FAA Altitude Limit on Model Rockets??? 400 Feet????

[Titan II]

Does this mean that when a local rocket club applies for an FAA waiver for a scheduled local rocket meet that if they have an AMA member involved in applying for the waiver, then rocket R/C gliders can accede the 400' limit?

No

 

[georgegassaway]

Does this mean that when a local rocket club applies for an FAA waiver for a scheduled local rocket meet that if they have an AMA member involved in applying for the waiver, then rocket R/C gliders can accede the 400' limit?

R/C Rocket Boosted Gliders need to ACCEDE to the 400 foot limit.

R/C Rocket Boosted Gliders may not EXCEED the 400 foot limit. Regardless of a waiver for rockets.

If you are confused, check what accede means:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accede#:~:text=: to express approval or give,usually + to

 

[flyingeagle]

Sorry for getting of the subject in here but dose anyone know if Allrockets and eRockets are legit to buy from? I keep sending them emails and they don’t respond. I was going to order from Allrockets but on their shipping said they use economy shipping. What is economy shipping. eRockets shorted my order for decals and I can’t get them to send them out or any response. Any help if grateful.

 

[Titan II]

Sorry for getting of the subject in here but dose anyone know if Allrockets and eRockets are legit to buy from? I keep sending them emails and they don’t respond. I was going to order from Allrockets but on their shipping said they use economy shipping. What is economy shipping. eRockets shorted my order for decals and I can’t get them to send them out or any response. Any help if grateful.

This is an important thread. Why don't you start your own?

 

[Steve Shannon]

Sorry for getting of the subject in here but dose anyone know if Allrockets and eRockets are legit to buy from? I keep sending them emails and they don’t respond. I was going to order from Allrockets but on their shipping said they use economy shipping. What is economy shipping. eRockets shorted my order for decals and I can’t get them to send them out or any response. Any help if grateful.

I could understand if this question was at least tangential to the subject, but it’s not. There’s even a subforum for vendor reviews and questions.

 

[flyingeagle]

Sorry How do I start my own and I will just that

 

[Steve Shannon]

Sorry How do I start my own and I will just that

First, pick the forum where you want to create a new thread. I recommend the vendor reviews forum for your question:
https://www.rocketryforum.com/forums/product-vendor-reviews.16/
Then click on the little symbol that says “post thread” over on the right:

 

[flyingeagle]

Thanks

 

[MikeT]

Mike

 

[aerostadt]

Thanks for posting this, Mike.

 

[Back_at_it]

I've heard the 400' limit on RC air planes before especially if you are within 5 miles of an airport. As for FAA rules for model rockets, I've heard everything from 1000' to 2500' so I don't know what is accurate.

My guess is the 400' is for the air planes.

 

[shockie]

If this applies to both RC rocket powered gliders and non-RC rocket powered gliders, why wasn't a Trust certificate required for NAR events that had those models over the past 2 years since the Trust test became available?

When did the NAR realize this was a requirement?

 

[speed]

I heard that original common law stated that a property owner owned the mineral and air rights for a distance of one Furlong(660ft). Not relevant now but still kind of interesting. The drone guys are very concerned about their "unmanned aircraft systems" flight limitations and are seeking to make changes. This might effect model aircraft in general.

I found this interesting...

https://www.namic.org/pdf/drones/1703_privateairspace.pdf
A History of Air Rights An ancient common law doctrine was that ownership of the land extends to the periphery of the universe. Owners of private property were said to own the land, everything below it, and all the airspace “up to the heavens.” Air rights are a type of property interest in real estate, referring to the space above the earth’s surface. Owning or renting land or a building gave the right to use and develop the space above the land. This legal concept is encoded in the Latin phrase Cuius est solum, eius est usque ad coelum et ad inferos (“For whoever owns the soil, it is theirs up to Heaven and down to Hell.”), which appears in medieval Roman law. In the age of commercial air traffic however, the heavens became a public highway. By 1940, Congress had legislated that “[t]he United States of America is hereby declared to possess and exercise complete and exclusive national sovereignty in the air space above the United States.” 49 U.S.C. § 176(a) (1940) (current version at 49 U.S.C. § 1508(a) (1976)). Congress also recognized and declared that every citizen of the United States has “a public right of freedom of transit in air commerce through the navigable air space of the United States.” 49 U.S.C. § 403 (1940) (current version at 49 U.S.C. § 1304 (1976)). “Navigable airspace” was then defined as “airspace above the minimum safe altitudes of flight prescribed by the Civil Aeronautics Authority [CAA].” 49 U.S.C. § 180 (1940).

 

[Steve Shannon]

I've heard the 400' limit on RC air planes before especially if you are within 5 miles of an airport. As for FAA rules for model rockets, I've heard everything from 1000' to 2500' so I don't know what is accurate.

My guess is the 400' is for the air planes.

The actual limits are published for all to read. Nobody should ever simply pass on anecdotes. For rocketry it’s documented in FAR 101.23 - 101.29.
The advisory circular for unmanned aircraft is here:
https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_91-57C_FAA_Revised.pdf

 

[TheTank]

Me to I'm one of the R/C club officers and went thru the application process also. From what I understand a 400ft altitude waiver canbe applied for. That could help out.

