NOTE:  TIMES LISTED ARE CENTRAL TIME ZONE

Click on Date to Register

GNS™ 430/530 NAVIGATOR TRANSITION: PLANNING FOR YOUR NEXT GPS AND RADIOS

Considering your upgrade options? Learn about the latest navigation systems from Garmin — and the added capabilities and workload-reducing features they can bring to your aircraft.

4 p.m. CT Tuesday, Sept. 10

OBTAIN PART 5 SMS MANDATE COMPLIANCE WITH GARMIN SMS

Learn how a FltPlan® SMS program can help meet the safety compliance and risk management needs of your flight operation. Explore SMS basics and easy-to-implement FltPlan tools and reports.

4 p.m. CT Thursday, Sept. 12

HOW TO PLAN AND SHOP FOR AVIONICS

Thinking about an avionics upgrade but not sure where to start? Join us to learn what questions to ask and how to plan your dream panel.

10 a.m. CT Thursday, Sept. 19

GARMIN PILOT™ APP TIPS AND TRICKS

Dive deep into the Garmin Pilot mobile app to learn about general operation, plus get insider tips and tricks to make flight planning, navigation and flying easier — and more fun.

10 a.m. CT Tuesday, Sept. 24

PROTECTING YOUR INVESTMENT: GARMIN ENGINE MONITOR SOLUTIONS

Still flying with analog engine instruments? Learn about the latest digital engine indication systems from Garmin and why you should consider upgrading.

4 p.m. CT Thursday, Sept. 26

Biweekly FAA Safety Briefing News Update
 

Data Visualization Showing Runway Safety Resources

The FAA offers a number of tools to support aviation safety and assist pilots in preflight planning at airports nationwide, including From the Flight Deck videos, airport pilot handbooks, and Arrival Alert Notices. To make it easier for pilots to access these tools, the FAA developed a data visualization to give pilots an at-a-glance view of where these resources are available. This data viz shows a map of the United States and includes filter and search options that let users customize their search. Pilots can filter and search by state, city, airport name, airport ID, and safety product. The data viz map is available at www.faa.gov/fromtheflightdeck.

Are You Storm Ready?  

Storm season is upon us. Hurricanes, tornados, hail, and thunderstorms can wreack havoc this time of year. While many prep for this season with generators, batteries, and supplies, don’t forget to prep your aircraft to weather the storm. 

The key to protecting your aviation assets is knowing your area and the weather phenomena associated with it. For example, the best way to keep your aircraft safe from something like an oncoming hurricane is to move it away from the affected area. If you can’t do that, a hangar is your second-best option. If you can’t do either of these, make sure you know how to tie down and properly secure your aircraft to protect it from weather damage. After the storm has passed, don’t forget to inspect your aircraft well. Read the article “Hailstones, Hitches, and Hauling Wind” in the July/August 2010 issue of FAA Safety Briefing(www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2022-01/JulAug2010.pdf ) for more information about how to protect your aircraft during a storm. Also check out this FAA YouTube playlist, “Bad Weather? The FAA is Ready,” here youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5vHkqHi51DQuf2uO9tHTd69DsOtgm0oj.

There are two components to BasicMed: the physical examination and the online course. The physical examination can be completed by any state-licensed physician—it does not have to be an FAA-designated aviation medical examiner. You will want to bring the FAA form 8700-2 comprehensive medical exam checklist (CMEC) with you to the physical exam. The CMEC has a section for you to fill out as well as the physical exam checklist and doctor’s information for the physician to complete. The CMEC can be downloaded from aopa.org/basicmed. 

The other component of BasicMed is the online course, which can be accessed by going to the same BasicMed link where you found the CMEC. The online course is titled “Medical Self-Assessment, A Pilot’s Guide to Flying Healthy” and is composed of seven chapters and a 20-question quiz at the end. All the quiz questions are based on the material in the course, and a score of 80 percent is required to pass. There is no limit on how many times you can take the quiz. You will be able to print a completion certificate from the online course, and it is recommended that you keep it and the CMEC with your logbook safe at home—you do not need to bring them with you when you fly.

