Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > RC Jets
Reload this Page >

Define a drone

Notices
RC Jets Discuss RC jets in this forum plus rc turbines and ducted fan power systems

Define a drone

Old 12-22-2015, 04:45 PM
  #1  
jofunk
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: willow springs , IL
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default Define a drone

Since we all know what some people are doing with flying platforms is not what we do as model airplane hobbyist, what would be the best definition of a drone to separate them from model airplanes? Mine would be: Any unmanned aircraft that operates to deliver or retrieve a physical object and or record, collect or transmit outside data. Where are the loopholes and snags in this definition? I can see one in a model airplane that drops dummy ordinance for show,or taping your Go Pro camera to your canopy. I say "outside data" to exclude operation signal and telemetry. It seems we are lumped in with the drones to some extent already but it would be interesting to see a drone definition that hits the nail on the head and clearly separates model airplanes from drones.
Old 12-22-2015, 05:07 PM
  #2  
erbroens
 
erbroens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Curitiba, Parana, BRAZIL
Posts: 4,271
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

To me a drone is any unmanned flying vehicle flown beyond the boundaries of a r/c club, or a designated area for r/c flying.
Old 12-22-2015, 06:34 PM
  #3  
mongo
My Feedback: (14)
 
mongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Midland, TX
Posts: 3,017
Received 28 Likes on 25 Posts
Default

Line of Sight.
Beyond Line of Sight

that is separation marker between sUAV used as model aircraft and sUAV used as "drones", since the FAA seems to want to lump both in the sUAV category.

any commercial use overrides the above and defaults to "drone"

Last edited by mongo; 12-22-2015 at 06:36 PM.
Old 12-22-2015, 07:11 PM
  #4  
AndyAndrews
 
AndyAndrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 6,138
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Any aircraft that can be flown and controlled remotely without being in visual range of the operator and or can fly on it's own in autonomous trajectory not actively controlled by human inputs.



ps, apparently it really doesn't matter though. The word drone means anything the FAA decides. Welcome to Amerika.

Last edited by AndyAndrews; 12-23-2015 at 10:18 AM.
Old 12-23-2015, 02:21 AM
  #5  
John Tancock
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: LondonSurrey, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

UAV's run around a GPS for guidance model aircraft do not in simple terms, that's why people are able to operate them with little or no experience. Where as model aircraft when purchased by the common man generally end up in the trash can!
Old 12-23-2015, 02:56 AM
  #6  
Boomerang1
 
Boomerang1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sydney, AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,914
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Don't upset the drones, the're starting to fight back!

John.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9T6-KPFRq8
Old 12-23-2015, 05:24 AM
  #7  
Kevin East
Senior Member
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Bossier City, LA,
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I agree with "line of sight". Drones move ( not limited to flight) autonomously, or preprogrammed.

Kevin
Old 12-23-2015, 05:27 AM
  #8  
John Tancock
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: LondonSurrey, UNITED KINGDOM
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Lol
That was too close to call, shouldn't have been operated over the course anyway!
The FAA seemed to have gone over kill on this?
By definition a model jet would be deemed as a static representation of the real thing and all turbine aircraft are the real thing! Does this mean that all turbine powered aircraft should have a maximum altitude of 400'?
That would be interesting!��
Old 12-23-2015, 07:02 AM
  #9  
jofunk
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: willow springs , IL
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

I think quite a few of the problem operators have a GPS stabilized platform flown in their line of sight trying to collect or transmit video over people and property. I am trying to come up with a definition to encompass them, and separate them from model airplanes.
Old 12-23-2015, 07:08 AM
  #10  
jofunk
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: willow springs , IL
Posts: 1,157
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

What business does that guy have skiing down that hill when a drone is flying over it? Rogue out of control skiers.
Old 12-23-2015, 07:26 AM
  #11  
invertmast
My Feedback: (23)
 
invertmast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Capon Bridge, WV
Posts: 7,996
Received 43 Likes on 34 Posts
Default

According to this FAA link:

https://www.faa.gov/uas/registration...gistration.pdf


quad copters between .55 and 55lbs.


