USA Title 14 CFR Part 107 Waivers (Post your approved/rejected)

Talon Six · Oct 11, 2016

Write your congressman!

licensed pilot · Oct 11, 2016

Talon Six said:
Write your congressman!

Been there, done that. Sen. John McMain's staff called me back and got the info on the problem. Not holding my breath...

Talon Six · Oct 11, 2016

You should have said, "Due to working F-35 integration issues, the FAA was unable to approve my airspace request costing me $1500 on a real estate job."

M2dpost · Oct 13, 2016

I applied for an airspace authorization to fly in the San Diego class Bravo on October 5th. On October 12th I received notification that it was denied. They sited the fact that they will not be approving Class B until after December 5th. It also stated the need for 90 days lead time for an authorization. On one hand I am happy that the turn around time was rather short, but on the other hand there is no telling if that will be the case once they start approving Class B.

I know I am preaching to the choir here but hopefully that 90 day lead time requirement won't actually be a 90 day approval cycle. I can't yell you the last time I had a client that gave me 90 days lead time, and I have been in video production for over 20 years now. That's just an unrealistic requirement. Additionally I find it odd that those of us that took the time to understand the regulations, and go through the testing process to obtain a license, are being regulated more heavily than a 14 hear old kid with an AMA card. All that kid is required to do is tell the tower he's gonna fly. We need to go through a 90 day approval process to get permission to fly. And in some cases this extends to way beyond 5 miles from an airport, especially in class bravo situations. That just seems so backwards to me.

Jason1234 · Oct 14, 2016

I submitted two authorization requests back on early September. I just got a call this week on one. They suggested a slight change to the 1nm requested radius, which was fine. They cut out a sector above a particular latitude. It was handled very well, and I got an email letting me know informally that it would be approved shortly as negotiated over the phone.

Then today a second waiver for a different airport was unceremoniously rejected without a call or email. The letter said my mitigation plan was insufficient. It was the exact same mitigation plan as the other airspace. Total nonsense. Of course, no details on why it isn't sufficient.

Here is the kicker. The approved request (informal now) is in Class D and a part of Class C at 400 feet. The disapproved request is in class E surface about 7 miles from the airport at 200 feet. This was one of my biggest fears. This particular class E Surface is especially important to my business.

This is far from a smooth and well defined process. It's ambiguous and apparently arbitrary.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Josh Evans · Oct 14, 2016

Does anyone has a source as to what has been provided in the description of the wavier. I'm looking to do various FLIR inspections of commercial buildings and industrial equipment, search and rescue, etc. I provided details such as anti-collision lights (specs) that will be used. Daylight review of location prior to night operations. One or more VOs. No flight over the public. Flight would be in approved areas with respect to airspace, state and local restrictions. I feel like no matter was I put, I would be leaving something out. Of course I hit submit and gone. I hate that there isn't at least a confirmation email.

Jason1234 · Oct 14, 2016

Josh Evans said:
Does anyone has a source as to what has been provided in the description of the wavier. I'm looking to do various FLIR inspections of commercial buildings and industrial equipment, search and rescue, etc. I provided details such as anti-collision lights (specs) that will be used. Daylight review of location prior to night operations. One or more VOs. No flight over the public. Flight would be in approved areas with respect to airspace, state and local restrictions. I feel like no matter was I put, I would be leaving something out. Of course I hit submit and gone. I hate that there isn't at least a confirmation email.

Yeah, no confirmation email is sad. Make sure you copy and paste your request so you know what your wrote when you get your denial letter.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Jason1234 · Oct 14, 2016

M2dpost said:
I applied for an airspace authorization to fly in the San Diego class Bravo on October 5th. On October 12th I received notification that it was denied. They sited the fact that they will not be approving Class B until after December 5th. It also stated the need for 90 days lead time for an authorization. On one hand I am happy that the turn around time was rather short, but on the other hand there is no telling if that will be the case once they start approving Class B.

I know I am preaching to the choir here but hopefully that 90 day lead time requirement won't actually be a 90 day approval cycle. I can't yell you the last time I had a client that gave me 90 days lead time, and I have been in video production for over 20 years now. That's just an unrealistic requirement. Additionally I find it odd that those of us that took the time to understand the regulations, and go through the testing process to obtain a license, are being regulated more heavily than a 14 hear old kid with an AMA card. All that kid is required to do is tell the tower he's gonna fly. We need to go through a 90 day approval process to get permission to fly. And in some cases this extends to way beyond 5 miles from an airport, especially in class bravo situations. That just seems so backwards to me.

I concur wholeheartedly. Backward thinking. Welcome to government bureaucracy.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Josh Evans · Oct 14, 2016

Yah, too late for that. I guess I'll give it a some time and see if a status email arrives. I don't want to submit another and cause issues.

Highrpm955 · Oct 15, 2016

For all you Class D,.... can you not just operate during non-effective operating hours? For instance, I have one near me that the Class D airspace if effective from 0800-1900 hours at which point, it reverts back to Class E/G... you could still do early morning shoots, and evening shoots depending on what your civil twighlight is.

Jason1234 · Oct 15, 2016

Highrpm955 said:
For all you Class D,.... can you not just operate during non-effective operating hours? For instance, I have one near me that the Class D airspace if effective from 0800-1900 hours at which point, it reverts back to Class E/G... you could still do early morning shoots, and evening shoots depending on what your civil twighlight is.