The District 1 officers have told us that they are working on that… but no progress yet but also to “keep doing what we have been doing.” We have a few glider tow events and several of us fly IMAC with giant scale birds and I know I definitely smoke through 400’ when flying the unlimited sequence. As long as we have a spotter and really pay attention to aircraft in the area, it shouldnt be an issue. An ATC buddy of mine told me that even the largest of our RC aircraft dont have enough of a cross section to ping on his ATC gear.

 

[MikeT]

Well, there will be at most only 8 possible AMA members flying the two S8 events, all on the US Team. The dozens of other S8 (R/C Rocket Glide) pilots, from outside the US, are not AMA members.

So, to me, AMA did graciously extend their CBO umbrella to cover the WSMC. AMA is not requiring those fliers to become full AMA members just to turn a buck for something the competitors can only use for 1 week.

OK, just now it occurs to me that when AMA is hosting FAI R/C events in the US, competitors coming form other countries, AMA must be doing the same thing (not requiring AMA membership of non-US fliers), and expectedly so. But that would be for model aircraft events. Now, technically under FAI bureaucracy, AMA is in charge of "Space Modeling" (model rockets), but AMA has agreed to let the NAR be in charge of that. So in a way AMA is technically obliged to do so, but could have chosen otherwise.

In any case, very good news that AMA is doing so. And first official use of a CBO for R/C Rocket Boosted Gliders.

It would have sucked so badly to have changed the S8E event to D power, and S8D event to C power (S8D models smaller and lighter than S8E models), to try to keep the models from exceeding 400 feet (and FAI might not have allowed that power class change for the WSMC), would have been a huge mess.

Just curious are you a AMA member?

 

[georgegassaway]

Just curious are you a AMA member?

Yes.

Also have my FAA "drone" registration, and passed the "TRUST" test.

First R/C model I registered is my avatar at the upper left.

 

[shockie]

I heard that original common law stated that a property owner owned the mineral and air rights for a distance of one Furlong(660ft). Not relevant now but still kind of interesting. The drone guys are very concerned about their "unmanned aircraft systems" flight limitations and are seeking to make changes. This might effect model aircraft in general.

I found this interesting...

https://www.namic.org/pdf/drones/1703_privateairspace.pdf
A History of Air Rights An ancient common law doctrine was that ownership of the land extends to the periphery of the universe. Owners of private property were said to own the land, everything below it, and all the airspace “up to the heavens.” Air rights are a type of property interest in real estate, referring to the space above the earth’s surface. Owning or renting land or a building gave the right to use and develop the space above the land. This legal concept is encoded in the Latin phrase Cuius est solum, eius est usque ad coelum et ad inferos (“For whoever owns the soil, it is theirs up to Heaven and down to Hell.”), which appears in medieval Roman law. In the age of commercial air traffic however, the heavens became a public highway. By 1940, Congress had legislated that “[t]he United States of America is hereby declared to possess and exercise complete and exclusive national sovereignty in the air space above the United States.” 49 U.S.C. § 176(a) (1940) (current version at 49 U.S.C. § 1508(a) (1976)). Congress also recognized and declared that every citizen of the United States has “a public right of freedom of transit in air commerce through the navigable air space of the United States.” 49 U.S.C. § 403 (1940) (current version at 49 U.S.C. § 1304 (1976)). “Navigable airspace” was then defined as “airspace above the minimum safe altitudes of flight prescribed by the Civil Aeronautics Authority [CAA].” 49 U.S.C. § 180 (1940).

My eyes are blurring over reading this.

 

[shockie]

Yes.

Also have my FAA "drone" registration, and passed the "TRUST" test.

First R/C model I registered is my avatar at the upper left.

Hey George, does that LEM boost up with a rocket motor and then the drone propellers take over? If so, that's way cool.

 

[georgegassaway]

Hey George, does that LEM boost up with a rocket motor and then the drone propellers take over? If so, that's way cool.

It is VERY VERY cool when it flies without the rocket boost,

I posted a lot about it, for months, in the Watering Hole section. How could you miss it?

I look forward to seeing someone else make one that is as big, that looks at least as good, that flies well as a quadcopter, that they boost only on rocket power. With the high risk of seeing it veer over and crash before the flight controller can save it.

And no it will never ever boost on rocket power. It weighs 3.3 pounds and is 24" across the footpads. It is the best handling multicopter I have ever flown (I'm not into the racing stuff).

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/flying-r-c-lunar-module-quadcopter-project.137174/
Its duration is as much as 12 minutes on a 3S 4000 mAh Lipo. Given the average thrust (hover) for 12 minutes, it is over 10,000 N-sec, either full power N or very weak M. But I never "hover" it, so the maneuvering does use more current, so on a 12 minute flight it may be expending 11,000 N-sec of more (weak N).

And the other project you missed is my avatar on YORF. A Mars Lander Quad. Which does take off only on rocket power, then the flight computer senses apogee and activates the engines to go into hover mode. It uses a 3D printed body and parts, by Mech-G. The body comes apart easily to access the electronics, structure, and swap battery pack,

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/mars-lander-rocket-quadcopter-project.151995/
The two together. The ML is 1X, LM is 1/16 scale (24" across the footpads).

The two ALSO together, but not as close.

Any other questions or comments about these models really belong in their original threads as linked in this post, so this thread can go back to FAA and 400 feet, and hopefully future CBO status for NAR & TRA..


.