RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

I'm more concerned about having an unmanned military weapon, with a highly functional spying capability, flying in our airspace. There's another privacy violation and nobody seems to be noticing it. Not to mention the outside chance that control is lost on the UAV and it happens to hit a house or an airliner. Unless get every person in the US to sign a waiver. On top of all that, each new level of enforcement (Law or Military) costs more money......TAXPAYER money........! The mere prospect of this just sucks!

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

A/C that are relying on altimeters for their altitude are not going to be flying anywhere near 500 ft AGL unless they have radar altimeters or are landing. Also for an altimeter to be used for IFR it has to be accurate to 75 ft. BARO and they have to have local settings. This is all moot because they will not be flying that low unless near an airport or on a military training route. Both conditions that are known well in advance of ever placing a model field in the area. So separation is possible as pilots are required to know what altitude they are flying and if they choose to fly below 500 ft they had better see and avoid or face the consequences. I have heard how hard it is to see models from aircraft (I have never had trouble,) but just because you couldn't see that person you buzzed while flying low through a field doesn't mean you didn't break reg. and wont be punished.

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

I don't think it was prompted the new rules - clearly the appearance of UA on the scene and the need to distinguish between them (regulated aircraft) and recreational model aircraft (unregulated) was the impetus.
The biggest item of contention is the 400' ceiling on model airplane ops, though. AMA would be in a much better position to negotiate that if there had been some history of providing guidance to their members consistent with the FAA guidance, rather than sweeping it under the rug and worse, defiantly editing the FAA guidance to eliminate the 400' ceiling in the AMA Safety Code. They are just too little to late with any kind of response; AMA 'invented' See and Avoid about a year ago, after it became an issue at the sUAS ARC. Had there been some acknowledgment of the need to stay clear of regulated aircraft (say for example, an SC requirement for a spotter when flying into airspace open to regulated aircraft), they might be better positioned to say it has been demonstrated that the procedures we have had in place are sufficient to avoid conflict. Without any such history there is vacuum of credibility that makes it a hard sell.

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

This thread overall has been very interesting. The discussions of the AMA and the FAA doing this or that, or not doing this or that, has been a good history lesson. The problems have been indentified and argued. At this point, for me anyway as I step in taking a break from my L-39 build, what's the solution? What is to be done? Is there any way to avoid onerous restrictions being placed on us?

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

Is there a right to privacy, or is it more a right against unreasonable search and siezure? Autos run into houses and businesses all the time, as do motorcycles periodically. Those vehicles were supposed to be under control too. The difference between something in flight hitting a home and a land based vehicle is only the direction it comes from. As for increased costs and money, I don't see people in this forum up in arms about government bail out spending, so I suppose the money spent is only outrageous if the spending is not in a field found acceptabel to the individual.

I don't disagree that unmanned systems have the ability to look in places that aren't normally viewable from the street, but everyone seems to forget that police helicopters have pretty much the same optical cababilities as most small unmanned systems. In many cases the police helicopters have much greater capability. Helicopters are still not the safest mode of aerial transportation around.

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

It would be fine if we're talking about restricted flying space. AFB's, Border Patrol, War Zones. But that's not what I'm gleaning from this article. Privacy is privacy. That's why we have wiretapping laws and constitutionally sound proceedures to follow for information gathering. The whole concept is a sensory overload for those of us that are even lightly paranoid about the ever growing reaches of the government and their oversight branches that grant them an all access pass to the taxpayer/citizen under the guise of security and protection. Nobody seems to care about something like this from the point of view that the Airforce poplulate our skies every day, but this isnt' the airman on a training mission, this is the big red button we all feared during the cold war. Before I state this, I'm for second amendment rights. But think of this, in that you see that guns can be acquired by just about anyone. How would you feel if a criminal got control of a UAV. Taking that a bit further, what about a Improvised UAV. Constructed similar in the use of the Improvised Explosive Devices that are used to kill people over in the Middle East? How long or how much regulation do you think this hobby, a freedom of which we all here enjoy, would last without a hard ramp up in regulation and restriction that could cause it's ultimate demise?

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

the whole thing is the boarder patrol is already using uas and they have plans to buy another soon .

i went through this when i worked under the FCC doing the digital change over and some thought they were coming for there radio equipment(amateur radio)there was a key word there and there isthe same key word in all this FAA stuff that word is "COMMERCIAL" and unless the new regulations are going to include the private sectorand right know it don't, no matter what the AMA is trying to tell you it still comes down to the FAA tobring in regulations that directly affect the private sector right now it's all he said she said .

</p>

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

These will allow agencies that never dreamed of owning and operating a heli to have the same capabilities.
Even though I have nothing to hide,
the prospect of unseen and unknown surveillance still bothers me.
I wonder outside of our little circle, how many folks out there have any idea
of what is coming?
We here tend to talk about it as if it is just a natural extension of RC.
Yeah, the technology is cool, but...


And, walking out your door, or exiting your car, the last thing I think of(or want to have to think of) is to look up for an errant UAV.[:@]

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

Although I work on and fly them, I am not in favor of opening up our airspace for every Tom, Dick, and Harry to fly aerial observation platforms. I do believe it is a much heavier dose of big brother intrusionism and it will have profound and lasting impacts on our lives. It goes waaay beyond red light cameras or similar. I don't want to go poltical here but I feel that our lives willl be micro managed by numerous government agencies sharing acquired information to keep the populace in line and the elected officials in their comfortable positions.

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

You'll get no argument out of me...

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

I also concur, but you can add beuracrats as well as elected politicians.

