Jump to content
Ed Cesnalis

Sierra Nevada Research Labratory

Recommended Posts

I was out checking jobs today.  Here is a photo of the University of California at Santa Barbara's Sierra Nevada Aquatic Research Lab.  The concrete truck is at the foundation for a new lecture hall that we are working on.

 

 

post-6-0-74112900-1409162673_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I was out checking jobs today.

from the air.. in a CT

 

 

 

.....

 

 

 

I picked the wrong job, it's hard to check/work on anything IT related from the cockpit :( dangit....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, none of us are doing anything business related when exercising Sport Pilot privileges, but then, you know that, of course. :)

 

If I count hay bales or look at variegated patterns in crop fields I want to assure you that I do not use the information to make farming decisions. If I fly to an airport and subsequently attend an agricultural event you can bet good money that I will forget everything I learned there on the flight home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's a commercial use unless you are receiving payment to fly.  You can fly to go to a business meeting without a commercial ticket, this is no different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's a commercial use unless you are receiving payment to fly.  You can fly to go to a business meeting without a commercial ticket, this is no different.

Andy, you are in error.

 

61.315

 

(a) If you hold a sport pilot certificate you may act as pilot in command of a light-sport aircraft, except as specified in paragraph © of this section.

 

© You may not act as pilot in command of a light-sport aircraft:

 

(1) That is carrying a passenger or property for compensation or hire.

 

(2) For compensation or hire.

 

(3) In furtherance of a business.

 

What is "in furtherance of a business"? The FAA says:

 

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2012/allen-terrafugia%20-%20(2012)%20legal%20interpretation.pdf

 

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/pol_adjudication/agc200/interpretations/data/interps/2011/gilbert%20-%20(2011)%20legal%20interpretation.pdf

 

Rebecca says no. You can not fly to a business meeting exercising Sport Pilot privileges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So "furtherance of a business" in SP is not the same as "furtherance of a business" under PP?  Only the FAA could come up with that.

 

So if I have a business lunch meeting 300 miles away, carrying only myself, I MUST drive and and cannot use my airplane?  If CT has a worksite and would like to see it from the air, he cannot?  Even though PPs are perfectly legal in doing these things?  Idiotic.  How big is the official FAA TFR all SPs must avoid around any area that we are currently conducting business in?   <_<    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So does an LSRM who flies a plane to make sure everything works correctly do it to further their business? What about SPCFIs? Can they charge for lessons? (Incidentally, ham radio has similar rules.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy, the wording is very different for private pilot compared to sport pilot. Private pilot says you may and then gives exceptions, and sport says you may not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way to enforce this unless you turn yourself in and no one can read your mind unless you blab it all over and then they would probably wouldn't do a thing anyway. 

Why worry and split hairs.

 

Everyone here flying or driving a car breaks some rule sooner or later with full knowledge or by failing to know the law. 

 

I'm with Ed. I fly to Las Vegas Monday and who's to say why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So does an LSRM who flies a plane to make sure everything works correctly do it to further their business?

 

Yes.

 

You can write in the flight test required in the logs, but you can't actually flight test the aircraft as a sport pilot, because it is in connection to your business. If you have a private license with a medical, then yes you could.

 

Whether or not you actually do that, though, is something you keep your mouth shut about :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the best of both worlds. I am retired so I have no business to worry about. I am an LSRM-A but only work on my own plane, so I guess I release it to myself to fly. A whole lot of strange scenarios around this rule.

As a general principle I try to follow the law. I think the FAA is going to find that rules that cannot be followed don't stand up particularly well in court - reference the NTSBs decision on the kid that the FAA tried to find for using his UAS to video a college campus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So does an LSRM who flies a plane to make sure everything works correctly do it to further their business? What about SPCFIs? Can they charge for lessons? (Incidentally, ham radio has similar

 

If a flight test is required, it must be done by at least a private pilot, per 91.407.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doug, you aren't exactly accurately characterizing the photographer in the Virginia incident. And, the FAA has appealed.

UAS is in the same boat - as a farmer, you are not permitted to fly a UAS over your own corn field and make agronomic decisions based on what you see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim, I could add to what I said. I have been flying R/C a lot longer than the real thing. I know a couple folks that work with the UAS program at UND and I know another that is making money with a high end ($20k+) video octocopter. He is willing to jump through any hoops the FAA comes up with, but they have no hoops. The NTSB said they have no authority over RC.

I had not heard for certain that the FAA ifs appealing the $16k fine against the UAV pilot however although they said they were considering it. Can you point me to that info?

There is a farm equipment trade show here next week called Big Iron where UAS folks will be showing off their wares to farmers.

Does the FAA control airspace and aircraft below 400'? That seemed to be a part of the case.

