Highflight-RCU
Posts: 597
Joined: 2/28/2003
From: Houston,
TX, USA
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mnmills
Highflight,
The legitimate use for something like this is what I mentioned before (see post 18). My friend is using a similar set up in his crop fields to see areas that need irrigation, have damage, need drainage etc. The crops are tall and he is unable to see all of his field. So to solve this problem he has a large plane that he can fly over and see any problems and get pictures and a lat/long off of the GPS. Its totally legitimate. Also, to compare a R/C supercub with a cam to a bomb is absurd. If you are that worried about bombs and national security spend your time looking at other more sources of danger such as airports, shippig containers, and automatic weapons, not people's r/c hobbies. I promise Osama doesnt own a futaba radio and a supercub.
Mike
Mike,
I'm totally willing to discuss the idea that there "may" be a legitimate use for RPV flight. However, there is NO legitimate use by RC "hobbiests" just for the purpose of "doing it". Even in your example, that's really a stretch, but fine, I'll buy that. But look what your farmer friend is doing; he's flying very low (he has to in order to properly evaluate his crops) AND he's flying ONLY over his very own property. Still, if his UAV is reported as a near miss or hit by a manned aircraft, your farmer buddy is in deep doo doo even though he's over his own property (a licensed pilot can fly as low as he wants over unpopulated areas; if a licensed pilot is doing a practice emergency landing over your buddy's corn down to around 100 feet, and your buddy hits him, you buddy is at fault for violating the "see and avoid" rule no matter if it's over his property or not). It has been established in the courts that property owners do NOT own any airspace OVER their property.
Hobbiest RPV/UAV questions in these forums are USUALLY framed with the intent to fly several MILES from the transmitter, and the intent of those questioners is usually obvious in that the questioner is just "playing around" with RPV/UAV.
Additionally, if someone has a LEGITIMATE use for UAV flight, then he needs to be contacting one of the commercial companies that do such a thing. Since those companies have already done all the groundwork and insurance requirements for UAV flight, that takes any liability off of the back of the person who contracts their services.
Lastly, you're getting away from my primary point, and that is that RPV/UAV flight by we RC hobbiests, for "hobby" purposes, will get us NOTHING, and will have the likelyhood of our hobby getting nailed bigtime by government intervention.
Is there legitimate uses for UAV flight?.. Absolutely! But screwing around by RC hobbiest "just because I want to", is NOT a legitimate use specifically because of the damage that it WILL cause to the RC hobby itself.
Finally, you say that "Also, to compare a R/C supercub with a cam to a bomb is absurd."
I am NOT comparing an aircraft with a cam to a bomb. In fact, aerial photography is a great offshoot of the RC hobby.
You continue to confuse aerial photography with long range (outside line-of-site) RPV flight. Even in your own example, I'll bet that your farmer friend flys within the range of a standard RC transmitter.
I'm trying to stay specific on topic, and I'll continue to try to make it clear that what I'm talking about that is a danger to our hobby and other people is the BEYOND LINE-OF-SITE, LONG-RANGE (further than our current transmitters will allow) RPV/UAV flight for the purpose of just screwing around "because we can".
Highflight
< Message edited by Highflight-RCU -- 11/4/2004 2:50:08 PM >
|
Printable Version
All Forums >> RC Airplanes >> Questions and Answers >> RE: Any Ideas for 3+ mile distance flights for Super Cub? 
RE: Any Ideas for 3+ mile distance flights for Super Cub? - 