Finally, the online course needs to be retaken every 24 calendar months and the physical exam every four years to the day (48 calendar months for the exam beginning November 12, 2024).

from: PilotWorkshops.com

Electronic logbooks are fully acceptable to the FAA, including for endorsements when the right conditions are met. Pretty much any major app or software logbook meets those conditions. That means you don’t need a paper logbook for tracking purposes, demonstrating currency, pursuit of higher ratings, reporting to insurance, etc.

What you do need is a backup of your logbook. That could be a digital backup. Just don’t count on a cloud version of your same app for this. It’s unlikely, but if the company is hacked, you could lose your data across all of their systems. Download a copy of your logbook using an export function, or running a report, and saving it. (Tip: sometimes the web interface for a digital logbook is better for this than the one on your phone or tablet.) Store that copy in another cloud location (like Google Drive), or on a local computer or thumb drive. Or even print it out.

Just doing this backup once a year limits the amount of data you could lose. Also, consider filling out a form FAA 8710 with IACRA, and therefore the FAA, when you get a flight review and list all your flight hours. That’s a documented record of at least flight totals.

Your logbook backup could also be … a paper logbook. There’s nothing wrong with keeping your own handwritten copy. Paper logbooks feel great in your hands and tell a story of your flying history in a way digital logbooks never will. Your great-grandkids won’t treasure the family heirloom of your digitized flight hours. But your physical logbook? That’s a different story.”

Question: I am a freshly minted CFI. What happens if I make a mistake in my logbook? I hear stories about CFIs who are worried about getting a call from the FAA in the event they accidentally mess up an entry in a logbook. Does the FAA really go after pilots and CFIs for improper logbook entries?

Answer: The short answer is no. But unfortunately there's a lot of "tribal knowledge" surrounding logbooks and what can happen. FLYING contacted the FAA for the correct information.

The CFI should be familiar with Advisory Circular 61-65 (H), which contains the endorsements an instructor is allowed to give. The language is copied verbatim. If you are a learner pilot, the first endorsement you will get is the TSA citizenship verification endorsement in accordance with 49 CFR 1552.3(h).

FAR 61.51 covers pilot logbooks and details how to log "training time and aeronautical experience." It states that each person must document and record the following time in a manner acceptable to the administrator:

(1) Training and  aeronautical experience used to meet the requirements for a certificate, rating, or flight review of this part.

(2) The aeronautical experience required for meeting the recent flight experience requirements of this part.

Part B covers logbook entries, stating that "for the purposes of meeting the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section, each person must enter the following information for each flight or lesson logged:

(1) General—

(i) Date.

(ii) Total flight time or lesson time.

(iii) Location where the aircraft departed and arrived, or for lessons in a full flight simulator or flight training device, the location where the lesson occurred.

(iv) Type and identification of aircraft, full flight simulator, flight training device, or aviation training device, as appropriate.”

The savvy CFI logs all instruction given, including ground time and the topics covered. If the learner takes the time to be there, they should get credit for the experience.

As far as "messing up an entry in a logbook," FLYING posed a series of questions gleaned from scenarios encountered in more than 30 years of flight training on both sides of the CFI certificate.

I start with this because when I was working on my CFII certificate, I logged time in my own logbook with blue ink and the CFII who I was training with positively clutched her pearls over that one.

According to the FAA, they do not require a specific ink color for a paper logbook.

The logging of time spent using an advanced aviation training device (AATD) can be controversial as there are some CFIs who refuse to do it, saying it will "ruin" a logbook.

According to the FAA: "Simply logging time (in any capacity) does not ruin a logbook, but the pilot must ensure they are properly categorizing the flight time logged. For example, if a pilot decided to record their time spent using an AATD in their logbook, that is acceptable. However, the AATD time could not be counted toward cross-country time for pilot certification."

As most logbooks have a few blank columns, it's a good idea to designate them to suit your needs. For example, you might have one for ground training received or given, AATD, solo flight, etc. You can have an entire section set aside for ground instruction, dual instruction given, etc.