Nope, Class D around here is effectively sunrise to sunset. And early morning would be horrible lighting for my needs. That's not a solution.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Highrpm955 · Oct 15, 2016

Jason1234 said:
Nope, Class D around here is effectively sunrise to sunset. And early morning would be horrible lighting for my needs. That's not a solution.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Just throwing it out there.. Might be a work-a-round for some.

licensed pilot · Oct 15, 2016

Highrpm955 said:
Just throwing it out there.. Might be a work-a-round for some.

The FAA waiver process is just as broken as the COA process was. I've resign myself to losing jobs until they fix it. I'm glad I live in mostly G airspace. The FAA feet dragging will only encourage operators to cheat and fly w/o waivers. I am sure some will.

Highrpm955 · Oct 15, 2016

licensed pilot said:
The FAA waiver process is just as broken as the COA process was. I've resign myself to losing jobs until they fix it. I'm glad I live in mostly G airspace. The FAA feet dragging will only encourage operators to cheat and fly w/o waivers. I am sure some will.

I am sure they will too. The "work a round" I was talking about is not a cheat. It's absolutely legal if your project can be done outside of D class operating hours. Not the best time to shoot, but it will work in a pinch if you have too.

HFI · Oct 25, 2016

The FAA's latest update on the Part 107 waiver process seems to be a complaint about those filing for them....I have not seen anyone actually post what was contained in their waiver. Although the final COA appears on the Waivers Approved website, and the issued COA is supposed to have a copy of the submission attached, they do not. For those of you who have filed successful waivers, will you consider posting the contents of the submission in this forum? I realize that having a waiver when others do not may give you a slight competitive advantage, but let's try and work together to get the FAA to be more specific and transparent when it comes to waivers and the approval process.

William Gaddy · Oct 26, 2016

One of the reasons you might find many people reluctant to post their submission is it usually includes a complete copy of their company Flight Operations Manual, which can contain information usable by competitors...

Cheers

licensed pilot · Oct 26, 2016

The feds asked you for your Flight Operations Manual when you applied for a waiver? Interesting. Only time I submitted the FOM was for my 333. Have 2 waivers pending, guess I better update my FOM...

William Gaddy · Oct 26, 2016

licensed pilot said:
The feds asked you for your Flight Operations Manual when you applied for a waiver? Interesting. Only time I submitted the FOM was for my 333. Have 2 waivers pending, guess I better update my FOM...

They didn't ask me for one, but you're wise if you do. And it better show all the night vision training, mitigation of visibility issues, lighting etc..

licensed pilot · Oct 26, 2016

William Gaddy said:
They didn't ask me for one, but you're wise if you do. And it better show all the night vision training, mitigation of visibility issues, lighting etc..

I see. Thanks.

licensed pilot · Oct 26, 2016

Finally received my night flight waiver (filed 9/2/16). Good for 4 years, same location. They asked for additional info. last week. I know many want to see the application but since the online waiver site does not supply a copy, can't post that. I have added what I offered for night vision training and apparently it met their approval. This is something I put together very fast in order not to delay the process any further. The exam is offered for anyone who wishes to use it. (no guarantees are promised or implied.) Use at your own risk.

Response to additional information request:

For a waiver from section 107.29 – Daylight Operations:

Applicant must provide a method to assure all required persons participating in the sUA operation have knowledge to recognize and overcome visual illusions caused by darkness, and understand physiological conditions which may degrade night vision. This means, what is your method of “Training” to ensure that individuals will have knowledge concerning the topics listed above.

To avoid posing a risk to persons on the ground at night time, Martinez Aerial will only operate the DJI Inspire 1 Pro in a controlled and limited footprint with controlled access and barriers/protection for nonparticipating persons. The operating area will be illuminated so that the operator and VO can see any persons on the ground. As the operator, Luis Martinez is an FAA certificated Commercial pilot and Remote pilot, well aware of night flying conditions. The VO will be thoroughly briefed on:

1. Chapter 17, Aeromedical Factors of the Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical knowledge, pages 17-22 through 17-29.
2. VO must review FAA Night Vision video, available at FAA TV: Vision in Aviation
3. All PICs and V0s must successfully complete (90%) attached exam.

Applicant must provide a method to increase conspicuity of the sUA to be seen at a distance of 3 statute miles unless a system is in place that can avoid all non-participating aircraft. Although your application states that you intend to operate in a confined area, for the issuance of a waiver of 107.29, you must provide a method to increase conspicuity of the sUA to be seen at a distance of 3 statute miles. The reason for this clarification is that the issuance of a wavier will not be for a onetime event at one specific location, rather the waiver will be issued for a period of time and for events that are located at various locations.

The sUAS will be operating below 200 feet above ground level (“AGL”), lower than the minimum altitude for other airspace users, with a 300 foot buffer. The ability of manned aircraft to “see-and-avoid” sUAS will rarely be required if the manned aircraft is appropriately flying above the required 500 feet AGL. Martinez Aerial’s night time sUAS – the DJI Inspire 1 Pro – is equipped and will operate with high intensity strobe lights, visible for over 3 nautical miles. In addition, airspace users will have knowledge of Martinez Aerial’s night time operations and limited operating footprint through Martinez Aerial’s submitted NOTAM.