I think it would simply be under FAR part 103 governing ultralight aircraft like hang gliders
posted by Sophont at 9:26 PM on January 5, 2024 [6 favorites]

You would need to follow Title 14 Chapter I Subchapter 4 Part 91 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which covers what is informally called “General Aviation”.
posted by Back At It Again At Krispy Kreme at 9:28 PM on January 5, 2024

That was my first thought, but Superman is capable of more than "more than 55 knots calibrated airspeed" so wouldn't fall under the definition of a powered ultralight. Unless you decide that without a motor he's unpowered, and so is technically a hang glider regardless of top speed...

Superman seems like he'd probably be regulated more like a fighter jet? It's technically legal to own a fighter jet, "Many jets have restrictions placed on them which dictate where they may be flown and for what purpose. Most are licensed in the "Experimental, Exhibition" category, which means that they can only be flown to and from air shows and displays, for pilot proficiency and other specific activities. They may not be used as "personal transportation" machines."
posted by BungaDunga at 9:41 PM on January 5, 2024

Not being facetious: since most of these characters operate as an alter-ego of a secret identity, they’d likely be operating illegally, or at least quasi-legally, from the go, since they would be unlicensed or else risk ‘outing’ themselves to the civil aviation authority.
posted by Fiasco da Gama at 10:01 PM on January 5, 2024 [2 favorites]

I've always sort of suspected that restrictions on it would end up with some sort of discrimination fight going on...

Sure, being born with the skill to fly would be one thing, but in Superman's case, his power was due to where he was born, which would arguably fall somehow into race/national origin, right? And given his reaction to Kryptonite, there'd be disability issues potentially at play.

And Spiderman - that, too. His appeared after being bitten by a spider. So, an adverse medical event, and powers acquired from it sure sounds like it could potentially stretch into disability.

Especially since the both of them also have strong beliefs (mental health?) that they are destined/required/obligated/whatever to be vigilantes that protect others...
posted by stormyteal at 10:05 PM on January 5, 2024 [1 favorite]

Arguably you wouldn't be subject to any FARs as you aren't operating an aircraft ("a device that is used or intended to be used for flight in the air").
posted by so fucking future at 12:04 AM on January 6, 2024 [1 favorite]

so fucking future, I would argue that Superman's special-purpose clothing would constitute "a device that is used or intended to be used for flight in the air" in this case.
posted by 4th number at 1:48 AM on January 6, 2024

I think that here in the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave, freedom stops at 500ft above ground level. At least, I think that's the limit on toy drones and airplanes. I should think the super heros have at least that much air to work with.
posted by SemiSalt at 4:53 AM on January 6, 2024

Larry Walters was ultimately fined $1500 by the FAA because he was "flying" near an airport without communicating with the control tower. So that's one thing your superhero will need to do, at least.
posted by Johnny Assay at 4:56 AM on January 6, 2024

I think the trick would be to get oneself classified as a bird, ideally a migratory bird for the treaty protections.
posted by heatherlogan at 6:25 AM on January 6, 2024 [8 favorites]

Good idea, but I think it's canon that Superman is neither a bird nor a plane.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 8:48 AM on January 6, 2024 [24 favorites]

you wouldn't be subject to any FARs as you aren't operating an aircraft

Agreed.

I would argue that Superman's special-purpose clothing would constitute "a device ..."

Strong disagree. Superman's suit is just clothes (albeit indestructible, since Ma Kent made it from the blankets in his rocket) and I'm pretty sure he could fly naked if need be.

So he is a bird. Angel, Hawkman, even more so.
posted by Rash at 10:22 AM on January 6, 2024 [3 favorites]

Now, the authorities would have a strong case for impounding the Silver Surfer's board (but who's going to take it away from him?)
posted by Rash at 10:28 AM on January 6, 2024

what would happen in terms of airspace regulations?

I think what would happen is they would need to introduce some new regulations, and at a guess there would be restrictions similar to those applied to flying drones e.g. no flying over airports, prisons or military complexes.
posted by Lanark at 10:53 AM on January 6, 2024

In Michael C. Bailey’s “Action Figures” series— a new super-powered teen is surprised when fighter jets scramble when she’s flying, and she is intercepted by a more experienced superhero who explains that all authorized fliers are given transponders (and other gear) to assist them in flying around in commercial airspace— this seems like a reasonably realistic scenario.
posted by gregvr at 10:54 AM on January 6, 2024 [2 favorites]

There’s a great old blog (and book), Law and the Multiverse, that would tackle questions like this. It was written by two lawyer MeFites. Here’s their take on this question.
posted by michaelh at 2:43 PM on January 6, 2024 [4 favorites]

There are a lot of materials for the Part 107 license (flying a drone under 55 pounds for commercial purposes), and that test gives a good overview of different types of airspace and the hazards you’d need to consider when granting airspace to Superman. I would expect that his unpredictable flight pattern, activity in highly populated areas, and elevation changes would make him considerably more dangerous than a hang glider. He would also need a blanket flight authorization for the areas he’s planning to fly in since he can’t put in a request a month in advance for clearance around airports, etc.

