Kite flying

"§ 101.13 Operating limitations.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may
operate a moored balloon or kite—

(1) Less than 500 feet from the base of any cloud;

(2) More than 500 feet above the surface of the earth;

(3) From an area where the ground visibility is less than three miles; or

(4) Within five miles of the boundary of any airport.

??

Section 4 clearly says no kite flying within 5 miles. The 500' limitation
seems to be in effect everywhere. No?

by Chris W Apr 19, 2006 at 11:51 AM



I used to fly RC planes at a park that was with in 3 miles of KOKC.
When the real planes flew over, they were higher than the RC planes.
However, the typical traffic patters didn't bring planes over the park,
so it was pretty rare to have one directly over head. I wonder if the
controllers saw us on radar? The engine was the only thing in most
planes that would reflect radar and they aren't very big. Anyway, no
one from the FAA ever came by to complain and we used to fly there on a
pretty regular basis. There were kids flying kites at that same park, as
I recall the RC planes were usually quite a bit higher than the kites,
however there was this one time an RC helicopter impacted a kite, the
kite's death was instantaneous, the helicopter died shortly after, when
it fell to the ground. I'm sure it was a spectacular impact, but I
didn't turn my head quick enough to see it



The kite caused the helo to crash???? Do you have an NTSB number or date?
I'd love to read about that one.

I re-read those FAA regs. I wonder who at the FAA I need to contact to
get permission to fly a kite over 250 feet. Do they have a division of
kite compliance? Who the hell would enforce it, esp since they don't
enforce minimums for the planes.

Man, I hope Boyer doesn't "take on" the poor kid who gets a kite for his
birthday, and unwittingly breaks the FARs.

Chris W wrote:
Anyway, no
one from the FAA ever came by to complain and we used to fly there on a
pretty regular basis.

There have been r/c vs. full scale conflicts around an r/c club at a
turf farm located south of HFD, where the FAA has complained. No
accidents that I know of, but complaints have been lodged. The
particular club has a large "giant scale" membership, so I suspect that
many of the planes weren't as close to full scales as the full scale
pilots may have perceived.

On the other hand, I've flown r/c @ active, open airports, with
permission. In that case, we simply used a spotter and landed the r/c
stuff until the full scale was clear of the runway. Kind of like street
hockey. If a plane appears in the pattern, someone yells "plane", and
we stop, and then someone yells "game on!" when the full scale is clear.
Other times, we'd have scanners or handhelds listening for approach calls.

Woodstock, CT, now a private field, even lists r/c activity in NOTAMS
and on airnav.com.

Before the current stadium was built, r/c was frequently flown at P&W's
East Hartford facility. Tethered balloons were flown to demonstrate
max. altitude to r/c pilots, to prevent conflicts with HFD.

"Skylune" wrote:
What about small model planes? Are these also restricted?

Oddly enough, I can find no regulations specifically mentioning RC planes.
The obvious regs, such as for ultralight vehicles, specifically state that
they are applicable only to manned vehicles.

Perhaps you or others could search the regulations and come up with the
relevant cites and post them here - I had no luck finding anything covering
unmanned aerial vehicles:
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text...4/14tab_02.tpl

by B A R R Y balsapilot@[EMAIL PROTECTED] Apr 19, 2006 at 05:18 PM

There have been r/c vs. full scale conflicts around an r/c club at a
turf farm located south of HFD, where the FAA has complained. No
accidents that I know of, but complaints have been lodged. The
particular club has a large "giant scale" membership, so I suspect that
many of the planes weren't as close to full scales as the full scale
pilots may have perceived.

On the other hand, I've flown r/c @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
active, open airports, with
permission. In that case, we simply used a spotter and landed the r/c
stuff until the full scale was clear of the runway. Kind of like street
hockey. If a plane appears in the pattern, someone yells "plane", and
we stop, and then someone yells "game on!" when the full scale is clear.
Other times, we'd have scanners or handhelds listening for approach
calls.

Woodstock, CT, now a private field, even lists r/c activity in NOTAMS
and on airnav.com.

Before the current stadium was built, r/c was frequently flown at P&W's
East Hartford facility. Tethered balloons were flown to demonstrate
max. altitude to r/c pilots, to prevent conflicts with HFD.



Interesting stuff. Amazing how often new and interesting things keep
appearing on RAP. Its why I keep coming back.

This kite thing has some potential. If the folks at STN all bought sturdy
kites, outfitted them with 40 pound test fishing lines, and flew them at
499.5 feet, they would be perfectly within their legal rights, and it
might make the stunt planes fly a little higher...

"Skylune" wrote:
"§ 101.13 Operating limitations.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may
operate a moored balloon or kite—

(1) Less than 500 feet from the base of any cloud;

(2) More than 500 feet above the surface of the earth;

(3) From an area where the ground visibility is less than three miles;
or

(4) Within five miles of the boundary of any airport.

??

