Another great reason drones should be kept out of America's National Parks

[Marko9219]

Flying in the dark? Obviously you're not a Part 107 holder.

Again the story you linked had nothing to do with national parks.
I have no issue with you having an opinion. I'm just not a fan of the folks who use evidence not related to their opinion to support it. The article has nothing to do with national parks.

And please please share the other MANY reasons drone should be banned from parks.

Nope not 107. No need for me. OK, here's reasons that work for me: Fire risk. Nuisance noise.Safety around crowds. Wildlife disruption. Wildlife harassment Environmental concerns. Resource usage. Law enforcement costs. Trying to figure out how to retrieve drones from a small lake full of boiling water. Shall I continue

 

[Marko9219]

That's probably the most ridiculous argument I've heard on this entire forum and there have been some doozies.

Yeah ridiculous tends to follow ridiculous and ridiculous points out ridiculous.

 

[Thwyllo]

Nope not 107. No need for me. OK, here's reasons that work for me: Fire risk. Nuisance noise.Safety around crowds. Wildlife disruption. Wildlife harassment Environmental concerns. Resource usage. Law enforcement costs. Trying to figure out how to retrieve drones from a small lake full of boiling water. Shall I continue

Yes please, because with the exception of the cooked drone you haven't mentioned a single thing that happens every day in NPs from a whole range of sources from vehicles to stupid people.

 

[Marko9219]

Won’t matter much longer. With the capabilities and range of the coming generations of UAVs, their ban will become meaningless. That is unless they can convince FAA to TFR the airspace. That wouldn’t surprise me either because many won’t be happy until the government has complete and utter control over every aspect of anything that offends them.

So, you think the beyond visual range thing will change along with battery life and radio range extensions?

 

[Robert Mitchell]

So, you think the beyond visual range thing will change along with battery life and radio range extensions?

Yes. At least for qualified operators and equipment. It’s inevitable.

But even now it doesn’t matter. I was told by a NPS ranger to walk “over there” (outside the park boundary) and fly over the park all I wanted.

 

[Twodumbdogs]

So, you think the beyond visual range thing will change along with battery life and radio range extensions?

You fly at night, but you’re worried about BVLOS?

 

[microlinux]

I'm not sure this has anything to do with flying in a park in a direct sense. A quad that crashes anywhere can cause a fire. There's nothing special about parks that causes things to burst into flames.

I don't know how accurate the article is, but it seems to allude to the fact that he was wearing a headset and thus didn't notice the dogs. That would be the real problem and an excellent example of one of the dangers inherent in BLVOS, lack of awareness of your surroundings.

 

[Marko9219]

Yes please, because with the exception of the cooked drone you haven't mentioned a single thing that happens every day in NPs from a whole range of sources from vehicles to stupid people.

That doesn't matter one bit. Its

You fly at night, but you’re worried about BVLOS?

huh? I can see my drone at LEAST 2 miles away at night (I've never gone beyond that) with my strobes. Way, way beyond daytime visual distances..

 

[Twodumbdogs]

For the record Mark I have no issue with drones being banned in national parks. I take issue with your inconsistent logic on why they should be. As I said before using a story of an incident that had nothing to do with national parks as your logic for a ban in national parks is inconsistent and disingenuous. That’s my issue.

 

[KeithLa]

Couple things about this incident, FWIW...

1) Home brew drone, built with parts from the Internet

2) Video clearly shows this drone had no autonomous safeties, spun out of control as soon the pilot became distracted

3) Given the ludicrous speed it was flying, its motors were probably very, very hot

4) Naturally, this news report doesn't mention such a crash would be highly improbable with a name brand, off-the-shelf drone, or photographic/non-sport flying.

 

[wytnyt]

i see so much sarcasm here seemingly trying to find the one that can be ticked off,really guys

 

[Marko9219]

i see so much sarcasm here seemingly trying to find the one that can be ticked off,really guys

Yeah , it's amusing how quickly turn it personal. Within a few postings it became about "agendas" then lack of medications.

 

[Marko9219]

Yes. At least for qualified operators and equipment. It’s inevitable.

But even now it doesn’t matter. I was told by a NPS ranger to walk “over there” (outside the park boundary) and fly over the park all I wanted.

That might work in a small National Park to some very limited degree. Good luck trying it in Yellowstone or Zion or Arches or Canyonlands. You would never get to see anything before you reached bingo battery

 

[dirkclod]

OK guys lets please stay civil in this as I have removed several post and don't want to have and do more .
Politics and rudeness is not going to cut it .

 

[tcope]

And what are the MANY other reasons?

Drones causing damage to the park itself
Tens of drones buzzing around people attempting to enjoy nature
People causing injury to another person while in the National Park
Drones harassing wildlife

 

[Mr. Salty]

For the record Mark I have no issue with drones being banned in national parks. I take issue with your inconsistent logic on why they should be. As I said before using a story of an incident that had nothing to do with national parks as your logic for a ban in national parks is inconsistent and disingenuous. That’s my issue.

But you can see how starting a fire in a national park would be bad, right?

 

[Red Baron]

The only reason that make sense will be because the noise can bother endangered species that live in the national parks.

What endangered species live in our national parks??

 

[Twodumbdogs]

Drones causing damage to the park itself
Tens of drones buzzing around people attempting to enjoy nature
People causing injury to another person while in the National Park
Drones harassing wildlife

Fairpoints, I suppose, but the laws in this country tend to be an acted to prevent something from happening again or to exert control over the populace.
So let’s look at your points individually.
1. Are there any documented cases of drones causing damage to the NP system (yes I know about the drone in the geyser)
2. Tens of drones? News story,video, articles?
3. Injury to a person? See #2
4. Harassing wildlife. There are many stories of people doing that (just saw a story today) and yet people aren’t banned from the park.

So does it make sense?

 

[Robert Mitchell]

Drones causing damage to the park itself
Tens of drones buzzing around people attempting to enjoy nature
People causing injury to another person while in the National Park
Drones harassing wildlife

... And yet the Harleys, screaming babies, and snowmobiles continue.

Reasons people, reasons.

As for this damage you keep citing, I am assuming you mean the geyser.

Do you really think a 2 lb piece of plastic stands a chance against thousands of gallons of sulfuric laden, at hundreds of degrees, flowing water? That thing dissolved long ago.

 

[Twodumbdogs]

But you can see how starting a fire in a national park would be bad, right?

As opposed to starting a fire anywhere else?