Has anyone tried to request a Waiver/ Airspace Authorization through the FAA? I just requested one today and am wondering how long it typically takes to hear back from them? Also, are there any tips in requesting a waiver to help it move along or makes sure that it gets approved?
Haven't done one yet, but I've heard like 90 days (seriously). As an alternative, you can try to phone ATC to give you the clearance directly, but they may try to direct you back to the web site. I've heard its a good idea to get cozy with your local airport managers.
We were told in a continuing education class that they go through smoothly if everything is correctly filled out and submitted. Problem children often get set aside until the 89th day.
Marcus, post: 421843, member: 11568 wrote: Has anyone tried to request a Waiver/ Airspace Authorization through the FAA? I just requested one today and am wondering how long it typically takes to hear back from them? Also, are there any tips in requesting a waiver to help it move along or makes sure that it gets approved?
Yes indeed. As a matter of fact, I just had one denied; the denial arrived yesterday, some 4 weeks or so after application. YMMV. That said, I think the turnaround may be a function of which section you're applying to waive. I applied for sections 107.31 (operating beyond visual line of sight), and 107.51 (operating above 400'). Requests that involve airspace other than G, I believe would take more time, as they'd involve the specific controlled airspace procedures and requirements.
I did this strictly as a test, to find the answers to the very questions you're asking, and learned a lot in the process. For each section you're asking to get waived, you need to describe the steps that will be taken to mitigate the risk to an acceptable level. I outlined a rural mapping exercise over hilly rural terrain some 15 nautical from the nearest Class D airspace; thought I did a pretty good job at describing steps to mitigate the risk (but clearly not good enough apparently).
A primary concern for this application was how to avoid non-participating aircraft. Given that most mapping exercises have the POV camera pointed straight down, you can't very well use the on board camera to see and avoid anything (except perhaps tall trees).
But i've since spoken with a flight briefer for some ideas, and he suggested that filing a NOTAM would satisfy that requirement. I've been a pilot for many years and never knew that just about anyone can file a NOTAM, not just the FAA.
So I'm now in the process of re-applying.
Quite frankly, I'm not sure how anyone can get a waiver for surveying exercises in urban areas. It's virtually impossible to avoid "operation over people not directly involved with the operation", as far as I can tell.
Others with more experience here might chime in, but for now I'll keep going at it. Stay tuned. BTW, which sections did you request to waive?
rfc, post: 421874, member: 8882 wrote:
Quite frankly, I'm not sure how anyone can get a waiver for surveying exercises in urban areas. It's virtually impossible to avoid "operation over people not directly involved with the operation", as far as I can tell.
CNN is the only organization that has a waiver to fly over people and that was for a tethered drone which had a maximum flying height of like 20 feet. I have heard that all of the new waiver requests to fly over people are currently being tabled.
rfc, post: 421874, member: 8882 wrote: Quite frankly, I'm not sure how anyone can get a waiver for surveying exercises in urban areas. It's virtually impossible to avoid "operation over people not directly involved with the operation", as far as I can tell.
So how are folks working with these rules? Say, for example, you had a project to survey a school. You go there on the weekend morning when no on is around? But they are usually open so someone could come along walking the dog or something. You then have to abort the mission? Or you might have a job on a commercial sites with employees walking around, it might fly over them.
roger_LS, post: 421894, member: 11550 wrote: So how are folks working with these rules? Say, for example, you had a project to survey a school. You go there on the weekend morning when no on is around? But they are usually open so someone could come along walking the dog or something. You then have to abort the mission? Or you might have a job on a commercial sites with employees walking around, it might fly over them.
The short answer is: You probably break the rules. As is the case often, it's not going to be a problem until there's a problem, like someone getting hit by a UAS after a total power failure or whatever.
Unless a surveyor was successful writing a global exemption...good for various places and various times, I haven't yet figured out how a commercial operator can effectively uses these for work and live within the technical requirements of the rules. Must be a way though.
roger_LS, post: 421894, member: 11550 wrote: Or you might have a job on a commercial sites with employees walking around, it might fly over them.
As far as the UK is concerned then it would be acceptable as long as there were only a few employees walking around AND their employer had informed them of what was happening and when (subject to the flight being more than 50 metres above them).
More or less also applies to occasional dog walkers - you need to put up a short warning notice on any footpath crossed by the flight at under 50 metres height; generally that would mean one close to landing or take off positions.
At least in the UK we don't normally have the worry of trigger happy locals!
We are trying to get a waiver over people to map a small town. According to our vendor, it's been successfully granted only once before in the US, so he is using their app as a guide.
