The other thing that gets me is bvlos, which who determines what that is ?

[mavic3usa]

a) Drone regulation is steered by advisory committees who are not part of any government body, but it is the government bodies that turn advisories into regulations.
b) the FAA is a federal government department, the same as the CAA (which until 1970 went by the title of 'the Air Ministry").
c) The number of cases of actual injury or damage to property (proven) is and always has been miniscule to non-existent compared to the number of drones in use. All 'data' cited in official CAA documentation addressing incidents that warrant increased and tougher regulation is covered with an asterisk followed by a page footnote with the word 'alleged' in very, very small type.
d) *THE* idiots.... not *ALL* idiots.
e) in official documents, these 'free spirits' are described as "bad actors" ie: those who undertake bad actions and it is the actions of those 'bad actors' that is cited over and over again in Aviation Authority reports as being the single factor leading to the requirement for harsher regulation.
We are not being assessed and judged by the actions of careful drone fliers (the majority). We are affected by the actions of those who flagrantly abuse current regulations (the minority).

Sorry I forgot you are in the UK so please put that into context when I talk about FAA/Congress. Anyway, the public will look nicely upon recreational drones and drone flyers as soon as the drone community does so but not until then. The current state of drones in America has little if anything to do with the conduct of recreational drone flyers, we absolutely will not take on the blame for that. I understand I frown upon the current rules and regulations (or at least their implementation) a lot more than others so it feels to me like a lot of blame to take on for [apparent] harsh conditions (which seem to be getting worse by the year). Like everyone else I believe in safety but that's the extent of it because how can you believe in new laws that are based on "bad actors" and "free spirits." We cannot be judged by the few "false flag*" abusers among us else this is never going to go anywhere and it hurts everybody; a drone will be like a skateboard, the same useless toy we all played with growing up. You see someone on a bird type scooter (the modern day skateboard) and it still kinda falls flat.

Please help me push back on that so we don't continue to be seen as peeping toms or privacy invaders or spying on victims because we have literally hundreds of laws being drawn up on this as we speak. We will be overwhelmed shortly.

*I don't necessarily mean government involvement but errant drone flyers who are not true hobbyists who fly once or twice in a lifetime, have no skin in the game because they have one drone and it's the only drone they'll ever have, doesn't care how they are perceived, could care less if all drones are banned or not. This hobby is prime for that.

 

[Felix le Chat]

Sorry I forgot you are in the UK so please put that into context when I talk about FAA/Congress. Anyway, the public will look nicely upon recreational drones and drone flyers as soon as the drone community does so but not until then. The current state of drones in America has little if anything to do with the conduct of recreational drone flyers, we absolutely will not take on the blame for that. I understand I frown upon the current rules and regulations (or at least their implementation) a lot more than others so it feels to me like a lot of blame to take on for [apparent] harsh conditions (which seem to be getting worse by the year). Like everyone else I believe in safety but that's the extent of it because how can you believe in new laws that are based on "bad actors" and "free spirits." We cannot be judged by the few "false flag*" abusers among us else this is never going to go anywhere and it hurts everybody; a drone will be like a skateboard, the same useless toy we all played with growing up. You see someone on a bird type scooter (the modern day skateboard) and it still kinda falls flat.

Please help me push back on that so we don't continue to be seen as peeping toms or privacy invaders or spying on victims because we have literally hundreds of laws being drawn up on this as we speak. We will be overwhelmed shortly.

*I don't necessarily mean government involvement but errant drone flyers who are not true hobbyists who fly once or twice in a lifetime, have no skin in the game because they have one drone and it's the only drone they'll ever have, doesn't care how they are perceived, could care less if all drones are banned or not. This hobby is prime for that.

There are quite a few points there I am in complete agreement with. Public perception of drone users is herded mainly by the media who can and do turn any molehill into a mountain, but when it comes down to control of airspace, the AA's will use scapegoats to justify alterations in regulation because it is easier to build a case on the back of the media going hysterical over some dumb video clip that features blatant rule-breaking stupidity than it is to get greater restrictive powers by admitting that the vast majority of us respect 'our' airspace and the regulation that governs it's use.
I think the underlying point to increased regulation of private drone use is that 'our' airspace is a valuable commodity that can't realize it's true worth as a saleable commodity until it is mostly free of irritating 'free spirits' whether they abide by regulation or wear the Billy the Kid black hat.

 

[WanderLost]

This is why I have a 2 mile BVLOS waiver in the FAA queue at the moment.

