he's actually had a verbal conversation with someone at the FAA. It's just more ambiguity. Maybe I made a mistake believing the comment was about "airspace" since that's the topic of this forum and the comment mentioned pilots getting "quick approvals". There haven't been "quick approvals" - if they are waivers - since January 23. Its great that there are experts on here about the finer points of the hazy rules and processes, but I really hope you are hearing things from the FAA that indicates there will actually be a system put in place to do what it's purported to do - not just to meet a date given to them by Congress. Anyway, thanks for pointing out the need for further clarification.
  4. As I have recently discovered, if you are applying for a waiver - don't. Even if that seems like what you should be applying for. Even if an FAA Rep told you to apply for a waiver. Apply for an AUTHORIZATION. I resubmitted for an authorization last week. We'll see if I have better luck.
  5. Alas, I wish I were. I understand clearly the difference. What I did not know (and only assumed by the lack of communication) until today was that they were not considering "waivers". I spoke to an FAA rep months ago when I first tried to file for a waiver. I made a mistake on the initial application (filed for both authorization and waiver). We talked, and based on my explanation to him, i was told that a waiver is the approproate request. I just don't remember seeing any specific communication about waivers not being reviewed. That was the last substantive conversation I've had with the FAA. Not even a "disapproval" - which, in an odd sort of way, would have been welcomed by this point. I'll go the authorization route. I was curious about the specific application because what the FAA appears to be granting to some individuals appears to be more of a "waiver" - i.e. Can fly in Class E airspace below 100ft AGL with a September expiry. If, on the other hand, the approval were for a flight to occur tomorrow between 2pm and 4pm within 1200' of a certain radius, that would appear to be an authorization. Who knows.... Silly and no safer, but it is what it is....
  6. Did you request a "waiver" or "authorization"? What you got sounded more like a waiver, by it sounds like you asked for an authorization. I am now going on 94 days without a peep from the "less than perfect" system. It's been 3 weeks since I filed it again - also with no word. I might try filing for an authorization.
  7. I didn't mean to suggest that people should fly illegally. I am only illustrating the absurdity of this system. Rules were created to purportedly create a safer environment for manned and unmanned aircraft to coexist. The reality is that it has not done that. It is just more beuracracy that is only serving to inhibit those that are playing by the rules. You are correct that the current system is not perfect. In fact, it is not even remotely close to acceptable. With all that said, I agree with playing by the rules - even if "the rules" put folks out of business before they can even get it off the ground. Pun intended.
  8. I have filed two identical airspace waiver requests. The first was 80 days ago, the second two weeks ago. I filed the second one because nobody at the FAA had contacted me, nor could/would they give me any confirmation that it was being considered. I have not received one unsolicited response or inquiry from the FAA on either request. The closest thing I got was a response to an email I sent after filing the second request that said "it is in the queue"....whatever that means. I suspect it means they don't know; otherwise, I highly suspect I would have been contacted by now. Here are your choices in many markets if you are attempting to build a UAS photography business: 1. Fly illegally 2. Don't fly, and allow others to take business illegally. I am pretty certain this system has yet to do anything other than penalize those trying to be safe.
  9. Brilliant. Only a beuaracratic agency within the federal government would interpret a Presisential order specifically to " lower regulatory burdens on the American people by implementing and enforcing regulatory reform" as instruction to stop granting relief from their burdensome regulations. Plus, I think that order only went into effect on Feb 24, so I'm not sure why they would have stopped in January. I think the entire process is as bad or worse than anticipated.
  10. Here's my update....It's now been almost 90 days since I have filed my first waiver request. Still no contact from the FAA specifically regarding the request. I have submitted my request twice and finally got an email - once I hounded them to death - that said it was in the queue. I also notice that the FAA website has not updated their "waiver requests granted" website since 1/23/2017. Anybody hearing anything about what they are up to? This entire process is absurd.
  11. No. Sorry - just highlighting the airports I'm dealing with. Waiver request is just for all of the surface class E of KVBT.
  12. Attached is the area of the Kansas City Sectional where I fly. You can see it gets a little crazy with the Class C, surface E and D airspace all around each other. By far, the lion's share of the flying I need to do falls within the surface Class E of KVBT and the Class D of KROG (surface to 39'). My first request was kicked back because I apparently checked both the authorization request box and waiver request box accidentally. Even though I was explicitly clear as to what I was looking for, it confused the heck out of the FAA! I also spoke with an FAA reviewer and re-submitted my request. My initial request is only for a waiver to fly in all of the surface Class E of KVBT. Depending on how that goes, I will request the Class D waiver too. The reviewer did not discourage the request and re-enforced the need to specifically answer the Performance Based Standards. I am cautiously optimistic based on the proposals I put forth in my request - which frankly are more stringent than hobbyists need to follow. Will update when I get their answer.
  13. Thanks, guys. I'm afraid I probably was not specific enough for the FAA. We'll see, but frankly I am attempting to get some type of clearance in all of the surface Class E airspace around me. We'll see what happens. I'll report back on the process and ultimate result. Thanks again.
  14. Does anyone have a sense as to whether the FAA will grant a blanket waiver for operations in surface Class E or Class D airspace? I ask because the VAST majority of the airspace I need to fly has controlled airspace at the surface. Their website asks for a specific lat/long, but it's not quite that simple since almost everywhere I need to fly is controlled. I would perpetually be requesting waivers. I guess giving them a specific location could work if it didn't take 90+ days for authorization. Most clients want the product well before then....
  15. Does anyone have a sense as to whether the FAA will grant a blanket waiver for operations in surface Class E or Class D airspace? I ask because the VAST majority of the airspace I need to fly has controlled airspace at the surface. Their website asks for a specific lat/long, but it's not quite that simple since almost everywhere I need to fly is controlled. I would perpetually be requesting waivers. I guess giving them a specific location could work if it didn't take 90+ days for authorization. Most clients want the product well before then....