Originally Posted by
Flight Risk
"A judge ruled that drones weren't aircraft"....Really?
That goes against everything I thought I knew. I thought an aircraft could be anything from a rocket, hot air balloon, hang glider, to a paper airplane. Anything capable of flight.
Rod: Read this page,
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/faa...ls-court-rules
Then read this page:
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the...-and-baseballs
Frisbie's and Baseballs? goes beyond common sense. The legal experts make the language so difficult and obscure, you don't know what you read after the 3rd time and still don't understand what they mean. So the definition of an aircraft is still open for debate, that's why all the B.S. The FAA and the Court have to make a clear and understood specification on what is an Aircraft. I think, the FAA only wants all RC flying OBJECTS, stay under 400' within 5 miles of an airport or obtain a waiver from them for a specific reason to go over that altitude. Where is the representation from the AMA?
Not unreasonable in my opinion. 400' is quite a ways up when flying RC, and line of site goes away real quick.