Stay tuned...

In Canada here, there are rule changes being considered by Transport Canada that include "Sheltered Operations" where BVLOS in certain conditions will be allowed - like real estate or inspection of buildings. Also, for all of us doing photogrammetry, a 2 nautical mile square can be flown BVLOS within the rules. Hoping to see these new rules come into force soon!

 

[Vic Moss]

In Canada here, there are rule changes being considered by Transport Canada that include "Sheltered Operations" where BVLOS in certain conditions will be allowed - like real estate or inspection of buildings. Also, for all of us doing photogrammetry, a 2 nautical mile square can be flown BVLOS within the rules. Hoping to see these new rules come into force soon!

There has been talk of "sheltered operations" within the FAA. We may try and push it at the next AAAC meeting (https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnerships/advanced_aviation_advisory_committee). It was supposed to be scheduled for next month, but they're having trouble getting FAA leadership schedules to mesh. So it's likely to be in March.

Before each meeting they'll send out emails to all the members asking for possible taskings to send to the FAA. Sheltered ops and eVLOS ops will be a couple of my suggestions.

 

[MARK (LI)]

Anyway, I follow the current laws best I can at all times and what triggered me was your unfair characterization of recreational drone users (the one's who drive the drone industry in America and make it what it is and has become today) as idiots and bragging about putting everyone in danger. Do they follow the rules? Not always. Are they hurting people and destroying property and bragging about it; nope. Recreational drone flying is not a crime and the pilots who fly them for fun are not criminals.

That was not what @Felix le Chat said.... what he said was:
Every time this happened and someone bragged about it: another nail was hammered in everyone elses metaphorical coffin because anyone with a drone is now considered to be a borderline moron in charge of a lump of flying plastic and metal.

....Not his opinion, just stating what the general public thinks about drones and their operators because what the rule busters do, and then publicize on YT and get all kinds of atta boys and likes, gives the impression that ALL drone operators either operate like this...or think it is fine and cool to do....if everyone thought that the rules are just for others and did what they wanted there would be a lot more mishaps...the rules are for everyone's safety and protection.....what I have come to conclude is the guys making the biggest fuss about the rules need them just to protect themselves more than others

 

[retleo121]

Well, from a noob drone pilot’s point of view, this VLOS/BVLOS topic is interesting. Believe me, I know what the CFR in the U.S. says about the VLOS requirement, as well as operating a drone over people and vehicles. I’m about 80% through Pilot Institute’s Part 107 training and plan on testing fairly soon. That said…

What I see, or think a reasonable person would believe they are seeing, is a lot of video examples, in TV shows, movies, and social media (filmed in the U.S., btw), that show drone footage that literally had to be outside of VLOS (and flying directly over traffic). Just yesterday I searched Hyperlapse tutorials and a guy was doing a night HL while sitting in his car talking to his video recorder and looking at his RC screen. He appeared to be the only person present, but I can’t 100% rule out a spotter. Other examples are videos of mountain peaks that simply had to be BVLOS.

So we train the correct way, within the guidelines of the law, then watch examples of great and fun looking drone videos and activities apparently outside the law, and have to make a moral choice of what to do. Interesting. Will we ever get to a point where BVLOS waivers are an actual thing for remote areas not likely to have conflicting aircraft or people underneath?

 

[Vic Moss]

Well, from a noob drone pilot’s point of view, this VLOS/BVLOS topic is interesting. Believe me, I know what the CFR in the U.S. says about the VLOS requirement, as well as operating a drone over people and vehicles. I’m about 80% through Pilot Institute’s Part 107 training and plan on testing fairly soon. That said…

What I see, or think a reasonable person would believe they are seeing, is a lot of video examples, in TV shows, movies, and social media (filmed in the U.S., btw), that show drone footage that literally had to be outside of VLOS (and flying directly over traffic). Just yesterday I searched Hyperlapse tutorials and a guy was doing a night HL while sitting in his car talking to his video recorder and looking at his RC screen. He appeared to be the only person present, but I can’t 100% rule out a spotter. Other examples are videos of mountain peaks that simply had to be BVLOS.

So we train the correct way, within the guidelines of the law, then watch examples of great and fun looking drone videos and activities apparently outside the law, and have to make a moral choice of what to do. Interesting. Will we ever get to a point where BVLOS waivers are an actual thing for remote areas not likely to have conflicting aircraft or people underneath?

Short answer, yes.

Long answer, stay tuned...