The Recreational UAS Safety Test (TRUST) - New FAA Drone Exam

[overdrive148]

The FAA just released the TRUST a few hours ago (The Recreational UAS Safety Test). If you fly any drone recreationally, you should take this test and get this certificate - even if you have a Part 107.

The test:

• Is 100% free
• Takes 30 minutes
• Cannot be failed
• Does not expire or require a recurrent test
• Is required regardless of drone weight
• Is required regardless of age
• Is required regardless of AMA/Flying Field status
• Does not save any personally identifying information (only cert number)

You can read more and find a website to take the test here:
https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_fliers/knowledge_test_updates/

Make sure you print out/save your certificate as you cannot log in to download the certificate again. This certificate must be shown to law enforcement and the FAA upon request.

Just went through the course through ERAU and it was really straightforward and very easy to understand. I think this will definitely help your average everyday drone pilot understand their role in the NAS and educate them on how to operate safely.

 

[Zeldman]

Thanks for the info.

Please explain ''cannot be failed''.

If actually failed is the test taker is executed or something.??

 

[JScarry]

Why do you think you need additional certification if you already have a Part 107 certificate?

 

[DFH65]

Makes no sense if you have a Part 107 but I just did it any way easy enough.

 

[ahw01]

How does this differ from the Faasteam course?

 

[overdrive148]

Thanks for the info.

Please explain ''cannot be failed''.

If actually failed is the test taker is executed or something.??

No, I mean there's no penalty for failing - you must get 100% to get the certificate but all you have to do is re-take the section quiz and score 100% to move on if you miss one.

Why do you think you need additional certification if you already have a Part 107 certificate?

Makes no sense if you have a Part 107 but I just did it any way easy enough.

If you have a Part 107 you can choose to operate under the Part 107 ruleset when flying on your own, but you can similarly choose to fly under Recreational Rules (USC 44809) for a flight even if you have a Part 107. You are still bound by basically the same ruleset but your sUAS registration requirements are different between the two:

Part 107 (Commercial) - each aircraft must be individually registered ($5/each every 3 years)
USC 44809 (Recreational) - you get one registration number that goes on all of your recreational aircraft ($5 once every 3 years).

Aircraft that are registered as recreational can only be flown recreationally. If you want to change that aircraft from Recreational to Commercial or vice versa it'll cost you an extra $5 each time. If you own only one aircraft then yes, it wouldn't make a ton of sense to ever fly under Part 101, but if you have a lot of recreational aircraft it makes sense to have both and choose between the two.

How does this differ from the Faasteam course?

The FAAST course I think you're referring to is the one where you use your Part 61 certificate and flight review to get your Part 107 Commercial certificate - TRUST is for recreational users only and can be completed by anyone.

 

[Zeldman]

No, I mean there's no penalty for failing - you must get 100% to get the certificate but all you have to do is re-take the section quiz and score 100% to move on if you miss one.

My way makes it more exciting....

 

[DFH65]

If you have a Part 107 you can choose to operate under the Part 107 ruleset when flying on your own, but you can similarly choose to fly under Recreational Rules (USC 44809) for a flight even if you have a Part 107. You are still bound by basically the same ruleset but your sUAS registration requirements are different between the two:

Part 107 (Commercial) - each aircraft must be individually registered ($5/each every 3 years)
USC 44809 (Recreational) - you get one registration number that goes on all of your recreational aircraft ($5 once every 3 years).

Aircraft that are registered as recreational can only be flown recreationally. If you want to change that aircraft from Recreational to Commercial or vice versa it'll cost you an extra $5 each time. If you own only one aircraft then yes, it wouldn't make a ton of sense to ever fly under Part 101, but if you have a lot of recreational aircraft it makes sense to have both and choose between the two.

My only point is it is a bit of a waste of time. This is purely educational and the information is 99.9% overlap so why waste my time.

 

[Lindberg]

The Part 107 "exam" I took couldn't be failed either. It told you which answers were wrong, and wouldn't let you proceed until you changed them to get 100% correct.

 

[MonkeyClaw]

Ahhh, the FAA again trying to ruin an aviation-related hobby. Nice!

 

[overdrive148]

My only point is it is a bit of a waste of time. This is purely educational and the information is 99.9% overlap so why waste my time.

It's an incredibly easy course to take and lets you pay the FAA less money per year under certain circumstances.
If it doesn't apply to you or help you specifically, you don't have to take it!

The Part 107 "exam" I took couldn't be failed either. It told you which answers were wrong, and wouldn't let you proceed until you changed them to get 100% correct.

So the Part 107 Exam is the one you schedule with PSI/go to the CATS testing center/pay $160/take a proctored 60 question test with a 70% minimum score to pass. The Part 61 Current FAAST course that you take online is the one you can't fail that you're talking about.

