One other aspect about quadcopters. I was flying one of my planes on Saturday morning by myself in a wide open field, in the snow (seems like no one else in NY likes flying off of skis...) I'm adding fuel in between flights when I hear a buzzing nearby. I look up and see a small green quad-copter, hoving about 20 feet away. I look around and finally see the pilot - he must have been 8-900 ft away, at the far end of this field. Given the small size of the quadcopter I guessed he must be flying it FPV, as there's no way he could have seen the quad with the naked eye it at that distance. The quad just hovered there, facing me. Then I had the wierd feeling I was being watched. It left after a minute, but I noticed it came back between flights. I have to admit it did feel a little like being watched, or spied on, even harrassed. I never thought of this before, but having a quad hovering near you, watching you, does now seem like a bit of an invasion of your privacy. I admit I was a little annoyed, as this guy (who I'd never seen, and who stayed 900 feet away) was obviously intentionaly hoving close to me. (He left after about 45 minutes, and didn't come over to say hello.) Now, maybe I was being overly-sensitive, but I can see this becoming a sore spot with these quads, that they can easily be used to harrass and annoy (especially with FPV). Would not be surprized if we hear soon about rural-types pulling out their shotguns and shooting these things out of the sky.

WOW...great insight...especially from a guy that harps on mandatory safety regs. Unreal in here sometimes but at least we know how crap comes to be.

Thanks for this video.
Reading the comments is interesting. One comment said that these multicopters are set at the factory not to exceed 400ft. Not sure about that.
Support both for and against this guy. Here's one that makes some interesting points:

• Posted by Nerys at 10:54 a.m. Mar. 18, 2015
• Report Abuse

Some of you people are truly insane. I mean seriously outright insane.

Let us go over some facts.

FIRST model aircraft are NOT required to stay below 400ft There is NO altitude limit. I can fly as high as I want to safely. I regularly fly this high.

The FAA is barred by congress from making rules regarding safe operation of hobby recreational model aircraft. THEY ARE FORBIDDEN

the altitude limit is for COMMERCIAL drones. not hobby drones.

Next Model aircraft are NOT required to avoid manned aircraft. They are required to GIVE WAY to manned aircraft. the difference is critical as one is impossible to do the other is quite possible and this video is a perfect example.

Recreational use of the airspace is a RIGHT commercial usage is a privilege.

NOW let us go over this video.

a drone operator is LAWFULLY and SAFELY flying his drone very likely to capture video of the fire going on their.

NEXT a manned helicopter ENTERS the airspace.

NEXT the drone operator on noticing the helicopter CORRECTLY and IMMEDIATELY defers (gives way) to the manned aircraft and VERY rapidly descends clearing the airspace.

this video has RIGHT and CORRECT written all over it. This video is an EXAMPLE that shows that the drone operator at least understands sharing the airspace and giving way for safety right of way to the manned aircraft even though he was their first (safety first!)

The drone is NO threat to that helicopter unless the pilot (of either) is dumb enough to fly into the other or you know. "chase down" the other like this news crew did in their witch hunt.

the drone operator appeared to do EVERYTHING RIGHT the chopper crew everything wrong and you guys are demonizing the drone operator.

you people make me sick.

I would like to see the FAA hand down a citation to that helicopter crew for harassing this citizen.

He did NOTHING WRONG and in fact appeared to do EVERYTHING RIGHT.

Yes Sir , Mr. mandatory safety regs had best be DAMNED careful what he wishes on other people ....... I get that he's no spring chicken , and likely well past retirement age like most everyone else here . Now just who do ya think will be wailin' the loudest when one of those regs happens to be an AGE LIMIT on piloting ANYTHING that flys ?

Think it can't happen , wiseguy with the big red letters ???? Many states are already enacting additional driver's testing/training for senior drivers , Age discrimination is one of the few forms of discrimination left that the world gets away with . How'd ya like to "age out" of the hobby some day by force ?

Laundry done , Troll's been fed , Have a great evening gents !

