Source: https://yuneecpilots.com/threads/how-many-are-aware-of-title-49-sub-title-b-part-830-rules.15577/
Timestamp: 2020-08-04 00:01:53
Document Index: 541841691

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 830', 'art 830', 'art 830', 'art 107', 'art 107', 'art 107', 'arts 101', 'arts 61']

Just to provide a new, stimulating discussion topic, the rules contained in Part 830 are applicable to unmanned aerial systems as well as manned.
Doesn't 107.8 apply to sUAS?
Part 830 applies to unmanned aircraft, but not small unmanned aircraft (sUAS)
107.8 is applicable but Part 830 does not specifically exclude sUAS, and as sUAS are indeed unmanned aircraft we might presume that makes them subject to NTSB reporting requirements for commercial operators. Commercial operator being the qualifier.
The above is incorrect as 830.2 imposes a weight minimum on UAS.
Patr you are correct . part 107 commercial operators are required to file reports to ntsb on accidents. I do think there is also a report to nasa as well to was covered in one of my classes from remotepilot101.com.
NASA reports have traditionally been voluntary and used as a means to collect various types of flight safety data. I can't recall the form number but I filed one in the long distant past due to a possible TCA airspace infringement. Either ATC didn't formally report it or the NASA report worked. I'll never know.
Accidents meeting certain criteria require FAA reporting and NTSB reporting....but there was no mention of reporting to NASA in any of the materials I studied, voluntary or other.
This clearly excludes sUAS:
Phaedrus is correct as the definitions in 830.2 state;
Edit; Mostly correct.
Part 107 pilots are required to report accidents to the FAA not the NTSB. The NTSB has issued a clarification and clear exemption to Section 830 for unmanned aircraft weighing less than 300 pounds.
But this is a great thread. People need to think about the rules, how they apply, and in what circumstances.
Reactions: photo417
Now that I've stepped on my ta-ta let's move on to a couple different questions; Aside from waiver category sUAS, what is the maximum weight of a normal category sUAS? What is the maximum weight of a normal category recreational sUAS?
Less than 55 pounds. Contained in the definition of a sAUS. Applies to both recreational and Part 107. "Small" means less than 55 pounds.
‘‘(9) SMALL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT.—The term ‘small unmanned aircraft’ means an unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55 pounds, including the weight of anything attached to or carried by the aircraft.
But... there is an OR in the two listed criteria.
The second is the “...of or greater than 300 pounds.”
The first criteria is “death or serious injury.”
I do not interpret the second clause as overriding the first.
“Unmanned aircraft accident means an occurrence associated with the operation of any public or civil unmanned aircraft system that takes place between the time that the system is activated with the purpose of flight and the time that the system is deactivated at the conclusion of its mission, in which:
(2) The aircraft has a maximum gross takeoff weight of 300 pounds or greater and sustains substantial damage.”
You are missing the NTSB memo I posted where they clearly state that a UAV under 300 pounds is exempted from Section 830 reporting requirements.
IMHO, it is more of a decision tree... if (1) is true, then the response goes in one direction, in which the parameters of (2) become irrelevant. IF (1) is false, THEN the response continues to (2) to consider the factors of weight and/or damage, kinetic energy, etc.
Unless I am reading the memo incorrectly, the Examples section seems to make all civil UAS subject to NTSB reporting requirements, regardless of weight, under certain conditions.
I have to admit that NTSB is not being as clear as I first thought.. In one place they use "or" and in another they use "and" with regard to weight.
The decision tree appears to be that serious injury or death regardless of weight is the trigger. Let's hope that never happens.
It appears a flight controller failure causing a fly away is another qualifier. Recreational flyers are exempt from NTSB reporting requirements though.
One thing is certain, the Feds don’t make written law easy to understand. Insult to injury in this has law as written is not supposed to be interpreted, but applied as written.
In study for a 107 currency exam I’m seeing things that may be of interest to commercial operators. The FAA is not limiting the law side of currency tests to Parts 101, 107, 333, and 336. They are linking those sections to law referenced in Parts 61 and 91, areas most commercial operators don’t bother with. TSA/DHS references are also expanding. To me they are implying that although our primary legal requirements are found in sUAS specific CFR’s we are also bound by CFR’s previously more applicable to full scale operations.
Test qualification is rapidly becoming more complex for commercial operators. Our reference material needs to expand accordingly.
It is interesting that not once does the FAA mention anything about NTSB reporting. Their only mention is reporting to the FAA.
The NTSB memo sets up a complex decision tree. But again, it is very odd that the FAA never mentions reporting to the NTSB. Their examples contradict the earlier parts of the memo as well.
The catch 22 is that final hearings are always done with an NTSB law judge. If Zi was the one up for a hearing and decision would I choose to go with extra effort to comply with the additional NTSB requirements or would I be satisfied with only submitting to the FAA? Historically, the NTSB has won most of the conflicts between the FAA and NTSB, at has more often than not shown favor to the FAA in their actions against pilots so my preference would be to satisfy the NTSB up front instead of being faulted for failure to comply.