 

[overdrive148]

Ahhh, the FAA again trying to ruin an aviation-related hobby. Nice!

Actually, this is the most accessible training the FAA has ever put out (in my opinion). The regular drone flying public on the whole doesn't understand the National Airspace System, where they can and can't fly, and why. This training is designed to inform average drone pilots of the regulations that apply to them so they can fly safely and legally. Highly disagree that it's ruining the hobby - it's making it better.

 

[MacFlier]

The site says it's for pilots flying drones heavier than 0.55lb. Is it also for other drine pilots flying something like the DJI Mavic (the one that weighs 249 grams, I e gram less than the limit)?

 

[WDD]

To all of those nay sayers, I say hold your powder. Since the FAA has started involving itself in drone certification, 125% of anyone who ever flew and will fly a drone has taken their courses. The fact that there are in 2021 zero drone deaths, no barn fires, and a complete absence of semi truck drone accidents proves that this certification and testing program is worthwhile. In fact, it suggests there should be even more FAA training and certification.

After all, if it can't be shown that any of this is having any affect on an undefined problem, why would they do any of this?

 

[overdrive148]

The site says it's for pilots flying drones heavier than 0.55lb. Is it also for other drine pilots flying something like the DJI Mavic (the one that weighs 249 grams, I e gram less than the limit)?

So the .55lb/250g weight and up relates to aircraft registration, not for pilot certification.

Any drone that weighs more than .55lb/250g must be registered with the FAA, but all pilots that operate in the National Airspace System must now either have a 44809 Recreational Certificate or a Part 107 Commercial Certificate. Hope this makes sense!

 

[overdrive148]

To all of those nay sayers, I say hold your powder. Since the FAA has started involving itself in drone certification, 125% of anyone who every flew and will fly a drone has taken their courses. The fact that there are in 2021 zero drone deaths, no barn fires, and a complete absence of semi truck drone accidents proves that this certification and testing program is worthwhile. In fact, it suggests there should be even more FAA training and certification.

After all, if it can't be shown that any of this is having any affect on an undefined problem, why would they do any of this?

The information from the course is something that should be included in the box with each drone sold in the US along with the basic instructions for flying a drone. That the FAA was able to put together something easily understandable, penalty free, and free to take for anyone in the US is a huge accomplishment. I'm not sure what your point is here. Have you seen the courseware or operated a drone?

 

[bluesideup]

• Does not save any personal information

Hi.
I do not think that any information you place on the Inet is Not being saved somewhere, but that is up to the individual to believe what they want, I've been around long enough to know differently.
Can you post a pic of the certificate / diploma? I am just curious as how different it looks from the FAA.

 

[overdrive148]

Hi.
I do not think that any information you place on the Inet is Not being saved somewhere, but that is up to the individual to believe what they want, I've been around long enough to know differently.
Can you post a pic of the certificate / diploma? I am just curious as how different it looks from the FAA.

The FAA states that the only thing being kept is the Authentication Token (certificate number) that can be referred to by Law Enforcement and the FAA itself to verify that its a valid certificate without name or other data. The ERAU site I did it through said the data was deleted after the course. It's a PDF certificate instead of a plastic card.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

When did RC airplanes turn into drones?

 

[overdrive148]

When did RC airplanes turn into drones?

Pick the language you want, but an RC airplane is an unmanned aircraft and these certificates (Part 107 and 44089) regulate unmanned aircraft. There was no transition period of definition, just new rules to regulate them.

 

[bluesideup]

The FAA states that the only thing being kept is the Authentication Token (certificate number) that can be referred to by Law Enforcement and the FAA itself to verify that its a valid certificate without name or other data. The ERAU site I did it through said the data was deleted after the course. It's a PDF certificate instead of a plastic card.

Hi.
Thank you. Just by them using the Authentication Token it's a confirmation that your personal information is being stored somewhere.
No big issue, if any one wants something they can always go to G and find it, just curious. See below what the FAA renewal looks like.

 

[overdrive148]

Hi.
Thank you. Just by them using the Authentication Token it's a confirmation that your personal information is being stored somewhere.
No big issue, if any one wants something they can always go to G and find it, just curious. See below what the FAA renewal looks like.

Ah, yours is the Part 107 Commercial Certificate from the FAAST course through the Part 61 method (versus doing it in person with a proctored exam without a Part 61 Certificate). The TRUST certificate PDF I shared is for recreational pilots.

Here's what the FAA has to say about data:
"Neither the test administrator, nor the FAA, will maintain personally identifiable information about the recreational flyer so it is not possible to re-print or re-issue your original certificate."

The only reason they keep the Certificate Number is to look up in a system with Law Enforcement/FAA to ensure that your cert is legitimate. If the number is a real one in the system, you're legitimate - no name or etc required.