That’s part of the thing with superheroes - they behave in ways that the authorities disapprove of, sometimes for good reasons.
posted by momus_window at 2:45 PM on January 6, 2024

First off, none of the existing regulations for aircraft, ultralights, drones, etc are going to apply to a self-propelled human.

For example, ultralight aircraft is defined here: "For the purposes of this part, an ultralight vehicle is a vehicle that: . . . " It goes on, but it doesn't matter. Superman is a human, not an aircraft. None of it applies.

So to see what might happen, think about what happened when a completely new flying technology came about: drones.

At first, this was a new thing and pretty rare. People pretty much did what they wanted. Most tried to follow some reasonable rules and guidelines because they could see if there were trouble, regulations would follow.

This is what you would see if you had just one or two superheroes flying around mostly on the down low and mostly try to "do good" rather than causing trouble. They would mostly do their own thing and just try to keep their head down and (quite literally) stay off the radar screen.

But look what happened next with drones. As they became more popular and more numerous, various issues DID arise: How high can they fly without interfering with other aircraft, what are privacy ramifications of drones flying around other people's property, etc etc etc. So regulations, laws, and licensing were developed based on the scenario and the issues that actually happened. Small low powered drones have relatively light-touch regulation and licensing, while bigger and more powerful drones have a lot more regulation and licensing, and so on.

A similar situation happened when the Segway was introduced. It didn't fit any existing laws exactly (not a pedestrian, not a bicycle, etc etc etc) and so specific new laws and regulations were produced for it. In that case they were driven by the company selling that particular product. They literally hired lobbyists who went around to every single state in the U.S. and got something passed that ensured Segways were legal.

A similar thing happened with the recent proliferation of bike share and then scooter share. At first it seems existing law covers the situation but as they proliferate, problems happens and thus, laws and regulations.

Similarly with e-bikes - they are sort of like bicycles and sort of like mopeds but, from a legal standpoint in most jurisdictions (depending on exact details of their laws), don't clearly fit into either category. With just a few around, they just kind of operated in a grey zone but as they proliferated, most every state in the U.S. has adopted specific laws and regulations dealing with them.

The point is, regulations and laws don't just exist in a vacuum. They are developed in response to situations and problems that happen. People are killed or injured, people complain about this or that bothering them, lawmakers and regulators respond and try to deal with the problems that arise.

Point is, a very few well behaved superheros who mind their manners in the sky and never have any incidents - and basically try to keep out of sight - and laws/regulations might never happen.

But you have just ONE incident of a superhero causing an aircraft to crash, or even just be damaged, have to unexpectedly alter their flight, abort a landing, etc etc - anything that appears to impact on safety - and suddenly the regulations would be forthcoming, and quickly. Because there would be immense public and commercial pressure to deal with the situation as an actual safety problem.

Now extend the situation further and assume there are not just one or two, but rather dozens or hundreds or thousands (millions?) of people flying themselves around for fun and profit.

Two things are going to happen here: Just as people walking, and riding horses and chariots and carriages and such, and riding bicycles and motorbikes and motor vehicles, informal practices and "rules" start to develop because this is now a social activity with many participating - and one that involves fairly considerable element of danger to self and others. So the self-flying community develops rules and norms - everything from where and how you can take off to how fast you can go in various situations and places, protocols for avoiding collisions (for example, aircraft going different general directions segregate by alternating 1000s of feet in altitude, people walking, driving, and biking usually take to the left [or right] side of the roadway depending on which part of the world they are in, vehicles have a protocol at intersections, vehicles, boats, aircraft, and even bicycles have rules for lighting, and so on). A lot of these things are worked out by hard experience and just become part of the social norm.

And then some or many of those social norms and accepted practices are codified by laws and regulations as time goes by. And various laws and regulations are created to deal with conflict situation or in response to incidents or patterns of behavior that lead to problems.

In short I don't believe that any existing laws or regulations would cover this novel situation well or closely enough to apply. Rather, we would see new norms, regulations, and laws develop in response to the novel situation. Some of them might proceed similarly or by analogy to existing regulations and laws for similar activities. But they would be different because this is a new, different, unique type of activity that presents different possibilities and different hazards.

And laws, regulations, and social norms and practices would continue to develop over time in response to whatever challenges arose with this particular activity, how frequently it happened, and (in particular) how frequently issues involving safety, injuries, or loss of life happen.
posted by flug at 4:46 PM on January 7, 2024 [4 favorites]

There are eponysterical comments, and then there are eponysterical comments.
posted by Rock Steady at 8:51 AM on January 8, 2024

This thread is closed to new comments.