There are many logbooks with preprinted endorsements, but you may run out of room. The FAA does not require endorsements to be on a specific page or in a specific location in the logbook. 

"Endorsements can be made in a pilot’s logbook or other documents acceptable to the administrator if the learner uses an electronic logbook rather than paper, in order to show they meet the aeronautical experience requirements for the certificate or rating that may be in paper form or electronic," FAA said. "Keep in mind that many endorsements require a CFI’s signature which may not work with an electronic logbook." 

For check rides most learners print out spreadsheets of their experience and have the CFI sign those.

Mistakes do happen. Usually they are math errors.

Filling out a logbook takes a fair amount of concentration, as does totaling up the columns and double checking the math before you sign the page. Take care when you do this, and please be extra careful when it comes to totaling up required experience for a check ride. You do not want a learner to go for a check ride and be turned away because they are missing 0.2 of something, or a takeoff and night landing or two. 

If you make a mistake, correct it. Please note that the FAA does not have specific guidance on correcting logbook errors. According to the source at the FAA, "choosing a particular correction style (white-out, crossing out the error and correcting, crossing out the line and making a new entry, etc.) is up to the pilot."

Credit to Megodeswki- DLying Magazine

Brought to us by AvWeb

Consistent learning is what makes a good pilot a great pilot. And Lightspeed is friends with lots of great pilots. We lean on these experts to help us bring the general aviation community a wealth of knowledge in our series of free downloadable eBooks from our Lightspeed Library.

Expand your understanding on topics like what to do after you make an emergency landing as you wait for help to arrive, how to safely land in a strong crosswind situation (equipped with cool diagrams!) or how to keep yourself and your passengers safe from carbon monoxide in the cockpit.

Our Library also has some stories of inspiration, for lighter reading. Enjoy these pilot profiles of how they became a leader in their field, or what inspires them to give back to their communities. There’s something in the Lightspeed Library for everyone. 
Hit the button below to gain access to a world of knowledge. (No library card needed).

by MEG GODLEWSKI, Flying Magazine

After checking the weather, select an approach and file to an initial approach fix for it.

Question: I am working on my instrument rating, and I have a question about filing to another airport. One of the CFIIs I fly with told me to file to the airport but not a particular fix because it’s really up to ATC to decide what the pilot should do. Another CFII told me to check the weather, see what the flow is, and file to an initial approach fix for an approach in use. Who is correct?

Answer: I advocate checking the weather and seeing what approaches are being supported by the conditions, then select an approach and file to an Initial Approach Fix (IAF) for that approach.

The reason? Because you lose your comms en route or before you are cleared for the approach, you will be following the AVE F procedure, which states that in the event of loss of communication you will fly one of the four: the heading you were assigned, vectored to, told to expect or filed to. If you are operating on an IFR flight plan, you should have at least one of these. This is what ATC expects you to do, so they will be protecting that airspace at the fix you filed to.

If you simply fly to the airport and the airport has multiple instrument approaches and multiple IAFs, ATC is going to have a more difficult time protecting the airspace. It will be like Whac-a-Mole with airplanes. If you file to a particular IAF, and they see a target squawking 7600 at that fix, they will have a pretty good idea that’s you. Make sure you continue to transmit in the blind – this means you make appropriate radio calls and position reports although you cannot hear them reply.

Bonus move: Adjust time en route by five minutes. For example, if it will take 23 minutes to get to the fix, file it as 17 minutes because that way you won’t have to wait for time to elapse in order to shoot the approach. 

Remember, you are requesting an approach when you file your flight plan. ATC is not obligated to grant your request, which is why you should have your approach binder with you (in either paper or electronic form). So if you are assigned something other than you filed, you will be prepared to fly what is offered.

“For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” - H.L. Mencken. 

That’s exactly where I found myself when pondering the question, “Do I need to put a compass in the Titan T-51D Mustang that I’m building?”