Section 4 clearly says no kite flying within 5 miles. The 500'
limitation seems to be in effect everywhere. No?

First, if (1), (2), and (3) are implicitly joined by "and" (since (3) and
(4) are explicitly joined by "or") then if visibility is greater than three
miles, presumably one can fly kites closer than five miles to an airport so
long as the kites aren't too close to clouds or too high. But never higher
than 500 feet.

But I am not a lawyer and have never been able to figure out whether
regulation writers love to omit "and" and "or" on purpose in their bulleted
lists. If all the items were intended to be joined by "or" then presumably
you can fly your kite in any clouds or fog less than 500 feet AGL, or
twenty miles up if visibility is unlimited!

Also, you elided paragraph (b) which states other exceptions:

"(b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to the operation of a
balloon or kite below the top of any structure and within 250 feet of it,
if that shielded operation does not obscure any lighting on the
structure."

Getting a little off topic here. I once saw a doctor and his child
flying a kite right in the easement path of power distribution lines. It
got to me so much that I had to stop and tell him how dangerous that
was. He said that he understood and had it under control. What some
people will do, even educated ones.

Ross
KSWI

Skylune wrote:

by Dylan Smith Apr 19, 2006 at 02:29 PM


On 2006-04-19, Skylune wrote:

LOL. So the kids I saw were in violation of the FARS!!! That is
hysterical.


Why is it hysterical?


Kids flying kites should study the FARs. LOL.


If you engage in any activity at any age, it behooves you (or your
guardian, in the case of kids) to at least have a passing awareness of
laws that may be governing you. Flying kites on 1000 foot strings on an
airport departure path is every bit as brain dead as letting your kids
ride their bikes on the wrong side of a main road



It is ludicrous because the rules say you cannot fly a kite within 5 miles
of the airport boundary, not simply off the departure and arrival ends of
the runway. 5 miles! LOL.
The kite manufacturers should have liability warnings on the kites. Who
on earth could know that?

I suppose there are rules against raising carrier pigeons near GA airports
also. If those stupid little new hover crafts become popular, I am sure
that the FAA will somehow limit their usage as well. What about small
model planes? Are these also restricted?

Damn, I'm starting to understand why the STN people say that GA airports
should be required to purchase all land in a 25 mile radius. ;-)

"§ 101.13 Operating limitations.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may
operate a moored balloon or kite—

(1) Less than 500 feet from the base of any cloud;

(2) More than 500 feet above the surface of the earth;

(3) From an area where the ground visibility is less than three miles;
or

(4) Within five miles of the boundary of any airport.

??

Section 4 clearly says no kite flying within 5 miles. The 500'
limitation seems to be in effect everywhere. No?

First, if (1), (2), and (3) are implicitly joined by "and" (since (3) and

(4) are explicitly joined by "or") then if visibility is greater than
three
miles, presumably one can fly kites closer than five miles to an airport
so
long as the kites aren't too close to clouds or too high. But never
higher

than 500 feet.

But I am not a lawyer and have never been able to figure out whether
regulation writers love to omit "and" and "or" on purpose in their
bulleted
lists. If all the items were intended to be joined by "or" then
presumably

you can fly your kite in any clouds or fog less than 500 feet AGL, or
twenty miles up if visibility is unlimited!

Also, you elided paragraph (b) which states other exceptions:

"(b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to the operation of a
balloon or kite below the top of any structure and within 250 feet of it,

if that shielded

Well, section b doesn't seem to apply. I read it as part 1 and 2 applying
in all cases. If I am right, that means you can't legally fly a kite over
500 feet, anywhere, period. Part 3 and 4: either apply: no kite flying
at all within five miles of the airport boundary or from an area where
ground visibility is less that three miles. (I have no idea what "ground
visibility under three miles means, though.)

Weird stuff. For fun, I am going to call the idiots at the FAA to get
clarification. I love to taunt those bureaucrat enablers.

Jim Logajan writes:

(1) Less than 500 feet from the base of any cloud;
(2) More than 500 feet above the surface of the earth;
(3) From an area where the ground visibility is less than three miles;
or
(4) Within five miles of the boundary of any airport.

Section 4 clearly says no kite flying within 5 miles. The 500'
limitation seems to be in effect everywhere. No?

First, if (1), (2), and (3) are implicitly joined by "and" (since (3) and
(4) are explicitly joined by "or") [...]

No, the same connective ("or" in this case) applies amongst all
parallel items.


- FChE

"Ross Richardson" wrote in message
...
We have a small city park on the north end of our airport. It is not
uncommon to sometimes have to dodge kites on the approach to the airport.
Usually have the police go out and explain the situation to them.

Ross
KSWI

Ross ain't kidding! I flew into SWI a week or so ago to partake of the $2.76
100LL and had to dodge kites on final. Fortunately some kind soul warned me
on the radio before I got there.

I called the police dept. and advised them of it, and the kites were gone by
the time I left.

Dan
KGYI