 

[WDD]

The information from the course is something that should be included in the box with each drone sold in the US along with the basic instructions for flying a drone. That the FAA was able to put together something easily understandable, penalty free, and free to take for anyone in the US is a huge accomplishment. I'm not sure what your point is here. Have you seen the courseware or operated a drone?

Flown RC quite a bit
Point is that I’m not sure what problem has been identified/specified, and how is success being defined/measured vs let’s require another level of admin.

 

[overdrive148]

Flown RC quite a bit
Point is that I’m not sure what problem has been identified/specified, and how is success being defined/measured vs let’s require another level of admin.

Have you seen these reports?
https://www.faa.gov/uas/resources/public_records/uas_sightings_report/

A random excerpt from the most recent one:

 

[MonkeyClaw]

My son is 5.5 years old and likes to fly drones. He can't even read the questions on the test. One of the neat things about drones is that they are accessible to kids to get them interested in aviation - until the FAA or local law enforcement gives them a ticket and fine because they don't even know about this rule.

 

[overdrive148]

My son is 5.5 years old and likes to fly drones. He can't even read the questions on the test. One of the neat things about drones is that they are accessible to kids to get them interested in aviation - until the FAA or local law enforcement gives them a ticket and fine because they don't even know about this rule.

So theoretically what happens if he runs into someone with the drone walking past your house, is he off the hook because he's 5 years old? Or is that a thing that an adult like yourself would be responsible for because you're supervising him? Genuine question.

 

[MauleSkinner]

My son is 5.5 years old and likes to fly drones. He can't even read the questions on the test. One of the neat things about drones is that they are accessible to kids to get them interested in aviation - until the FAA or local law enforcement gives them a ticket and fine because they don't even know about this rule.

I had the same problem with firearm regulations when I was that age.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

To all of those nay sayers, I say hold your powder. Since the FAA has started involving itself in drone certification, 125% of anyone who ever flew and will fly a drone has taken their courses. The fact that there are in 2021 zero drone deaths, no barn fires, and a complete absence of semi truck drone accidents proves that this certification and testing program is worthwhile. In fact, it suggests there should be even more FAA training and certification.

After all, if it can't be shown that any of this is having any affect on an undefined problem, why would they do any of this?

Yep. Just like medicals.

 

[Half Fast]

Have you seen these reports?
https://www.faa.gov/uas/resources/public_records/uas_sightings_report/

A random excerpt from the most recent one:

Interesting that you picked a sample for which, in every case, no evasive actions were required, there were no reported impacts to operations, and there were no strikes.

And as far as I can tell, no drone miscreants were caught.

But granted that drones are a problem, how does this new training and certificate solve it?

 

[Lindberg]

It's an incredibly easy course to take and lets you pay the FAA less money per year under certain circumstances.
If it doesn't apply to you or help you specifically, you don't have to take it!



So the Part 107 Exam is the one you schedule with PSI/go to the CATS testing center/pay $160/take a proctored 60 question test with a 70% minimum score to pass. The Part 61 Current FAAST course that you take online is the one you can't fail that you're talking about.

I'm certain you are correct, but my reward for "passing" was a UAS pilot certificate.

 

[overdrive148]

Interesting that you picked a sample for which, in every case, no evasive actions were required, there were no reported impacts to operations, and there were no strikes.

And as far as I can tell, no drone miscreants were caught.

But granted that drones are a problem, how does this new training and certificate solve it?

I'm gonna go ahead and chalk the ones encountered up high as "no evasive action taken" instead of required since aircraft traveling at 500mph probably don't have the time to see or avoid a drone. If any of you with experience flying faster aircraft in the flight levels has input on that, I'm more than happy to change that view.

There are a lot of sightings of drones flying at high altitudes well outside legal limits. Some of those people probably don't know the rules regarding drones and assume they can fly as high as they want. Every drone operator getting educated on the rules will reduce the number of drones above 400ft by at least a small margin of people who don't like to break rules but don't know them or why they are implemented. Yes, people who don't care about the rules are going to do stupid things and hopefully win stupid prizes. That's where probably where things like Remote ID come in later. The point is, less drones above 400 AGL, less collision hazards, less likelihood of collisions.

Also, I really like drones but the last place I'd like to see one is coming through my windshield at 4000 AGL as PIC. Drones belong at 400ft AGL and below as the regulations state to stay separated from manned aircraft with their lower boundary at 500ft and above.

(And yes, I am aware that helicopters don't follow this rule/aircraft taking off and landing are lower than 500ft/aircraft can legally operate below 500ft AGL over sparsely populated areas and open water away from people/vehicles. The point is to keep the majority of drone flights lower than the majority of aircraft flights. Aircraft flying below 400ft AGL accept the risk of colliding with a drone since that is their domain, while aircraft above 500ft don't).