As usual I have a problem with the article (and the report) as it, as usual for the “drone” articles that I tend to see, reeks of bias. Imagine my surprise that a flight college has determined that drones could be potentially hazardous to flights… (article quotes in italics)
“A significant number of all recreational drone flights sampled were conducted in ways that posed a hazard to navigation…Researchers also evaluated sUAS detections against the FAA’s UAS Facility Map (UASFM) established for the Daytona Beach…. The UASFM shows the maximum altitudes for authorized Part 107 UAS operations around airports that do not require additional safety analysis….…….“At least 21.5 percent were determined to exceed the maximum defined altitude limits of their UAS Facility Map area,” the study noted.”
The article is about hazardous recreational users and recreational users were not required to comply with UASFM maps when the study was done. (In fact, as pointed out by the study, the LAANC system WASN’T EVEN IN PLACE at Daytona when the study was done.) I am 107 certified, live approximately 3 miles from a Class C airport, and have routinely flown recreationally above the LAANC standards for my backyard. I have contacted the tower before each flight and advised them that I would be flying up to 400’ and they have been fine with it. (And, although I know they weren’t “giving me permission”, the entire tone of the conversation indicated that they were not uncomfortable with my flights. The folks at the tower have consistently been courteous, helpful, and curious in a positive way about my flights. They have called me and notified me of nearby chopper traffic and, if I could detect in their voice or statements that in any way they wanted me below 400’, I would have asked for their recommendation and abided by it.)
This could have just as easily been stated as “Recreational drone users are SO safety conscious that nearly 80% abide by stringent altitude restrictions that they aren’t even required to obey.” But of course, that doesn’t work well with the title “Small Drone Flights Often Unsafe”
“Unmanned aircraft operated as close as 0.50 nm to public airports and 0.35 nm to heliports. Of the 190 data points, 96.8 percent were detected within 5 sm of an aerodrome, with 84.2 percent detected within 5 sm of two or more aerodromes.
Of course, it is NOT illegal, or exceptionally dangerous, to operate recreationally in these areas if it is done in a legal manner, but again, that isn’t mentioned.
“Altitudes ranged from ground level to 1,286 agl, with the mean altitude of 238 agl; at least 6.8 percent of platforms were detected above 400 agl, eight between 400 and 500 agl, two between 500 and 1,000 agl, and three above 1,000 agl.”
Many on this forum feel that it is legal to fly above 400’ recreationally and it is somewhat of a gray area. (Let’s not debate that on this thread please….) I choose to stay under 400’ and so do over 93% of the recreational users near the Daytona Airport.
“The majority of detections occurred within urban areas. Nearly 48.7 percent of detections occurred in residential neighborhoods; 28.3 percent near single-family homes, 20.4 percent near multi-family buildings, and 21.5 percent proximate to commercial, industrial, or public properties. Just 12.0 percent occurred near unimproved land and parks where drones could be operated relatively safely.”
So according to this article, it is unsafe to fly a UAS “near residential neighborhoods,…near single-family homes,…near multi-family buildings,… proximate to commercial, industrial, or public properties”. Are you kidding me?
“One sUAS operated within 0.3 nm from the Tomoka Correctional Institution.”
Which is of course completely legal.
So let me rewrite the article:
Recreational Drone Pilots Show an Abundance of Caution
A recent study by Embry Riddle University conducted near the Daytona Airport in Florida shows that a significant majority of recreational drone users not only abide by the rules, they fly much safer than they are required to.
Of the 190 flights secretly monitored by Embry Riddle (using equipment graciously developed by DJI to spy on users of DJI drones without a warrant), it was determined that over 93% of all recreational drone users obey the law. In fact, most recreational drone users fly at less than 60% of the altitude that they are federally recommended to fly at. When you consider that there presently isn’t a police force for the skies whose sole job it is to monitor drone activity, this is astounding. Imagine if 93% of all cars on the road obeyed speed limits even if they knew there were no police to catch them. Heck, imagine if 93% of all cars obeyed the speed limit even WITH the police there to stop them.
Other encouraging news from the study:
This study confirms what drone operators have known all along, and that is that the vast majority of them fly legally and safely. It is truly a great day for recreational drone users now that Embry Riddle has put everyone’s mind at ease about drone use in the United States.
- It appears that the “Geofencing” feature installed by DJI on their drones prevented some folks from unknowingly taking off to close to the airport.
- The closest anyone flew to a prison was over three times as far away as they were allowed to fly.
- Although over nine out of ten drone operators behave in a completely legal manner, over 80% of recreational drone pilots voluntarily fly within much stricter commercial UAS altitude limits, EVEN THOUGH THEY DON’T HAVE TO.
In closing, maybe we can get the president of Embry Riddle to release the following statement:
“If we could only have the pilots we train each year achieve the outstanding safety record of the millions of recreational drones flying every day over the US. All these years of flying drones by unlicensed, untrained recreational operators and not a single fatality in the US. I am deeply troubled by the dismal safety record of general aviation in the US and the hundreds of deaths and millions of dollars of damage that it has caused. Perhaps we can learn from our friendly responsible drone operators how to better “Be smart and fly safe”.
I love you! You should send this to Embry Riddle U. Thankx a million for your words...
( and only 12- 16 years old should mow lawns)
