Actually I'm exclusively interested in data under 400 feet! Surface-level pressure observations are my target; recent research suggests that a dense network of atmospheric pressure observations (taken on the surface) will produce a significantly higher accuracy forecast. Smartphones work nicely for this except for their lack of even geographical distribution.
Get in touch . I'm working on making a low cost sensor box from Raspberry Pi's for wide dissemination; atmospheric/temp sensors, precision GPS receiver, software defined radio for grabbing AIS and ADS-B data, etc, and then open sourcing all of the collected data sets and the live streams.
I would love to integrate with Cumulonimbus! My email address is in my profile.
That may be useful then. I don't think there's any specific rule against a fully-autonomous system, though it would certainly raise some eyebrows. If you do it with enough safeguards and in a safe area, you might get away with it.
I thought I saw those too, but haven't been able to find them in the FAA notices for model aircraft. There is such a clause in the 2012 for small unmanned aircraft (sUAS) use by a "government public safety agency".
I would presume the FAA will try to apply such a rule to civil use after this ruling.
Edit: Federal Register Notice 14 CFR Part 91 says they "expect line of sight" for model aircraft. It does not seem to be required--and at least one administrative judge thinks that such a notice does not carry much weight.
Are you sure that's the case? The 400 feet rule comes from FAA Advisory Circular 91-57 (in 1981), which is essentially a public memo with ambiguous (weak at best) legal status.