-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
UAVs, not just an Air Force gig anymore
- Thread starter kanakAttack
- Start date
You can run, but you can't hide.
WishICouldFly
UO Future Pork Chop
"We got a big camp here, time to bring in the Reaper!"
Is that why I've had the call "traffic 11 o'clock, 3 miles a UAV" just 2 days ago over southern California? And it wasn't a military UAV either.
There are limitations placed on civilian UAVs by the FAA, but they are allowed to fly.
Further, the military can fly UAVs how and when they please as the military is not bound by the FARs. They follow them as a courtesy but can break them whenever the commanders feel necessary.
Says who? (I'm not calling you out; I just hadn't heard this, and I'm curious.)
Capt Morgan's
Banned
I think if the forestry service is using them then wouldn't they technically be a government a/c and not civilian so what would be the issue with the FAA?
At last check when there is a major forest fire and the tankers and all USFS a/c are flying they block off the airspace so they have unrestricted use of it anyway.
:sleep_125
Bullet
New Member
Says the FAA. With special approval yes, but they are officially NOT approved.
In 2005, 1st Air Force requested unmanned aircraft system support to provide video for search and rescue purposes in the wake of Katrina; however, because of national airspace restrictions, the request was cancelled.
"We couldn't fly because we didn't have the authorization, and there wasn't a sufficient amount of time to accomplish the necessary coordination," said Tom Thibodeau, ACC unmanned aerial systems management consultant. "Now, we have a process to receive approval to fly Predators within hours as opposed to weeks."
Hurricane Katrina emphasized not only why it's important to have assets readily available, but also to have an understanding in place between the FAA and the military, said Lt. Col. Matthew Bannon, ACC chief of unmanned aerial systems. And now that Predators are authorized to fly in direct support of disaster relief, these taskings must be balanced with their ongoing overseas missions. With the exception of one training squadron, 100 percent of ACC's Predator assets are currently supporting operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.
Mod note. Full story available here
Bullet
New Member
I was speaking about the predator...
Yeah the commander can do whatever he wants.....riiight
Did a little search for Predators and the FAA....
Presently, Predator and Reaper aircrew rely on either the nose camera or the MTS cameras to "detect and avoid." Using these sensors can be equated to "looking through a straw." Scanning for traffic is difficult, and when identified, distance and altitude judgment is often inaccurate. Other UAS tools used to increase situational awareness of manned aircraft are Link-16, Air Traffic Control advisories and vigilant monitoring of radio traffic. However, UAS aircrew do not have the luxury of a sanitized cockpit environment working in the GCS, and as a result these other flight path deconfliction tools, are also limited. Finally, UAS operators further mitigate the mid-air collision hazard through strict airspace planning and procedures. This is especially the case when flying within the US airspace structure as UASs are not currently allowed to file and fly like manned aircraft. Instead they currently operate in special use airspace or in specially sanitized airspace coordinated with the FAA.
The way I read this is that they are indeed allowed to fly in US airspace but just have to follow special guidelines.
The link where I found this: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-161658029.html
Presently, Predator and Reaper aircrew rely on either the nose camera or the MTS cameras to "detect and avoid." Using these sensors can be equated to "looking through a straw." Scanning for traffic is difficult, and when identified, distance and altitude judgment is often inaccurate. Other UAS tools used to increase situational awareness of manned aircraft are Link-16, Air Traffic Control advisories and vigilant monitoring of radio traffic. However, UAS aircrew do not have the luxury of a sanitized cockpit environment working in the GCS, and as a result these other flight path deconfliction tools, are also limited. Finally, UAS operators further mitigate the mid-air collision hazard through strict airspace planning and procedures. This is especially the case when flying within the US airspace structure as UASs are not currently allowed to file and fly like manned aircraft. Instead they currently operate in special use airspace or in specially sanitized airspace coordinated with the FAA.
The way I read this is that they are indeed allowed to fly in US airspace but just have to follow special guidelines.
The link where I found this: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-161658029.html
Look guys...quit trying to wiki-google the answer. It's really easy....
From FAR/AIM 2007...
To ensure segregation of UA(V) operation from manned aircraft, the military typically conducts UA(V) operations within restricted or other special use airspace. However, UA(V) operations are now being approved in the NAS system outside of special use airspace through the use of FAA-issued Certificates of Waiver Authorization (COA) or through the issuance of an experimental airworthiness certificate. COA and airworthiness approvals authorize UA flight operations to be contained within specific geographic boundaries, usually require coordination with an air traffic control facility (ATC) and typically require the issuance of a NOTAM describing the operation to be conducted. UA approvals also require observers to provide "see-and-avoid" capability to the UA(V) crew and to provide necessary guidance to manuver the UA(V) away from any detected manned aircraft. For UA operations approved above FL180, UA(V)'s are operated under instrument flight rules, are in communication with ATC and are equipped with a transponder.
HAL...you are of course correct that none of this neccesarily applies...but even the FAR doesn't prohibit...wanted to clarify since we posted simultaneously...
From FAR/AIM 2007...
To ensure segregation of UA(V) operation from manned aircraft, the military typically conducts UA(V) operations within restricted or other special use airspace. However, UA(V) operations are now being approved in the NAS system outside of special use airspace through the use of FAA-issued Certificates of Waiver Authorization (COA) or through the issuance of an experimental airworthiness certificate. COA and airworthiness approvals authorize UA flight operations to be contained within specific geographic boundaries, usually require coordination with an air traffic control facility (ATC) and typically require the issuance of a NOTAM describing the operation to be conducted. UA approvals also require observers to provide "see-and-avoid" capability to the UA(V) crew and to provide necessary guidance to manuver the UA(V) away from any detected manned aircraft. For UA operations approved above FL180, UA(V)'s are operated under instrument flight rules, are in communication with ATC and are equipped with a transponder.
HAL...you are of course correct that none of this neccesarily applies...but even the FAR doesn't prohibit...wanted to clarify since we posted simultaneously...
You made a blanket statement saying the FAA doesn't allow UAVs in U.S. airspace. That is NOT correct. There are special rules and limits, but UAVs ARE allowed. I have seen many civilian UAVs while flying airways between Las Vegas and southern California cities. These UAVs were not in any special use airspace. They have been called out to me by ATC and I have seen them visually. Sometimes they have been accompanied by chase aircraft and sometimes they are by themselves.
The military does NOT have to follow the FARs. If the appropriate operational commander decides that mission accomplishment is more critical than following a FAR, the FAR will be ignored. Any violation the FAA files against the aircraft will be "filed" by the commander. As a common practice and courtesy, military pilots are required to follow FARs unless otherwise authorized by the appropriate military authority. But this is a military imposed requirement and it is because the military has decided to do so. State aircraft (i.e. military) are exempt from civil regulations.
If the Pentagon had decided flying UAVs over New Orleans after Katrina was vital to their objectives, they would have regardless of what the FAA said. But it wasn't a primarily military mission and they weren't the final decision makers.
Believe it or not, that is the way it is. I personally was ordered to violate the LAX Class B airspace (then called the TCA) off Long Beach once to conduct a multi-million dollar radar test that had been planned for months. The winds shifted and LAX decided to cancel our airspace reservation so they could vector LAX arrivals through the area we needed. COMNAVAIRPAC said f'em and we flew anyway collecting a couple of hundred flight violations as we repeatedly entered and exited the LAX Class B without ATC authorization and caused the rerouting of countless commercial airline flights.
If you were a military aviator, you would know this.