Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie And, while there is a lot of truth in that, there are also those that really do want to learn and have to pick the good information out of all the crap being thrown around. It's too bad many don't remember that little tidbit as well when they start pushing their own agenda[/QUOTE]

@Hydro Junkie - Unfortunately there are too many of us reading and looking for factual, real information, and knowledge to let out and out falsehoods stand as an education to the less knowledgeable which is what some posters do as a matter of course. That makes a lot of the bandwidth wasted here much worse than just a waste, it approaches malicious intent when a poster posts an outright lies.

@init4fun - In part I agree with you. Stupid_Pilot crossed the line with lies and when those are directed at me it becomes clear that war has been declared. I am sorry he has chosen that route over truth, rational thought, and consideration of other folks but not at all surprised that he insists he has been attacked as that is always the mantra of the less than honest purveyor of deceit. That he chosen that approach to the discussion of a serious safety issue that really does need some rational thought rather than depraved moral lectures about personal rights is why I truly do hope he has the full opportunity to personally experience all the bad stuff he supports with his falsehoods. Were he not so heavily entrenched in pandering false stuff (check this thread out carefully and watch the flip flop and definition drift that can be directly attributed to him), or insisting he was being misread (another dissimulation), we might make some headway. Would I agree with him on any thing? That, ladies and gentlemen, strictly depends on the integrity of the statements and supporting positions. Attacking me over something I did not say probably won't work anytime in this millennium or the next. Following that up by saying I misunderstood the post defines the level of integrity of the individual making things difficult.

I think that the entire community needs to make headway on this subject of drones rather than my way, your way, or Stupid_Pilots way. Unfortunately his falsehoods suggest that is something Stupid_Pilot does not want us to do for some reason.

The real sad part of that is while we sit here and put up with lies, falsehoods, misrepresentations of fact, or whatever else you want to call factually incorrect statements, the world is ACTING and we are not having a positive impact on those actions which is contrary to my own personal mind set but seems to be great and wonderful to others. To wit the FAA has been acting fast and furiously in granting waivers to drone operators all over the country recently but I have yet to see or hear anyone here, especially our above self stated expert , make a single remark about it. It is possible I missed that post, but the point remains the discussion has been driven to ignoring reality.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Anyone stop bickering long enough to catch the National 6 pm news Friday night?

Updated: 10:56 p.m. Friday, July 10, 2015 | Posted: 6:41 p.m. Friday, July 10, 2015

[h=1]FAA: Drone flies near Charlotte airport[/h]http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/loca...airport/nmw8X/

CHARLOTTE, N.C. —
A drone reportedly came too close to a U.S. Airways flight Wednesday, according to Federal Aviation Administration officials.

An unmanned aircraft was operating 5 miles northeast of Charlotte Douglas International Airport just before 9 a.m., FAA officials said.

The FAA bans drones within a 5-mile radius.

It isn't the first near miss at Charlotte Douglas. Channel 9 found FAA records show in July of last year, a regional jet approaching Charlotte was 12 miles out at 3,100 feet when the cockpit reported a black-and-white drone buzzing 100 feet below.

"You have some people who regardless of what rules are out there, they're going to do what they want to do," Terrice McClain, a drone operator, said.

McClain, who is exploring the commercial use of drones, said incidents like this close call give a bad image of the booming drone-using community.

"You hear a lot of sightings, a lot of reports but you don't really hear about operators getting caught," McClain said.
Click here for more on FAA rules on drones.
Finally the News Media is reporting that there are FAR's and rules about where U can't fly QUAD's Drones
The FAA is investigating the incident at the airport

NorfolkSouthern

Well, there is nothing the FAA can do about certifying a drone or model airplane operator, because of Section 336. All they can do is enforce the rules that already exist, by classifying everything that flies as an aircraft, even if it's a fixed-wing .40 sized trainer. And the drones are getting harder to catch. I guess the only way to get around all this would be an act of Congress.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

FAA: Drone flies near Charlotte airport:

