A few questions from a beginner

[fablau]

I teach several drone classes at Grossmont College. I suggest you register for one. The next one begins August 15th. It’s free with approval. I’ve trained 200 students in the last year. 99% have passed their 107, 30% have gotten full time drone related jobs and none have crashed to date.

That's pretty cool, thank you for sharing this. I am almost 2 hours from your place, but I'll think about it!

 

[kensteele]

You're reading this on a public forum (non-FAA controlled) and the image was posted by a user of this forum.

Presumably, if you had encountered that image on the official site where the FAA published it, it was probably just a graphical aid to accompanying descriptive text, which would probably answer your questions.

In other words, the helpful graphic is not supposed to be an all-encompassing list and definition of FAA rules and/or guidelines. You need to put a little more effort into it before you start complaining that the rules are unclear.

Chris

i think you misunderstood my point. i understand the graphic mostly. my point is the recreational flyer shouldn't have to know anything on that graphic. as far as i'm concerned, the recreational flyer shouldn't even have to know who the faa is or what f.a.a. even stands for. meaning, they're taking the recreate out of recreational and it's stifling the industry, it's making occasional flyers into bad guys, and it's driving a wedge between those who fly for fun vs. those who fly and think they know everything.

i enjoy this stuff and i want to know everything i can about it but millions do not and i recognize that and i refuse to classify them otherwise or make them learn it prior to flying. to me, the rules are clear, at least most of them are clear if not subjective and i see a little bit of rule-bending here and there. but if something i don't understand, it's mostly my fault, not the rules. i don't complain the rules are unclear. i complain the rules are too many, have little or nothing to do with safety, and are too restrictive in some cases. and i'm not alone in this. sadly, there are too many fellow flyers who believe exactly the opposite, that's my problem.

 

[Not A Speck Of Cereal]

i think you misunderstood my point. i understand the graphic mostly. my point is the recreational flyer shouldn't have to know anything on that graphic.

That's your problem then. Lots of recreational activities don't require the kind of rules and regulations that protect the safety of other properties and lives. If you poke yourself in the eye with your paint brush, that's going to ruin your day, but it's not going to be directly adverse to someone else's existence.

Some people drive cars for transportation; others like to drive cars for recreation at high speeds, using dangerous maneuvers -- those kinds of recreational uses require specific places and rules to do legally. If you want to create a private race track where people can take their own personal responsibility for such actions, that's fine, but public streets are out of the question (where people use autos for transportation and other non-recreational use).

So are certain airspace regions where manned aircraft fly. (There are also rules and regulations for recreational use of drones involving public safety that have nothing to do with airspace, such as flying over people, but that's not directly on-topic to your point.)

If recreational flyers decide that they don't need to bother knowing the most basic rules about airspace, then you're inviting makers of UAVs and controllers to install tighter restrictions than we already have.

Is that your advocating?

If not, then my other point (about the graphic probably coming with descriptive content to define finer points of the graphic) are on point.

Chris

 

[kensteele]

If recreational flyers decide that they don't need to bother knowing the most basic rules about airspace, then you're inviting makers of UAVs and controllers to install tighter restrictions than we already have.

anyone else here agree with this point? if recreational flyers can't be "bothered", tighten up the rules and the restrictions for hobby flyers? show of hands please.

 

[Huckleberry]

I agree with Not A Speck, and seeing the new regulations that hobbyist are going to be required to take a test, i'd say the FAA agrees as well.

If i need to take it upon myself to gain a little bit of knowledge to help eliminate DJI from programming more restrictions in to the program of my aircraft, then I'll do it.

I'll admit though that I was an aircraft mechanic in the Air Force for 8 years so I semi speak the lingo.

I look at it the same way I look at firearm ownership. Though I don't have to have knowledge on firearms or be trained/familiar with the use of them, I do see it as my personal responsibility as a gun owner to ensure I am educated, trained and comfortable with handling every firearm that is in my collection. If that's what it takes to keep ole Nancy Pelosi out of my gun safe, so be it.

Now, the registration part, that's an entirely different story.

 

[kensteele]

I look at it the same way I look at firearm ownership. Though I don't have to have knowledge on firearms or be trained/familiar with the use of them, I do see it as my personal responsibility as a gun owner to ensure I am educated, trained and comfortable with handling every firearm that is in my collection.

disagree. completely. so why not have the buyer take the online test right there at bestbuy, click thru a few screens and if you pass, then you can complete your drone purchase. the computer will let you thru just like nics. do you really believe you should have to get training in order to keep a firearm in your home for personal protection or carry it in your car or on your person away from home for personal protection? but for a drone?

i think you hedged a little bit, you said it is your personal responsibility and i think you meant it's not the government's responsibility; is that right? if so, i agree with you. i think everybody should be responsible. will i force people to be responsible? do i want my government to force people to be responsible? not really. maybe some penalties and light enforcement is always helpful.

so again, if a recreational flyer doesn't understand the different classes of airspace (that chart), should they be able to buy and fly a drone, yes or no?

 

[Huckleberry]

I don't believe anyone said that you need to pass the test or be knowledgeable on aeronautical charts to purchase a drone. The statement was about manufactures placing unnecessary restrictions within the programming of their drones due to the lack of knowledge by "recreational" pilots. Point being, if DJI decides to program a height restriction of 10' AGL in to their drones because of uneducated recreational pilots, they can do just that. But if those programmers feel that even recreational pilots are taking it upon themselves to gain a little bit of knowledge, they are less likely to force implement those restrictions upon us.

 

[Not A Speck Of Cereal]

Yeah, passing a test to be able to purchase the drone is changing the goal posts, though making a comparison to firearm purchasing sort of opened the door to that. I personally wouldn't have made that comparison.

How about my earlier car analogy? You can probably purchase a car without a license or insurance, you just can't drive it. But yes, the government does force that person to have the training and pass a test to prove it before you can drive it in public.

I don't see why public airspace should be a free for all, simply because you're flying for recreation. Of course, you will have personal responsibility if you damage property or injure a person. Government intervention before that happens is all about reducing the incidents

Drones are new, but regulations to ensure public safety is not — it's all the same principle.

Chris

 

[AMann]

Recreational fliers should understand and follow the rules for the airspaces they want to fly in as well as they should understand the rules of the roadways they want to drive their vehicles on. Although the potential risk of an accident may be very different between the two, an accident may still lead to the loss of life in either case and could be the responsibility of the flier.

 

[BigAl07]

Yeah, passing a test to be able to purchase the drone is changing the goal posts, though making a comparison to firearm purchasing sort of opened the door to that. I personally wouldn't have made that comparison.

How about my earlier car analogy? You can probably purchase a car without a license or insurance, you just can't drive it. But yes, the government does force that person to have the training and pass a test to prove it before you can drive it in public.

I don't see why public airspace should be a free for all, simply because you're flying for recreation. Of course, you will have personal responsibility if you damage property or injure a person. Government intervention before that happens is all about reducing the incidents

Drones are new, but regulations to ensure public safety is not — it's all the same principle.

Chris

@Not A Speck Of Cereal
Excellent and a very logical and intelligent response. I think your last sentence pretty well summed it up! Well done!

This thread has gone COMPLETELY off topic and we can only hope the OP got the answers he/she required and they were CORRECT!

It needs to be said that you should always go to the LEGAL SOURCE for rules & regulations and that would be the FAA. If you have a question and you need a definitive and reliable answer then contact your local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) and pose your question(s) directly to them. You can take their answers to the bank.

Flight Standards District Offices (FSDO)

www.faa.gov

***Thread Closed***