We applied for a waiver to operate over non-participants and it got denied.
I had read in several publications that the next evolution of Part 107 was to relax the regulations on beyond visual line of site and flying over people. The FAA focused all their efforts getting Part 107 in place and now is looking into research and developing each limitation further.
After the FAA UAS Symposium about two weeks ago it looks like they've changed their priorities and are now focusing on a tracking system for people breaking airspace rules.
Article here: http://www.airware.com/blog/FAA-Begins-Remote-Identification-UAS-Gateway
To me the limitation of flying over people can be hard to interpret. Sure... flying directly over a crowd of people is pretty straightforward... not allowed. But what if I'm flying a vacant site for civil engineer design mapping, and one or two people are walking their dog on the sidewalk adjacent to the site. Maybe the aircraft gets close but is never directly overhead. Is that allowed???
Jon Collins, post: 421944, member: 11135 wrote: We are trying to get a waiver over people to map a small town. According to our vendor, it's been successfully granted only once before in the US, so he is using their app as a guide.
Are applications public information? Is there a site where you can read them/download them? They say "success breeds success". If anyone knows where to get these, I'd sure like to know.
The FAA's UAS website:
https://www.faa.gov/uas/request_waiver/waivers_granted/
It hasn't been updated since the end of January and 99% of the granted waivers are for night operations.
Michael Detwiler, post: 422573, member: 12520 wrote: The FAA's UAS website:
https://www.faa.gov/uas/request_waiver/waivers_granted/
It hasn't been updated since the end of January and 99% of the granted waivers are for night operations.
I've studied that page. That shows the waivers, but not the original applications (which are supposed to be attached to the waiver and considered part of it, but are not included in the PDFs on the site. Probably a way to get them via FOIA, but that'd be a pain no doubt.
With the limited flying time on these drones, I would believe that any certain area to simply be shut down to access by any pedestrians, visitors or employees for that short time span.
A Harris, post: 422585, member: 81 wrote: With the limited flying time on these drones, I would believe that any certain area to simply be shut down to access by any pedestrians, visitors or employees for that short time span.
For an enclosed private site then that can work fine. For a larger site with public access (as was described at the start of this thread) it is often not possible to close the area off. Flying time might be limited, but up to 50 minutes and an area radius 500 metres makes a full closure unlikely. Planning to minimise any residual risk is an essential part of the operation. You can never risk assess out the possibility of a fly-away, even though they rarely happen - circuit boards do fail
chris mills, post: 422630, member: 6244 wrote: For an enclosed private site then that can work fine. For a larger site with public access (as was described at the start of this thread) it is often not possible to close the area off. Flying time might be limited, but up to 50 minutes and an area radius 500 metres makes a full closure unlikely. Planning to minimise any residual risk is an essential part of the operation. You can never risk assess out the possibility of a fly-away, even though they rarely happen - circuit boards do fail
If a company can not control the situation, they need to back off and find another way.
Public safety is number one on the list, anything less is not acceptable.
If your one man crew can not handle crowd control, then make the necessary arrangements for security to shut the area down for 1hour or so.
Any flyaways means that your plan is not working.
A Harris, post: 422633, member: 81 wrote: Any flyaways means that your plan is not working.
No, any flyaway probably means a failure of the circuit board.
Is flyaway that often of an occurrence?
A Harris, post: 422706, member: 81 wrote: Is flyaway that often of an occurrence?
Should never happen, but all things are possible.
Our first board always seemed to make the aircraft perform not quite as we expected, but we put that down to a learning curve. Data sent to supplier but they said all was OK and it must be just how conditions were during the flights.
After about a year we had an incident when it headed off on its own - off the plan route, through the safety circle, failed to respond to emergency return button, wouldn't respond for long to manual control. Eventually at 1400 metres it briefly responded to the control desk "Go to safety orbit location" command.. Once it was heading back the pilot regained a manual control and brought it back as quickly as possible. (This was on our regular training field where we know there is no radio or other interference - out in open sheep farming country.)
Card returned to our supplier who sent it back to the manufacturer (I can't say who). No comment from manufacturer but the card was replaced. Since then the performance has been totally different, so it would seem the original problems were not "learning curve" after all.
With reference to your earlier comment, we use a two man crew minimum. I wasn't suggesting, and wouldn't, flying anywhere near a "crowd". We are talking about occasional individuals passing within a flight area. You can't shut down 1 km square of open public access but you can plan things to eliminate all but the most unlikely risks. From 400 ft.height the glide distance is in excess of 500 metres, so to eliminate all risk from a power failure you would need more than a 2km,.square to be cordoned off.