PRESIDENT TO PRESIDENT
FAA and Model Aviation
by Dave Brown, AMA President
Why are we hearing so much about the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) lately? Many
modelers are asking this question, so I'll try
to give you an explanation that you can share
with other members.
The FAA's recent interest in our activities is
coincidentally coming from two separate areas
within the FAA. The first issue at hand is
airspace used by model airplanes. Their
attention is focused on us because of
technological growth within model aviation and
the use of unmanned aircraft for myriad
commercial and governmental purposes. The FAA is
wrestling with the best way to safely integrate
these operations into the national airspace,
which will be a daunting task.
Another reason the FAA is focusing on model
aviation is because many of these commercial and
government activities are being conducted with
model airplanes that have been modified to make
them suitable for these tasks.
In the eyes of the FAA—or at least within the
current thinking of the FAA—a model airplane
ceases to be a model airplane when it is used
for any commercial purpose, regardless of its
size. What it becomes and what regulations it is
subject to is still up in the air. Although the
FAA is discussing this topic, it seems to be
adamant that the aircraft are no longer model
airplanes, and should not be operated under the
guise of the unregulated—or perhaps more
appropriately, self-regulated—sport of model
aviation.
Unmanned aircraft or UAs are the latest moniker
for these non-model airplanes, replacing the
earlier RPV and UAV. At the root of the
difficulty is the basic philosophy of the FAA,
which separates model airplanes flown for sport
and recreation from UAs. It is one of its uses
rather than one of its descriptions. Within the
aeromodeling community, we tend to differentiate
between UA and model airplanes on the basis of
equipment and technology, and this difference in
philosophy creates a few misunderstandings.
As you can imagine, this transitional period,
while they develop regulations to apply to these
unmanned aircraft, will be full of turmoil as
each local office of the FAA applies its own
interpretation to the situation.
AMA is working with the FAA in an attempt to
keep the sport of model aviation alive and well,
while the FAA grapples with the difficult task
of defining the regulatory climate for UAs. In
the meantime, we as aeromodelers need to become
familiar with the national airspace system. We
may end up in a situation in which limits on the
airspace we are allowed to fly in will be
determined by the class of airspace in which we
are flying. You may want to make a small
investment in a book called 2005 FAR/AIM Book
and study the airspace section.
The second arena in which there have been many
questions raised lately has to do with our use
of airports for model airplane events. The real
question is not the use of airports for model
airplane activities—that has not been
challenged—but rather the “total closure” of
federally funded airports for model airplane
activities. The FAA has many policies that
regulate the management and use of airports in
general, and even more regulations apply to
airports that receive federal funding. Among
those regulations is a provision which prohibits
the "total" closure of a federally funded
airport for "non aeronautical activity."
This regulation has existed for a long time, but
it has been interpreted differently by different
regions of the FAA. It may have been the basis
for some refusals to allow modeling events to
take place in the past; we have certainly been
refused the use of airports, but I am not aware
of this regulation being stated as the reason.
In the current situation, a modeling group
wanted to use an airport for a jet fly. With the
support of the airport management and the local
chamber of commerce, the group applied to the
local FAA office to close the airport for the
duration of the event.
The local FAA office rejected the request,
deciding that model airplane activity
constitutes a “non-aeronautical” use of the
airport. The local club, as well as the local
politicians and chamber, pushed the question
“upstairs” to the FAA in Washington, and the FAA
supported the local office’s determination.
At that point, the decision was still local, but
when it was pointed out to the FAA that similar
situations in other parts of the country were
not being made subject to this rule, the FAA
issued a letter which “clarified” the situation
to all regions. This letter effectively defined
model airplane activities as “non-aeronautical”
activity for purposes of this rule.
This would seem to shut us out of some airports,
but even that is not the final word. Because the
term “total closure” isn't defined and is used
only in one paragraph of the entire document
dealing with airport regulation, what
constitutes “total closure?” Is closure of the
only runway at a single runway airport for 10
minutes a “total closure?” How about closing it
for four hours, opening it up to full-scale
traffic for an hour, and then repeating the
schedule?
Another obvious question is why would model
airplanes be non-aeronautical activity in the
eyes of one part of the FAA, while another part
of the FAA considers us a being subject to its
rules? Again, AMA is working with the FAA to
resolve this issue, and we seem to be making
some progress. In the meantime, I would
recommend that you not change the way in which
you do business. This ruling would seem to
affect only those situations in which we are
proposing to close the entire airport or the
only runway of an airport that receives federal
funding.
That narrows the effect of this ruling
considerably, and I would not let this ruling
stop me from making the request for any airport
that you would have considered before this
ruling because it may still be subject to
interpretation. Or perhaps it may be changed by
the FAA as a result of our efforts to have it
changed.
Fortunately, while the FAA initially presented a
firm reaction to our questions, they are now
becoming more receptive to our position that we
should be allowed this access.
That's how my month as president has gone; how
has yours gone?
|
|