If U take any of the approaches at CHT CHARLOTTE/DOUGLAS INTL
and they reported the DRONE at 2000 to 2100' MSL
2100' - 748' (CHT's altitude above sea mean level) Leaves
equals 1352' above ground not 2100'. now at 3 degree glide slope
That pots the Quad at about 4.88 miles from the air port. All Depending
on what approach was being used at the time.
So this Idiot was 952' too high and 1/8 mile too close to
CHARLOTTE/DOUGLAS INTL.
http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/loca...airport/nmw8X/

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

i do not belive all the stuff about drones people say ilive withim 50 miles of big airports and never a drone there

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

At 50 miles out from any large airport with scheduled service the planes are still above FL 250 or 25,000' I doubt any one will see a R/C Quad up there. At 5 miles from an airport any plane on a precision approach is About 1384' AGL if the Touch Down Point is at the middle of the 5 mile radius.

flycatch

My Feedback: (26)

They just announced that in California the days of non commercial drones will be ending soon. This was caused by people flying drones near forest fires and the grounding of aircraft used to combat them.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

flycatch;
Where's the URL?

Hydro Junkie

I found several articles about firefighting planes being grounded, none that said drones were being outlawed.

littlecrankshaf

My Feedback: (58)

You sure??? Maybe it's just because drones are known to cause cancer in California... since as anyone knows, California is one of the biggest nanny states...and just look how well that's been working out for them... I hate to say it but Texas is getting known for the very same thing... Once the safety card is played, all focus must then be to match suit or denomination...nothing else allowed or you are called stupid and put out of the game...LOL

Sport_Pilot

I thought they issued TSA's for the firefighting areas? That would include drones. I don't see how banning them will stop people from flying them. I bet that they are not recreational flyers, but news hounds trying to make a buck on the images. That is unregistered and illegal commercial operations.

[email protected]

My Feedback: (1)

iam 60 miles from la airport 40 miles from ont. airport 50 miles from palm springs airport all good big airports have not heard of drones around them also 50 miles from john wayne and san diego airports there are at least 25 clubs in the middle of them never heard of any drones around

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

HD: This is a link to the latest fire where drones caused problems. http://news.yahoo.com/firefighting-p...013040946.html

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Sporty: it's TFR's Temporary Flight Restrictions.
TSA = Transportation Security Administration
A group of low level federal agents that are almost USELESS in stopping contraband onto US airliners.

rgburrill

I'll take that brt Sport. Check out the youtube videos and read some news articles - they are mostly "recreational" fliers, not commercial operations. There are a geat many commercal operations in california flying by the rules and notifying the FAA when they are in certain areas. Some of them are even fire departments flying with exceptions to track fire lines.

You see Sprot, unlike the "recreational" (AKA self absorbed) flier who violates the rules constantly, the legal commercial flier has a waiver that allows him to fly his UAV in certain areas and requires him to keep ATC notified of his position and altitude. Soemthing about SAFETY for other pilots.

An interesting sidenote, some enterprising person has dveloped a failry inexpensive, lightweight, system to add to small UAVs that reports it's posistion to ATC and other aircraft. This guy is going to make a bundle when the FAA finally gets sired of people like Sport.

VF84sluggo

My Feedback: (55)

TSA = Thousands Standing Around

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Those Thousands Standing Around ...
Have never caught a Terrorist, Man they're doing a good job, in spite of them selves.

When Googling Something Like "California the days of non commercial drones will be ending soon." From

Originally Posted by flycatchThey just announced that in California the days of non commercial drones will be ending soon. This was caused by people flying drones near forest fires and the grounding of aircraft used to combat them.

I see a lot of stuff way back as far as 2013 where the California Legislature has tried to make laws limiting all kids of :COMMERCIAL" use of drones but nothing on the recreational use.
Google this "California limiting commercial use of drones" and U get a lot
Anyone have any URL's to post on California limiting the recreational use of Drones?

Sport_Pilot

As I recall there are many news organizations who have gotten cease and desist orders from the FAA and they believe their freedom of the press trumps the FAA. I think both you and I agree that safety comes first. I also believe the CA fire fighters would allow a few commercial drones to film if they would coordinate there flights. Then again it is Kalifornia, so maybe not.