I support you mr. flight risk as being correct and thank you for showing these bumbling idiots the error of their ways!

Am so very very sick of drones and what they are doing to this hobby! Why oh why did the AMA back them?

You see it that way, most of us agree on what YOU see, however, the mass morons out there watching the news chopper and the mindless boobs spewing their twist on the news is where the problem lies. The mass morons wont see it the way you, I and most others here see it, and thats the problem! You get the notion in their feeble brains that a drone was out to take down a news chopper and they run with it until our hobby has been banned.

It hasn't even started yet. Per the sUAS NPRM these things are no longer classified as "civil UAS" where they seemed to fit as previously categorized. FAA has consolidated the 5 separate categories formerly considered into just one. There are now just commercial sUAS and model airplanes in the under 25 Kg UA category. The ones generating all the bad publicity that are not operated for hire are, you guessed it: model airplanes. The faint line that might have allowed modelers to say "we" aren't 'them' has been erased.

Cranky: Keeps the A Wholes that think they OWN the SKY in check... Now go comment on the NPRM

Said the guy who ran off the IMAC guys with a ratty airplane and a cheap battery and receiver.
Yeah, who really IS the A Whole?

What is so dang hilarious, if not so very sad, is that when you deploy your cheapo Ucando guided missile, that meets the definition of drone better than most quad-copters that you rail so vehemently against.

Damn good idea.

Just what is it that the "drones" are doing that you hate them?

I give...you are much wiser than me...There, you happy???

Now back to flying your guided missile. Hopefully one day you are successful and your intentions will lead to disabling one of those giant aerobats causing it to careen out of control.

Planes, Heli's, Quad's, FPV, Gun's, Car's, Boat's,....it doesn't matter what it is. The MORON's who use these thing's with no common sense or self-control are the problem. When thing's get to far out of control the government get's involved and it's usually downhill from there for everyone. What can we do about these particular people? Probably not much. They have alway's been around and will continue to be...until "Big Brother" takes over control of everything. In the mean time trying to talk sense into them is a waste of breath because after all they are what they are....MORON's!

I'm not disagreeing (nor agreeing) with you HoundDog, but I do think you are barking up the wrong tree. According to the NPRM, everything that flies and weighs less that 55 lbs and is not for hire is a model airplane. Congress has mandated that FAA cannot make any rules regarding their operation if they comply with the CBO rules. So what do you want FAA to do? If there is any rule making needed, FAA is barred from doing it so it's up to the CBO to do it. Tell them what you want.

I really don't see a problem with the rule making the way it's written, so there is no reason for me to comment. Somebody tell me: What is wrong with it? It does not affect modeling at all. It does, however, allow a provision for the commercial operation of drones, and I am fine with that.

One clarification on my comment - the only reason I said "rural-types" pulling out their shotguns is cause us city folk don't usually have shotguns. Although, now that I think of it, maybe this quad-copter craze is a brilliant under-handed marketing scheme from the gun industry to create a demand for the soon-to-be-released "drone gun". Would our AMA cards double as a carry permit?

What do guns have to do with it? This is not a gun rights/second amendment debate. It is this:

And again, here's my answer: "I really don't see a problem with the rule making the way it's written, so there is no reason for me to comment. Somebody tell me: What is wrong with it? It does not affect modeling at all. It does, however, allow a provision for the commercial operation of drones, and I am fine with that."

Thank you very much.

NS: You and I are in agreement on this. I tried to get the point across to HD in another posting. There is no threat to model aviation in the NPRM at all. I don't even understand the AMA issue with it. Everything said about it on the AMA website is irrelevant and appears to be based on a misunderstanding or a misreading of the rule.

However, I have noticed one rather odd thing in the NPRM. It seems that the FAA intends to allow commercial users to operate FPV using spotters. It seems to be a contradiction of the rather hard nosed FAA interpretation of section 336. I did, however comment about this issue on the Interpretive rule for section 336. So there is not much more that I can do. Although, I supose I could raise the issue in a comment on the NPRM. Perhaps we all should.