Drone strike example.

[VietVet]

It's crazy. I just learned today that my home state of Florida passed a law that makes drone operators liable for damages if they capture any private property with a camera at a level higher that street level. In essence, any aerial captures of anything other than your own property constitutes an invasion of privacy.

Fortunately, in the next few months I will be moving to my vacation property in TN where the closest neighbor is more than a mile away.

I travel between NJ and Florida, I have a place in Cape Coral and will be heading there next Tuesday. I have taken all the FPV out of my fixed wing so I'm back to flying the old way but what can you do? I'm telling you quad flying will almost be a thing of the past for the hobbyist.

 

[UAV Man]

It's crazy. I just learned today that my home state of Florida passed a law that makes drone operators liable for damages if they capture any private property with a camera at a level higher that street level. In essence, any aerial captures of anything other than your own property constitutes an invasion of privacy.

Fortunately, in the next few months I will be moving to my vacation property in TN where the closest neighbor is more than a mile away.

I know its not good but impressed if they enforce the law in Florida. Many states I've seen have various laws but enforcing them is a different story. In the UK we haven't had the 'privacy' issues arise yet but can imagine it will only be time due to the size of the island.

I'm moving to Alberta so although the laws in CANADA are stronger than most the space is vast so we'll see how far I get buzzing the Moose and Bears

 

[UAV Man]

This is a great topic and one that every quad owner should show interest. A couple years back you could fly your RC fixed wing aircraft just about anywhere without a problem. I used to fly mine near my home in a very large open lot. When flying it folks would stop by and actually be entertained by watching it fly by do loops and safely land. The police would drive by sometimes even watch and smile. I never had an irate neighbor call and complain, never! You had Parkflyers who on a Sunday could go to the local vacant soccer field and fly their craft. Now I'm afraid to go back to where I flew and wonder when this whole thing will come to an end because of rules and regulations. Then the press started with all this "drone" thing as if Darth Vader was here with the Death Star and things went down hill fast. I would say there have been more negative incidents with lasers and aircraft then with quads but you don't have to register when you buy a laser pen. There is no lobby for the quad enthusiast and the AMA members are more or less fixed wing flyers and blame the quads for all this attention to the hobby. Each state, city and town are now adopting "drone" laws to restrict or stop the flight of "drones" all together. I wanted to by a Mavic until I saw all the attention it was getting, not by the hobbyist but by the press and the average Joe. Even though DJI is now claiming shipping in 5 to 7 days I find myself restrained from buying one because there will be more restrictions coming. I don't have the answer to the problem but I can tell you reversing these rules and regulations will be next to impossible. Maybe one of you has the answer?

Only been seriously buzzing about with Quads for past 2 years but have seen laws change so much even in this short period. I think as an enthusiast I should point out to the rebels but the response is pure negativity. Most of them are NEW flyers and invested very little (ie. 1k for Mavic). The risk to them is minimal and the governing bodies don't have the resources to track them down.

So I guess it's going to become a 'criminal' based interest soon, obviously a strong term but if you break the law, wear the badge. Also those who constantly point out that in some countries they are guidelines and not laws, look at the history of all laws. They were guidelines once! People ignored them, now they are laws!!

 

[nomad33fw]

This law is not a "law" as you think of them. It is in the Criminal Procedure section of Florida State Statutes. This law is to prohibit government agencies and companies (think private investigators) from using a drone for surveillance without a warrant.

This is what happens when someone who isn't trained try's to interpret statutes. You have to read the entire section, especially the part about INTENT.

Plus if you notice there is no penalty for violation other then civil...

 

[SteelFlyer]

I must say I find some of the comments amusing. On previous threads people have commented on how they don't believe a drone can damage and aircraft and have suggested that studies need to be done. Here comes an actual study to try and figure it all out and the same people are dismissing it.

 

[Robbyg]

I think a Mavic could knock out an engine but the chances are probably slim. It certainly would cause damage and cost the airline hundreds of thousands of dollars to overhaul the engine and deal with lost income.
With that said there has not been a case so no one really knows for sure just how serious the damage might be. I have seen some jets flying pretty low outside the five mile radious. Just head to a high mountain and sometimes they pass pretty close to the peaks. Maybe 2000 ft up but that's certainly low enough to make me think it is possible.