Any YouTube hits for this fire?

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

Oddly enough there are folks who have written extensively in this thread with the same type of mistaken belief. As for allowing commercial drones to fly and film, that assumes the group using them were interested in working WITH "the authorities who are assured to be telling nothing but lies to keep the press/public out of touch."

If you question that final statement, go back and wade through this thread again but with an open mind rather than a closed steel trap.

init4fun

Even my news , 3000 odd miles away from California , is reporting 4 incidents in the past month of drones interfering with firefighting operations . With this amount of idiots now in possession of them , it's only a matter of time . The best we can hope for is that "traditional" RC fixed wing and heli use is not affected , and only the "flying camera" operations take the hit .

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Init:
That's exactly why this thread was started. I firmly believe that is these clowns that fly these new drones, without regards to the rules and regulations supplied by the FAA and the AMA suggestions, it will very likely include all R\C aircraft. Flying near dangerous locations,over people and conjested (airports) airspace, without prior approval, from the FAA,and not complying with TFR's they will lower the hammer big time on the R\C industry, especially if it causes an accident or Fatality.
Question: what's the difference between a Drone and a Heli, or an R\C winged aircraft with a camera? None.
Ya don't need a camera onboard to be a drone, but..... if people would only comply with rules of Safety, none of this would be generated. Some people will not follow rules ,plain and simple, that's where the problems start.

init4fun

Hi Flap Happy ,

Yes , a person doesn't need a camera to make a menace of themselves with an RC toy , but think about it , the present problems the folks with cameras are causing are the ones that are making the news . If there were no flying cameras , there would be no idiots trying to get their "Dude !! awesome footage" of some kind or another , flying over parades or disaster sites . It specifically is the camera that is driving these excursions and a drone is merely the tool the fool is using without regard to any kinds of safety protocol . I really can see a future where enough of these morons will disrupt enough emergency services to the point where civilians in possession of flying cameras will be a no no , and hopefully the rest of RC survives . It really is a shame that a few jerks will end up getting the flying camera banished like lawn darts and good ol fashioned chemistry sets , and I believe like you do that it's only one drone involved disaster away from happening . Honestly , since the drone is just the vehicle for the camera , and the vehicle of choice seems to be the multi copter , does anyone for a minute think that any of these folks would still be into helicopters of ANY type if it weren't for the camera ? This isn't a love of aviation , it's a way to get footage that the average photographer could only dream about 10 years ago , and our hobby is being dragged into it by the association of similar hardware and the fact that the AMA sees big Dollars in future drone operations .... I hope we survive ......

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

Init: I hope we will survive this problem. The question is, "how can anyone do anything to put a damper on this growing concern". "What action needs to take place to stop this"?
We are concerned, the FAA is troubled with this, and the AMA is somewhat maybe concerned, but nobody actually has an answer before more rules and regulations start to take place. I surely want to avoid that if possible and I am pretty confident people reading this thread feel the same way. The love of Aviation is being slowly being destroyed by camera buffs that want to make a video at our expense, and don't care about rules we abide by.

Jim Branaum

My Feedback: (3)

This is precisely my point and why I am so adamant about this issue. There is an overarching fear that "WE" will be hammered by the knee jerk from some governmental organization over something one of these brain turned off folks will pull. It is kind of like gun control and crooks. If you take the guns away from the public, only the criminals will have guns, so that really doesn't work very well. However, if you make a crime committed with a gun have an extremely different and harsher consequence things begin to change. Look at the rate of crime where CHL licenses are plentiful compared to, say Chicago where they tired to outlaw hand guns.

The question I think we should be looking for is what stick can be used that is effective across all users, rational or not. Bogus definitions have nothing to do with that, nor do personal attacks, nor does anything about rights. But, I could be wrong since it is possible no body even cares and this hobby is already history. Hope you don't have any expensive toys...

FLAPHappy

My Feedback: (209)

HD: read my post above about 4 or 5 up.