After all, putting a mechanical compass in a modern aircraft seems akin to putting a wind-up clock in a Tesla. Searching for guidance, I spoke with fellow builders, flight instructors, and avionics experts. The simple answer I received every time was “Yes.”  Then I made one last call to my good friend and consummate federal aviation regulations expert, Ric Peri at the Aircraft Electronics Association. Peri’s answer: “Well, let’s go through the FARs and figure it out.” And down the rabbit hole we went…

It started simply enough. FAR 91.205 specifies various instruments required for flight under VFR, starting with these three:

1. Airspeed indicator.
2. Altimeter.
3. Magnetic direction indicator.

Most people interpret “magnetic direction indicator” to mean a compass. But does it? And we also need to consider that Part 91 covers general operating and flight rules, not the certification of the aircraft. So, we need to dive into Part 23, which covers airworthiness standards for the airplanes most of us fly.

Part 23.1303 stipulates the minimum required flight and navigational instruments, and it matches up exactly with FAR 91.205. Part 23.1327 covers the accuracy and installation of the magnetic direction indicator, but it doesn’t define what exactly that is. Can it be an electronic instrument, driven by a magnetometer, or does it have to be a mechanical compass? If we look at the amendments to Part 23 and the associated commentary, we can see that the FAA has gone back and forth on the topic over the years.

In 1993, Amendment 43 to Part 23 addressed the issue directly, and the commentary on the revision explained that a magnetic direction indicator has to be a non-stabilized magnetic compass based on the following explanation: “The non-stabilized magnetic direction indicator, which does not require power from the airplane's electrical systems, provides directional information to the pilot when all other directional navigation systems have failed due to loss of power.” The FAR language was changed to read, “A direction indicator non-stabilized magnetic compass.” No powered instruments need apply. End of story.

This wording was maintained through other amendments, until Amendment 62 in 2012, where the wording for minimum required flight and navigational instruments mysteriously changed back to “A magnetic direction indicator,” language that remains to this day. So, what happened? Does an electronic instrument now count? Sorting through volumes of commentary that went into the rationale for many of the changes in Amendment 62, they all point to “Yes.” Beginning in 2012, there was an industry push to accept that electronic instruments could deliver levels of accuracy and reliability that mechanical instruments simply could not. And so, the requirement for a “compass” has finally been relegated to the history books. A “magnetic direction indicator” is the current requirement for VFR flight, alongside the airspeed indicator and altimeter. (IFR flight requires additional instruments including artificial horizon, directional gyro, slip-skid, rate of turn, and others.)

Given the numerous electronic flight instruments available for the general aviation pilot, will this soon make the classic wet compass a thing of the past? The answer is…maybe. Some primary flight displays and electronic flight instrument systems on the market still list a “compass” as required equipment under their supplemental type certificates. It would certainly have been better if their STC language matched the FAA’s “magnetic direction indicator.” But the pieces are certainly in place to support a retrofit, all-electronic panel that meets the FAA requirements for certification, redundancy, and emergency power backup.

In 2015, the FAA released a policy statement (PS-ACE-23-08) acknowledging the superiority of electronically driven attitude indicators, making it possible for thousands of aircraft to easily upgrade to electronic attitude indicators and dump their old vacuum pumps. These days, many new flight instruments on the market utilize modern magnetometers, delivering reliable and highly accurate magnetic direction indication. I suspect it won’t be long before the old wet compass and all of its issues are a thing of the past. The FAA removed the “compass” specific requirement from the private pilot certification standards back in 2013. Now it’s time for the retrofit avionics industry to step up and complete the process, relegating those compass correction cards to the museums. Until next time, I hope you and your families remain safe and healthy, and I wish you blue skies.

Jeff Simon is an A&P mechanic, IA, pilot, and aircraft owner. He has spent the last 22 years promoting owner-assisted aircraft maintenance and created the first inspection tool for geared alternator couplings available at ApproachAviation.com. Jeff is also the creator of SocialFlight, the free mobile app and website that maps more than 20,000 aviation events, hundred-dollar hamburger destinations, and also offers educational aviation videos. Free apps are available for iOS and Android devices, and users can also visit www.SocialFlight.com.