 

[rnewman34]

This is a great topic and one that every quad owner should show interest. A couple years back you could fly your RC fixed wing aircraft just about anywhere without a problem. I used to fly mine near my home in a very large open lot. When flying it folks would stop by and actually be entertained by watching it fly by do loops and safely land. The police would drive by sometimes even watch and smile. I never had an irate neighbor call and complain, never! You had Parkflyers who on a Sunday could go to the local vacant soccer field and fly their craft. Now I'm afraid to go back to where I flew and wonder when this whole thing will come to an end because of rules and regulations. Then the press started with all this "drone" thing as if Darth Vader was here with the Death Star and things went down hill fast. I would say there have been more negative incidents with lasers and aircraft then with quads but you don't have to register when you buy a laser pen. There is no lobby for the quad enthusiast and the AMA members are more or less fixed wing flyers and blame the quads for all this attention to the hobby. Each state, city and town are now adopting "drone" laws to restrict or stop the flight of "drones" all together. I wanted to by a Mavic until I saw all the attention it was getting, not by the hobbyist but by the press and the average Joe. Even though DJI is now claiming shipping in 5 to 7 days I find myself restrained from buying one because there will be more restrictions coming. I don't have the answer to the problem but I can tell you reversing these rules and regulations will be next to impossible. Maybe one of you has the answer?

Get your part 107, even if you don't plan to fly commercial.. many in the industry are expecting the FAA to actually give additional leeways to certified sUAS pilots then they do now. Such as Beyond Visual Line of Site, and night operations. Certification is not a panacea to all the drone drama, but it is at least an attempt to professionalize pilots and provide a distinction between those who have no clue, and those who at least should know better

 

[allen deckard]

I'm just curious but am really the only person that has never seen someone else's drone flying before? Is any of this really that big of a deal? At least currently?

Saw a lot and fixed and cleaned a lot of bird strikes during my military days.

Does anyone remember when the faa years ago had the chicken launchers testing bird strikes and it wasn't until years later that it was points out they shouldn't have been using frozen birds.

 

[4wd]

I'm just curious but am really the only person that has never seen someone else's drone flying before? Is any of this really that big of a deal? At least currently?

Saw a lot and fixed and cleaned a lot of bird strikes during my military days.

Does anyone remember when the faa years ago had the chicken launchers testing bird strikes and it wasn't until years later that it was points out they shouldn't have been using frozen birds.

Same here, this is the additional dimension conveniently overlooked that makes the hysteria [even more] silly.
The number of drones is tiny compared to the number of birds but also they only fly ten minutes then spend days/weeks/months in a case. Whereas birds are out there any time of day and night and respect none of the restricted areas - in fact tend to favour them.

 

[Kate]

no1 cares about drone strikes except drone pilots, and people talking on tv.
I know this because i didn't before i got one. like any healthy person I was thinking about $ & psy
even at the checkout on ebay i was thinking about $ & psy.
The only time im not thinking bout $ & psy is when im flying my drone.

thats why this post is so sloppy

 

[Mad Mavic]

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

 

[pftarch]

An interesting quote in the article that often gets overlooked:

"An airliner's engine would dice up the smallest commercial drones without much of a problem. But as these mechanical birds grow bigger, things get more dangerous."

I would argue that the "mechanical birds" the general public is flying are getting smaller, not bigger. I believe that the computer simulation was based on an 8 pound drone, which is SIGNIFICANTLY larger that a Mavic or even a Phantom.

I do think that the FAA might want to look into changing the .55 to 55 pound range for regulations. Perhaps up to 3 or 4 lbs. for unregistered/licensed users, registration and licensing for UAS operations above 3 or 4 lbs. (I doubt that it will happen, but it's nice to dream.)

As others have said in this post, I am not worried about my Mavic taking down a commercial passenger jet, but, I get VERY nervous about helicopters and GA aircraft. As I tend to stay below 400' and away from the approaches to airports, the odds of me hitting a commercial plane are small, but I am always extra vigilant about other aircraft. And I feel that a UAS strike on ANY aircraft could have a catastrophic outcome, no matter how small the odds.

I also must note that statistically, GA flights will result in deaths and injuries on a near DAILY basis (and this has and will occur with or without UAS operation) and that doesn't get the headlines that a "possible" near miss by a "possible" UAS gets. I grow weary of the public's perception of my 2 pound Mavic being a death machine, when odds are logarithmically greater that they will get hit by a plane or helicopter, (and those odds are minuscule and rightfully accepted by society.) If you statistically wanted to immediately save hundred of lives annually, ban recreational air travel and let UAS's run wild. (That is a hypothetical argument/approach that I am NOT recommending, but it is factual.)

None of my opinions matter though, for I am near certain that we face a cycle of stricter bans and regulations for the foreseeable future. Perception is everything and we are not perceived in a positive light by society.