ira d

As whole I am in favor of federal laws in fact I think it's a good thing that full scale is regulated by the feds and I think there should be less local laws.
I think as a American citizen the same laws should apply everywhere in the USA. That being said I don't think the FAA should be involved in small
hobby type aircraft that are not conflicting with full scale operations, As for as commercial uas operation I think that should be enforced more
by OSHA and other work place regulations if they are not flown in the same manner as full scale or in conflict with full scale.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Come on John...obviously he was flying his toy at a designated flying site. Not sure where all your hatred stems from... I think maybe you really should consider some position as a fun policeman.

bradpaul

By his own words no less ............................. and he probably thinks we are the problem

WE need a new regulation on how to interpret what John writes, yeah a regulation ........ that will solve it. .

Ordered the Parrot AR, it will be fun...... see John you have inspired me to defend my rights as a U.S. citizen to fly a drone in the street in front of my house. Thanks

phlpsfrnk

Regards
Frank

PS; What is the common denominator here, the reading or the writing?

JohnShe

Talk about hyperbole. Anyway, he dang near whacked himself fin the head. At any charted club flying site he would be carried out on a rail for his stupidity.

I like fun as much as the next guy. But the fun comes to an end when someone gets hurt.

JohnShe

I would say both are pretty common problems. As a rule, we whip out succinct statements without checking our grammar or our spelling. Then we read our own prejudices into the statements of others. Which can result in either hilarious or hurtful interpretations.

JohnShe

Cool! How about this, we adopt the rules of grammar, spelling and logic. I'd like that.

JohnShe

Really, I think that your tinfoil hat may have a hole in it.

JohnShe

Good one, LCS. Quote me out of context so that you can insert your own meaning. You are drifting awfully close to trolling.

bradpaul

How predictable, the field safery comrade is now the spelling and grammar comrade...............

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

time to get another new thread this one is old

JohnShe

Well, you asked for it! LOL! ROTFLMAO!

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Now you want rules pertaining to guys whacking themselves???







Are you serious? After we quit laughing, we would have a contest to see who could fly under his quad.
Oh BTW charted??? Where's that dang spelling policeman when you need him most??? LOL You are so funny sometimes and are a real pleasure to have around...and I do mean that.

JW0311

I know I'm going to get a written lashing for this statement, but I can't see how more regulation is going to insure that I will not become a "victim" of another's actions. I understand that it would provide a means to prosecute or reprimand the "other" individual, but I can't see the connection between safety and or security and more regulation. Do we not already have laws in place to cover reckless or endangering behavior? As has already been stated, Injuring another individual is already illegal and that hasn't seemed to slow anyone down in that regards. No one is ever going to be able to secure my well-being better than I can. No matter how many regulations are in place. I think I would agree that more regulation is a slippery slope and very hard to undo once done. I'm going to stick to my guns and say education and providing awareness would be a better solution. Those that will listen and comply are going too and those that don't, would probably not follow regulation anyway. Spelling and grammar checked to the best of my ability.

James

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Wow!!! The best post I ever read on any forum ever!!! Succinct and concise! Very well said...

JohnShe

Well, he could just as easily whacked an innocent bystander, in fact in the video he come awful close to his rather witless partner.

And, yes at our flying field, he would have been escorted off the field.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

[h=1]jawohl herr kommandant!!![/h]

JohnShe

I know, I know, you have a reasonable fear of the FAA overdoing the regulations. And, yes there are possible conditions where a rule might not properly apply or work well. But, within the scope of flying model airplanes for recreation I consider the AMA safety guidelines perfectly reasonable and workable. The problem is, there are no guidelines for commercial operators who want to work outside the confines of their own property or a chartered flying field. I consider the danger of damage or injury significant enough that I want to see a reasonable set of regulations applied to those operators. I don't want to stop them, I just want to set limits of safe operation. I don't think it is unfair or unreasonable nor do I see a slippery slope. After all, the FAA has been regulating general and commercial aviation for years with very few problems. I live close to a busy and successful general aviation airport and just a little further away from a busy full scale international airport. I have big planes and little planes flying over my house rather frequently. Yet, I have no fear of disaster because of the regulation requirements under which these planes are operated. I would like to have the same feeling with drones and right now I don't. You may fear regulation if you wish, but I fear the lack of regulation.

JW0311

While I don't see your point to be unreasonable at all, I can't, in my mind, make the connection between regulation and trust that my safety is not at risk. The regulations themselves do not, in my mind, mean that I am free from the risk of personal injury. What would ensure that is the fact that those operating those aircraft are adhering to those regulations. So this goes back to human behavior and whether these individuals are going to comply with the regulations. I'm confidant that you understand, as well as I do, that there are those that will not comply with any regulations. Plenty of examples to show that fact. I do not believe that regulation decreases risk or eliminates it. The choice of the individual will determine increase or decrease of the risk. Not the regulation and good luck with controlling individual behavior. I think it's been tried a few times.

James

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

Spot on!

In this very thread there is one recent example that should stand out. The incident in Australia wasn't vetted to any real extent in that vein... I wondered why but of course that wouldn't have bolstered the case some are trying to make here.

JohnShe

It works so well in general and commercial aviation. Why can't I have the same expectations with commercial drones? They had to weed out a lot of idiots during the barnstorming days of aviation and now general and commercial aviation are safe and reliable. I expect the same thing to happen with commercial drones.

JW0311

My wife is still trying to control my behavior after 25 years and is not having any luck. Or so she says.

James

JW0311

I think you and I are after the same thing. I hope you are right and perhaps it will all come out in the wash, so to speak.

James

kerryg

While every pilot should be held responsible for their actions, commercial work brings in a whole other element. No different than rules around filming with a regular camera, drone operators will need to have certain things in place like insurance and bonds.

There is no stopping personal stupidity. I got into an argument today when I commented that it is reckless to fly a Phantom 2V directly over people and I was scolded saying "these things have numerous failsafes and simply do not fall out of the sky". This is the attitude we face, some people simple do not fully understand the risks and failure rates of these types of aircraft.

JW0311

Yes Sir, It was the choice of the individual operating the "drone" that caused the injuries, not the presence or absence of regulations. In the presence of regulations he may have made the choice to follow them or he may not have. Goes back to personal responsibility. Just my thoughts I could be wrong.

James