Now the FAA has passed a rule that changes how clubs have been doing things for years and the national Modeler's group is vehemently opposing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the wording "in furtherance of a business" referred to the deductibility of expenses, as in would be deductible if PP not if SP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the wording "in furtherance of a business" referred to the deductibility of expenses, as in would be deductible if PP not if SP?

Nope. The FAA is very clear on what "in furtherance of a business means". The problem is, what the FAA says it means is not what we would like it to mean. We lose. See the links in my message above.

 

The recommendation to apply the 3 S's to the situation is a typical recommendation that has one flaw which can sometimes lead to very unhappy results.

 

Three Esses? When you find the neighbor's pet dog out running your sheep, what do you do about it? Shoot. Shovel. Shut up.

 

As you sensed immediately, the human failure part of this is the "shut up" part. We seem to be wired to just have to tell someone - wife, brother-in-law, best friend, someone who is complaining about the same problem, etc. And that person does not have the same incentive to shut up.

 

The problem is the same in aviation. One can do any number of things. We've all heard of pilots who fly with an expired medical or with a plane out of annual, just as we've heard of people who drive their car when their license is suspended. What is the downside of this? Often, seemingly nothing until a problem arises. What is the problem in aviation if you go ahead and fly anyway? An accident gets the NTSB involved and if there is a passenger (s)he gets an attorney involved, a disgruntled fellow pilot blows your cover at some WINGS meeting, an angry competitive mechanic rats you out at the FSDO, the airport manager you irritated decides to make an anonymous phone call to the FAA, your ex-wife decides to take revenge for some alleged wrong. Not worried about any of this? No problem. That is your call to make. How does the song go, "Don't worry, be happy".

 

One could say the same thing about maintenance. What is the downside of ignoring the 5 year hose replacement schedule? Usually, absolutely nothing. So there we are. Fly for business and ignore the hose schedule. What's not to like?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim, I could add to what I said. I have been flying R/C a lot longer than the real thing. I know a couple folks that work with the UAS program at UND and I know another that is making money with a high end ($20k+) video octocopter. He is willing to jump through any hoops the FAA comes up with, but they have no hoops. The NTSB said they have no authority over RC.

I had not heard for certain that the FAA ifs appealing the $16k fine against the UAV pilot however although they said they were considering it. Can you point me to that info?

There is a farm equipment trade show here next week called Big Iron where UAS folks will be showing off their wares to farmers.

Does the FAA control airspace and aircraft below 400'? That seemed to be a part of the case.

Now the FAA has passed a rule that changes how clubs have been doing things for years and the national Modeler's group is vehemently opposing it.

Doug, I can add my comments to each of your points but we're getting some serious thread drift in doing so. Want to start a new one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim, I could add to what I said. I have been flying R/C a lot longer than the real thing. I know a couple folks that work with the UAS program at UND and I know another that is making money with a high end ($20k+) video octocopter. He is willing to jump through any hoops the FAA comes up with, but they have no hoops. The NTSB said they have no authority over RC.

I had not heard for certain that the FAA ifs appealing the $16k fine against the UAV pilot however although they said they were considering it. Can you point me to that info?

There is a farm equipment trade show here next week called Big Iron where UAS folks will be showing off their wares to farmers.

Does the FAA control airspace and aircraft below 400'? That seemed to be a part of the case.

Now the FAA has passed a rule that changes how clubs have been doing things for years and the national Modeler's group is vehemently opposing it.

The FAA controls all airspace in the united states and territories. The "400 foot rule," by the way, is a myth. That is the agreed height by the AMA. There is no FAA regulation. The FAA has long stood on the stance that model aircraft can self-regulate (and self limit due to antenna design), but with recent technology, the range is drastically increased, and with remote video, it means that people will be flying without using LOS.

 

The reason that the NTSB shot down the FAA's rule on UAS, is because the FAA did not follow rule-making procedures established for regulatory agencies. They have the authority over UAS, but they are not allowed to just throw around rules willy-nilly, as much as we think they do :P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the FAA:

Model Aircraft

Recreational use of airspace by model aircraft is covered by FAA Advisory Circular 91-57, which generally limits operations to below 400 feet above ground level and away from airports and air traffic. In 2007, the FAA clarified that AC 91-57 only applies to modelers, and specifically excludes individuals or companies flying model aircraft for business purposes.

 

The FAA guidance is available at: http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/91-57.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's an advisory circular, not a regulation. It holds no regulatory authority.

 

Nice to be proven wrong though and see there IS a sort of "official" (emphasis on quotes) rule about 400 ft. I've always seen it in the AMA standards for operating model aircraft, but never found it in a regs search.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They banned FPV devices (like goggles) which completely obscures your (the pilot) view. FPV itself is still legal, and other people around you can still wear them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×