This is crap. First to qualify, I have a pilots license and a rotor rating. These have to be about the most unscientific tests I have seen on the matter! Really 4 grape size steel cylinders to represent the motors? The motors on my 3DR, and Yunnec's (still waiting for my Mavic) are not solid steel, they may even be aluminum. In any case they are not SOLID, they break apart on hard impact. The plastic is also not solid chunks. and it is not all bound together in a tight package to be shot out of a cannon. These tests are typical of someone that has an agenda and designed the test to match the outcome they were looking for. That and the first story they mention about London turned out to by a ballon, and why is the plane flying so close to the building?
The facts are:
You can't ban drones anymore then guns - I can print both and buy the necessary components and pieces.
In the US the FAA is a typical *** backwards bureaucracy, if they existed when the Wright Brothers were trying to get in the air we would still thing ballon flight was high tech. When rules or laws don't make sense people are less likely to follow them.
I don't want someone flying an 'drone' into the path of an aircraft either but unless you are flying in the direct flight path of a runway this is probably not going to happing. Keep the thing below 400 AGL not over highways or directly inline with takeoff and departures. Other then this you should be good.
In a small aircraft the pattern is generally flown at about 1000-1200 feet about 1/4 to 1/2 mile out until you make your final turns, for large aircraft the pattern is much higher at further distances. No drone should be up at these altitudes or this close to an airport anyway. Manned aircraft should not be flying as close to buildings as a typical drone would be...they are actually prohibited.
anyway just my .02 vent
I too have a single engine land, non complex aircraft, certificate. Just applied for a part 107 waver and was denied. FAA regulations result from years of accumulated data and the capabilities of modern drones has obviously got them stumped to say the least. Therefore they seem to be erring on the side of caution.
with that said, it would perhaps be a good idea for anyone thinking of encroaching on controlled airspace, especially that includes a lot of GA traffic, to first make a trip to their local airport and ask for a tour. One item I would suggest observing is a pitot tube. I've flown ultralights without an airspeed indicator when I was much younger and way before knowing what stall speed was. Anyway, you get my drift. GPS is great for ground speed but some old dude in an older Cessna at max cargo, having his pitot tube ripped off by a drone on final, would probably be looking for the drone "pilot" if he survived the landing.
I have a Mavic Pro Platinum with
DJI Goggles. I enjoy flying it to the limits of its capabilities but within AGL limits. Am i ever going to hit a manned aircraft; probably not big sky theory). My greatest concern, aside from the evac choppers that are ever-present, and definitely fly low, and the occasional ultralight buzzing around tree top level, is the IFR rated pilot flying in VFR conditions, ducking under clouds. We had one killed a few years ago following the interstate and struck a power line (hence you comment, stay away from interstates). Nevertheless, that's how low a freaked out pilot will get, trying to stay alive.
the other two cents... check out that pitot tube folks, and perhaps a stall warning indicator to boot. Better yet, take a introductory ride with an instructor, about $100 an hour. When you get up to 1000 feet AGL, then think about hitting a drone, watermelon, tennis ball (joking). Trust me, the last thing you want, is to see something hitting the plane you're in.
2 cents added