It's been more than two decades since then-Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley ordered large X’s carved into the runway, rendering it unusable. (Flying Magazine)

Where were you on March 31, 2003, when the aviation world woke up to the news that Merrill C. Meigs Field in Chicago had been destroyed? 

I was at Sun ’n Fun Aerospace Expo in Lakeland, Florida, working as an aviation reporter. Early that morning I started getting voicemails and emails telling me about the large X’s carved into the runway, rendering it unusable and trapping a handful of aircraft based there.

One of the first to see the damage was a pilot who had planned to land at Meigs but had to divert to another location. He reported the damage to a surprised air traffic controller who, like himself, was not aware that Meigs had been destroyed.

The abrupt closure took airport employees by surprise as well. One of the Meigs tower controllers told a local news outlet that he learned he was out of a job while driving into work and heard a local radio station reporting on the damaged runway.

• READ MORE: ‘Remember Meigs Field’

At Sun ’n Fun, which is the second-largest aviation convention in the U.S., the destruction was talked about somberly. How could this have happened? 

We quickly learned that the heavy equipment operators that came to the airport under the cloak of darkness and dug those massive ditches into the runway were acting on orders from then-Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley. Daley was not the first Chicago politician to propose the closure of Meigs Field.

In the 1980s, Mayor Jane Byrne suggested closing the airport and turning the property into a park. Local pilots, aviation advocacy groups, and businesses that appreciated the convenience of an airport so close to downtown objected to the idea.

In addition, the FAA noted that the airport had received agency grants, and each grant carried an assurance that it would remain open a set amount of time—usually 25 years—so that the grants can be amortized. At the time, the airport had most recently accepted a grant in 1976. In theory, the earliest the airport could be closed was 2001.

The airport was built shortly after World War II on Northerly Island, a human-made peninsula minutes from downtown Chicago. The airport had a single runway measuring 3,900 feet by 150 feet. In 1952, the airport was named after Merrill C. Meigs, publisher of the Chicago Herald-Examiner newspaper and an aviation enthusiast. 

The land, which is owned by the Chicago Park District, was leased for the airport. The location being so close to downtown Chicago made it popular for businesses, medical flights, and for a short time, commercial aviation. It was so busy that a control tower and two instrument approaches were added. By the late 1990s, commercial aviation had given way to general aviation and medevac flights. Meigs was also popular in the virtual aviation world, as it was the default airport for Microsoft Flight Simulator.

In 1994, Daley revived the idea of closing the airport and redeveloping its 75 acres into a park. The FAA reminded the city that it had accepted FAA funding for improvements and by doing so agreed to grant assurances that stipulated the airport remain open.

• READ MORE: City Council Votes To Close Santa Monica Airport
• 
  

Daley continued to push for closure, and in 1996, the Chicago Park District refused to renew the lease for the airport. Large X’s were painted on the runway identifying the airport as closed. 

In response, the Illinois  Legislature and the FAA strongly opposed the action, and the combined pressure resulted in the reopening of the airport. The painted X’s were removed and the airport resumed operations. The understanding was that the facility would remain open until at least 2026.

Aviation organizations loudly defended the airport and its convenience for downtown businesses, yet the threat of closure remained. The pilots attending the Meet the Administrator public forums at EAA AirVenture held up large red-and-white signs that read “SAVE MEIGS FIELD” to get their point across.

Aviation groups such as the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) continued to watch the airport. The FAA repeatedly noted that it  is in the business of protecting airports, not closing them, reminding the city of Chicago that the grant assurances stipulated the facility stay open. In addition, FAA regulations state that closure of an airport that includes an instrument approach—Meigs had two—requires a 30 days notice prior to shutdown, which was never given.

Aviation advocacy groups were quick to respond to the airport’s destruction. Phil Boyer, AOPA’s president at the time, called out Daley for what Boyer called a lack of honor: “The sneaky way he did this shows that he knows it was wrong.”