I find it funny they ONLY have photos of quad copters in what constitutes what needs ti be registered. You would think if they Meant all RC stuff, they would of included a picture of an airplane and helicopter to.
Old 12-23-2015, 07:30 AM
  #12  
RCISFUN
My Feedback: (44)
 
RCISFUN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Erie, PA
Posts: 6,706
Received 12 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

DRONE = PITA for the traditional "Model Airplane" enthusiasts
Old 12-23-2015, 09:36 AM
  #13  
ravill
My Feedback: (11)
 
ravill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Granite Bay, Ca
Posts: 5,683
Received 76 Likes on 63 Posts
Default

Dumb
Reason
Or
Noise
Emitter
Old 12-23-2015, 11:27 AM
  #14  
SushiHunter
Senior Member
 
SushiHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 540
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ravill View Post
Dumb
Reason
Or
Noise
Emitter
Doesn't
Rely
On
Noteworthy
Expertise

Last edited by SushiHunter; 12-23-2015 at 11:36 AM.
Old 12-23-2015, 11:45 AM
  #15  
RCISFUN
My Feedback: (44)
 
RCISFUN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Erie, PA
Posts: 6,706
Received 12 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Oh boy I like this game.......


Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Capture.JPG
Views:	97
Size:	11.8 KB
ID:	2137264  
Old 12-23-2015, 12:26 PM
  #16  
ravill
My Feedback: (11)
 
ravill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Granite Bay, Ca
Posts: 5,683
Received 76 Likes on 63 Posts
Default

I love it! LOL!!
Old 12-23-2015, 12:33 PM
  #17  
bdoxey
My Feedback: (6)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by jofunk View Post
Since we all know what some people are doing with flying platforms is not what we do as model airplane hobbyist, what would be the best definition of a drone to separate them from model airplanes? Mine would be: Any unmanned aircraft that operates to deliver or retrieve a physical object and or record, collect or transmit outside data. Where are the loopholes and snags in this definition? I can see one in a model airplane that drops dummy ordinance for show,or taping your Go Pro camera to your canopy. I say "outside data" to exclude operation signal and telemetry. It seems we are lumped in with the drones to some extent already but it would be interesting to see a drone definition that hits the nail on the head and clearly separates model airplanes from drones.

In designating an aircraft a "drone", the airframe type does not matter - capability does. This applies across all airframe platforms.

Drone definition:

1) Any aircraft capable of autonomous flight (i.e. with no user input). Examples:
a) Able to maintain a constant position in space, either by hovering or by circling over a fixed point
b) Able to navigate to a specific point or "waypoint"
c) Able to navigate back to the point of origination - "fly home feature"
d) Flight by orientation to the user vs. aircraft orientation - i.e. right, left, fore and aft always related to position of the operator

2) Any aircraft able to be flown using only visual input from cameras carried aboard the aircraft. The simplest test here would be a video downlink. Data downlink alone should be allowed for aircraft performance parameters but not for any navigation information.

3) Any aircraft able to be flown using flight data input from equipment carried aboard the aircraft. In essence, flying "IFR" using flight data input from the aircraft. Data downlink alone should be allowed for aircraft performance parameters but not for any navigation information or attitude reference information.

These definitions should apply to the capabilities of the airframe, not the use. For instance, "my aircraft can do all this but I only operate LOS" does not "un-define" the drone designation.

These definitions allow an airframe and/or equipment to be immediately recognized and regulated at point of manufacture and point of sale. Equipment would be any navigation/autonomous flight or camera equipment that allows the above performance capabilities. No, this does not include rate or heading hold gyros used for stability augmentation. There is a distinct difference between stability augmentation and autonomous flight capability.

I would like for the AMA to draw these distinctions immediately as a way to separate model aviation as it has existed from the "drone threat" that is perceived by the FAA.

I am not calling for a ban on these "drones" and wish them well, but they can and should fight their own battles. It is a battle "traditional modelers", for lack of a better word have no knowledge, no desire, and respectfully no responsibility to fight.

Bryan
Old 12-23-2015, 01:33 PM
  #18  
JohnVH
My Feedback: (38)
 
JohnVH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ferndale, WA
Posts: 16,170
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

anything remotely piloted/controlled.. Everything RC is a drone.
Old 12-23-2015, 01:52 PM
  #19  
jws_aces
My Feedback: (33)
 
jws_aces's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Salem, Va
Posts: 1,046
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by JohnVH View Post
anything remotely piloted/controlled.. Everything RC is a drone.