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

Oh for sure. Everybody is saying throw the bums out, problem is, push-come-to-shove, it's the other guy's bum they want thrown out, not theirs. They like their bum. He brings home the goodies from Washington.

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

All of this regulation reminds me of when the feds were going to outlaw street rods and require certificates to own and operate them!

My company, Aerosight, has been into UAV for quite some time. Although we aren't the largest firm, we dabble a bit.
I am all for UAS myself (Obviously) and friends have said I may be a bad guy helping promote UAS in the States as the Police and big brother will use them in a way that isn't liked by the public. I agree somewhat. The bottom line is the UAS WILL be in place with or without my help in local PD agencies etc. All I hope to do is to be there in a way I can help insure that the initial setup of the industry is tweaked a bit by good guys like me who are involved just enough to help promote responsible use.

Personally I'd like to see the FAA leave the hobby stuff alone but that being said...We have a 3lb UAV that is thermal capable, autonomous and military grade called the Maveric. It seems unfair though that a hobby guy can fly a 15' YAK or extra 300 without regulation but I can't get my system in the air without a certificate of authorization from the FAA which often takes 90 days to get. (so obviously both sides have real reasons to complain)

I love how the Feds fix what isn't broken at the publics expense. Initially when the FAA released the first notification of the UAS regs it simply said....(Written here in easy english...) "You can't fly for compensation..." which wiped out alot of oportunity for suppliers, business and so on. Now they are suggesting that to fly even the small planes you will need a commercial pilot's rating to do so COA's TPR's etc.

To me, if it flies under non-human guidance (Autonomously)over a given distance (Up to discussion) it should be regulated. If you fly line of sight leave the guys alone. I fly in forested land, BLM etc and I can't even do that legally yet. BUT...I can fly my foamies and RC planes... HMMM

As far as Privacy goes, Someone stated above...
Current optics in news and PD copters gets you the same or more views as our UAV's do. But, you hear them coming!

Europe has UAS all over the place and they are doing just fine with it all. What we all hope for is that even the smaller guys are represented and the end results work for everyone.

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

The NPRM has been delayed yet again, until October. In my own humble opinion, the thought of the FAA ever coming up with a rule, is pure hogwash. And now the AMA is setting up to accept FPV, which I fully support, along with the private ownership of UAV's. I don't want the government to trample on my RIGHT to own a drone, any more than I would want them to take away our guns. Yes, the FAA can come up with a "rule", but it's not gonna have teeth. I'll believe all this, when I see it.

NS

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

Privacy concerns over this is like being concerned that the town will flood because your neighbor washed his car after a heavy rain. There are so many easier and more clandestine ways for government agencies to obtain private information about you than UAVs. The biggest reason for the push for UAV's is for smaller local law enforcment agencies to have a cheap available means of conducting surveillance (from locating a lost child in the woods to chasing down a murder suspect) and for private industry from agriculture to cell phone companies. Commercial operation of any vehicle or device has always been subject to greater oversight and stricter rules. When someone dies as the result an unfortunite accident while people trying to have fun it is a tragedy, but when someone dies as the result of an unfortunite accident while a business is trying to make money, thats unacceptable. In the latter case any agency that could, or should, have regulated the activity will be hung out to dry. We are our own worst enemy in all of this. We want our right to privacy yet when the meth lab next door blows up and takes out half the neiborhood we screem why didn't the cops know about it and close it down. We want to fly our planes when and where we want but when a child is killed by one we will screem why were they allowed to fly that plane, in that place, at that time, in that manner. The FAA is doing what it has to to appease everyone yet still maintain some semblance of control.

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

Good post but unfortunately accidents occur all the time in the pursuit of commercial interest... so unfortunately it is acceptable... the real question is how much risk are we willing to accept.

Yes, we are our own worst enemy in all of this.

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

My point was only that if in a commercial pursuit an accident happens and there are no rules regulating it then the general public will be outraged, however if there are rules in place, that were followed, then the general public is much more accepting that it was just a tragic accident.

RE: FAA under pressure to open skies to drones.
 

What's funny to me is that Laws are always passed <u>for </u>the people but the people never seem to have gotten a say in it...

I am an ex Sheriff deputy and I get a kick out of Laws being passed that can never truly be enforced by the agency. Cell phone while driving laws...Good luck with that. Kids not wearing a helmet when on a bike when under 14 years of age... Seriously? Do I have time to chase down a 14 year old when we don't have funding to enforce our Felonies?! The FAA can't even get their own investigations conducted currently. In Oregon I have a friend whos family member was killed by a drunk pilot. It hasn't been investigated yet and that was over a year ago!!

What I expect to happen...
The laws will be passed as they all are. Initially people will get spankins for it because it's new, until they realize what a pain it is to enforce and how much it will cost them to visit the flying field every day. The basic concept is simple; when it comes to government...make a law to protect THEM and they will ignore you for the most part unless you royally screw up and kill someone, then the media hype kicks in and the agency replies back with, "Well we have a law against that, lets get em!" And then they get involved. The FAA requires our group to get a COA for everything we have wanted to fly. That's their own rule but when I have asked for them I get local replies like, "who cares just don't do anything stupid..." Seriously, but you know I can fly then and as long as noone freaks out I may do that forever or one day get spanked, fined and lose my businesss for it. How can anyone gain investors or missions when it's in limbo or unclear. I have a hard time spending $40K on a plane witha "Hope" I can fly legally.

PS: worried about big brother? Google "Key hole" satalite in google. been around since Reagan and recently revamped with better technology. (Live video feeds via sat and able to track...Just like in the movie enemy of the state.) Don't be fooled, you are being watched covertly. Fear what you don't know about not the obvious monitoring...http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/js/f...wink_smile.gif