EAA president Tom Poberezny was attending Sun ’n Fun when he heard about Meigs Field. Within two weeks, the organization became part of a GA coalition that lobbied the U.S. Senate to support the National Aviation Capacity Expansion Act, which called for the codifying of the historical political agreement between then-Illinois Governor George Ryan and Daley to preserve Meigs Field for another 25 years.

Meanwhile, Daley defended his actions, claiming the destruction was done “due to safety concerns,” citing a potential terrorist attack similar to 9/11 when terrorists used aircraft to attack the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Arlington County, Virginia. This story was quickly discounted when the Department of Homeland Security stated that the airport’s proximity to downtown Chicago was not a risk and that no threats had been made against the city.

Daley then told multiple media outlets that the abrupt closure was done as a means to prevent lengthy and costly litigation as various entities fought to keep the airport open.

For several months, pilot organizations and aviation groups lobbied for the repair of the runway and the reopening of Meigs Field, but it was not to be.

Several weeks after the forced closure, which became known as “Daley’s Midnight Raid” in aviation circles, the FAA gave permission for the 16 aircraft left stranded to depart using the taxiway as a runway.

That was not the last time aircraft used the facility, however.

In July 2003 a pilot on the way to EAA AirVenture in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, experienced mechanical trouble and made an emergency landing in the grass next to the remains of the Meigs runway. Daley accused the pilot of intentionally landing there as a publicity stunt to “embarrass him.” The pilot maintained that he had engine trouble, and the grass infield was the most suitable place for an emergency landing. The FAA sided with the pilot’s interpretation.

In August 2003, the demolition of the remaining infrastructure of Meigs Field began. Today, it is a park.  Even in the virtual world, Meigs in MSFS is gone—lost to the ages.

In 2005, the FAA fined Chicago $33,000 for closing an airport with a charted instrument approach without giving the required 30-day notice. At the time, the maximum fine the agency could levy by law was $1,100 per day. The city of Chicago appealed the fine, and aviation advocacy groups and elected representatives were quick to note its amount. Some $33,000 was “pocket change”’ to many municipalities that wanted to close the local airport.

In response, the Meigs Legacy Provision was passed as part of an FAA reauthorization bill. The provision increased the maximum fine per day from $1,100 to $10,000 per day for illegal airport closures.

In September 2006, the city dropped all legal appeals and agreed to pay the $33,000 fine, as well as to repay the FAA for the $1 million of Airport Improvement Program (AIP_ funds that were used to demolish the airport and build Northerly Island Park.

Meigs Field’s saga serves as a warning whenever other airports are threatened. The message is clear: It could happen here.

“Remember Meigs Field!” has become the battle cry of endangered airports.

Santa Monica Airport (KSMO) and Reid-Hillview Airport (KRHV)—both in California—come to mind. Both airports date to the early days of aviation. When they were built, they were in farm fields away from the city. Today, they are surrounded by industrial and residential development. And both are facing threats of closure from their elected city and county officials.

Credit to Flying Magazine and Meg Godlewski

Meg Godlewski has been an aviation journalist for more than 24 years and a CFI for more than 20 years. If she is not flying or teaching aviation, she is writing about it. Meg is a founding member of the Pilot Proficiency Center at EAA AirVenture and excels at the application of simulation technology to flatten the learning curve. Follow Meg on Twitter @2Lewski.

1. 22030603 Veteran Fliers BRIGADIER GENERAL GREGORY L TREBON   https://youtu.be/l7QL3RfU4hQ  
2. 22030602 Veteran Fliers BRIGADIER GENERAL WILLIAM J JABOUR        https://youtu.be/sXYegaMIxoE  
3. 22030601 Veteran Fliers MAJOR GENERAL PAUL M DUTCH VAN SICKLE  https://youtu.be/ZmriS510YNs 
4. 21120403 Veteran Fliers Series - Jim Stone  https://youtu.be/wk3-kj12Xpg 
5. 21120402 Veteran Fliers Series - Jim Weldon  https://youtu.be/9NGEiPV7euI
6. 22020500 Veteran Fliers - Pat Phillips  https://youtu.be/q_AF7-xmAYU 
7. 21120401 Veteran Fliers Series - Keith Phillips  https://youtu.be/sa-LL6T0Zpo 

Connect with FAADroneZone: Facebook  | Twitter

We know you have questions about Remote Identification (ID). We’re here to help you figure it out.