You know what is really funny listening to the AMA and they are saying free flight and control line are exempt. That is there interpretation of the FAA ruling.

So the autonomous quad or aircraft that has a GPS course or any other preprogramed flight path is the most dangerous but yet it would fall into the free flight exemption....

Go figure that one out. No control by person while in flight.

So you can program you quad to fly at 5000ft and turn it on and let it go. What is the difference of that and a free flight electric glider?
Old 12-23-2015, 01:58 PM
  #20  
JohnVH
My Feedback: (38)
 
JohnVH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ferndale, WA
Posts: 16,170
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jws_aces View Post
You know what is really funny listening to the AMA and they are saying free flight and control line are exempt. That is there interpretation of the FAA ruling.

So the autonomous quad or aircraft that has a GPS course or any other preprogramed flight path is the most dangerous but yet it would fall into the free flight exemption....

Go figure that one out. No control by person while in flight.

So you can program you quad to fly at 5000ft and turn it on and let it go. What is the difference of that and a free flight electric glider?

You know, most the problems are not so much with the autonomous or fpv flying, its the morons flying LOS, from what I see on the news anyway, I can fly a plane or quad a VERY long ways away LOS. I was just going off a google / dictionary definition of drone..
Old 12-23-2015, 02:36 PM
  #21  
hairy46
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sinclair, WY
Posts: 2,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Any thing flown out of line of sight, I think its that simple!
Old 12-23-2015, 02:45 PM
  #22  
JohnVH
My Feedback: (38)
 
JohnVH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Ferndale, WA
Posts: 16,170
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by hairy46 View Post
Any thing flown out of line of sight, I think its that simple!
you can do that with ANYTHING rc
Old 12-23-2015, 03:36 PM
  #23  
hairy46
My Feedback: (1)
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sinclair, WY
Posts: 2,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

But anything flown out of sight is a drone! Anything we fly only line of sight is NOT! Ok again find the loophole! Geez

Last edited by hairy46; 12-23-2015 at 03:43 PM.
Old 12-23-2015, 04:02 PM
  #24  
cloudancer03
My Feedback: (22)
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: palm harbor, FL
Posts: 2,232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I can't define it but I sure as hell reconcile the bloody thing and would crush it when I have the chance.
Old 12-23-2015, 04:03 PM
  #25  
Duncman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bdoxey View Post
In designating an aircraft a "drone", the airframe type does not matter - capability does. This applies across all airframe platforms.

Drone definition:

1) Any aircraft capable of autonomous flight (i.e. with no user input). Examples:
a) Able to maintain a constant position in space, either by hovering or by circling over a fixed point
b) Able to navigate to a specific point or "waypoint"
c) Able to navigate back to the point of origination - "fly home feature"
d) Flight by orientation to the user vs. aircraft orientation - i.e. right, left, fore and aft always related to position of the operator

2) Any aircraft able to be flown using only visual input from cameras carried aboard the aircraft. The simplest test here would be a video downlink. Data downlink alone should be allowed for aircraft performance parameters but not for any navigation information.

3) Any aircraft able to be flown using flight data input from equipment carried aboard the aircraft. In essence, flying "IFR" using flight data input from the aircraft. Data downlink alone should be allowed for aircraft performance parameters but not for any navigation information or attitude reference information.

These definitions should apply to the capabilities of the airframe, not the use. For instance, "my aircraft can do all this but I only operate LOS" does not "un-define" the drone designation.

These definitions allow an airframe and/or equipment to be immediately recognized and regulated at point of manufacture and point of sale. Equipment would be any navigation/autonomous flight or camera equipment that allows the above performance capabilities. No, this does not include rate or heading hold gyros used for stability augmentation. There is a distinct difference between stability augmentation and autonomous flight capability.

I would like for the AMA to draw these distinctions immediately as a way to separate model aviation as it has existed from the "drone threat" that is perceived by the FAA.

I am not calling for a ban on these "drones" and wish them well, but they can and should fight their own battles. It is a battle "traditional modelers", for lack of a better word have no knowledge, no desire, and respectfully no responsibility to fight.

Bryan
Actually that is quite good, well thought out. May need some refinement, maybe not. Good suggestion.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.