Do I have to fly with Remote ID?

Remote ID applies to drones which are required to be registered or have been registered with the FAA, including those flown for recreation, business, or public safety, and drones that are foreign-registered.

While drone operators were required to comply with Remote ID beginning September 16, the FAA recognizes the unanticipated issues that some operators are experiencing with complying with this rule and will exercise discretion in determining enforcement actions for noncompliance through March 16, 2024.

Why is Remote ID necessary?
Remote ID is necessary to ensure the safety and security of the national airspace system by distinguishing compliant airspace users from those potentially posing a safety or security risk. Remote ID also helps to lay the foundation for routine advanced operations such as package delivery and flying beyond visual line of sight..

What do I need to do?
There are three ways to be Remote ID ready:

1. Operate a Standard Remote ID Drone – a drone produced with built-in Remote ID broadcast capabilities; or
2. Operate a Drone with a Remote ID Broadcast Module – a device with Remote ID broadcast capabilities that can be attached to a drone; or
3. Operate at an FAA-Recognized Identification Area (FRIA) – areas where drones without Remote ID broadcast capabilities can operate.

How do I know if my drone or broadcast module is Remote ID ready?
1. Go to the FAA UAS Declaration of Compliance website
2. Click on “View Public DOC List”
3. Filter by “RID”
4. Search for your drone or broadcast module

My drone or broadcast module broadcasts Remote ID but is not on the Public DOC List, am I Remote ID ready?

No, even if advertised as “Remote ID ready” or uses other verbiage, only drones or broadcast modules listed on the FAA DOC are considered to be in compliance with the rule. However, the FAA’s policy on Remote ID enforcement discretion provides until March 16, 2024, to have the DOC updated.

Do I need to update my drone’s registration with Remote ID information?

If your drone or broadcast module is listed on the public DOC list, you need to register or update your existing drone registration through FAADroneZone to include the standard Remote ID drone or Remote ID broadcast module serial number. The Remote ID serial number is not the same as your drone’s serial number. Drone owners should check with their manufacturer for additional information.

Since recreational pilots only need to register once and can apply that registration number to multiple aircraft, they can list one Remote ID broadcast module serial number and move the broadcast module from drone to drone as long as it is listed on the same registration.

Part 107 pilots need to register each drone individually. Therefore, each drone must have its own Standard Remote ID or Remote ID broadcast module serial number.

Visit our Remote ID webpage to learn more about adding a Remote ID serial number to your drone’s registration.

Have more questions? We’re here to help at the UAS Support Center or call us at 844-FLY-MY-UA (844-359-6982).

We’ve all heard pilots discussing their weekend plans or just shooting the bull on 123.45 while the rest of us try to report our positions in Alert Areas (training areas). This annoying interruption can be downright dangerous.

The FAA actually has a frequency for BS’ing between aircraft believe it or not. The frequency 122.75 is dedicated for general air-to-air communications between private fixed-wing aircraft.

Please use 123.45 if you intend to communicate with another aircraft during a maintenance flight, or for reporting your position in an Alert Area, and by all means please keep your transmissions short and concise.

Want to discuss dinner plans, talk about your airline interview last week, meow, or chat about anything unofficial? Then 122.75 is the frequency for you. Everyone will greatly appreciate it!

Pilots are often nervous about flying into or around airports with skydiving operations. There’s really no need to be, as Paul Bertorelli explains in this AVweb video. Just avoid the airport by three or four miles on the downwind side when transitioning and don’t overfly a dropzone airport if you’re landing there. Just fly a normal (not too tight) pattern.  Watch the video by Paul Bertorelli published 5/29 with full credit to AvWeb