FAA Drone Advisory Committee Meeting Notice

[eEridani]

Folks - here's the upcoming drone law meeting being held by the FAA ... open to the public.

Drone Advisory Committee (DAC); Notice of Public Meeting

This notice announces a meeting of the Drone Advisory Committee.

www.federalregister.gov

And here's the committee holding the meeting.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnerships/drone_advisory_committee/

In the last two annual reports these hasn't been any involvement by people we know. No input to requests for community involvement. No participation in working groups.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnerships/drone_advisory_committee/media/2019_DAC_Public_Comments_Submitted.pdf

https://www.faa.gov/uas/programs_partnerships/drone_advisory_committee/media/2020_DAC_Public_Comments.pdf

Seems commercial interests are quite involved, and a handful of schools and special interests. But shouldn't there be more from the public - the recreational users that form the largest group of pilots? One problem is the DAC depends on members to communicate meetings and requests for input to the community; seems this aspect of DAC membership is lost on the participant or not part of their charter.

So -to everyone interested in flying drones for fun: GET INVOLVED - no one else is going to do it for you.

 

[Vic Moss]

The hobby is represented. Very well indeed.

 

[Vic Moss]

\

Seems commercial interests are quite involved, and a handful of schools and special interests. But shouldn't there be more from the public - the recreational users that form the largest group of pilots?

And Dave Messina, CEO of FPV Freedom Coalition is on multiple Task Groups, including the one I'm on. Also, until recently, AMA had a place at the table as well. I'm not sure why they aren't on the latest.

One problem is the DAC depends on members to communicate meetings and requests for input to the community; seems this aspect of DAC membership is lost on the participant or not part of their charter.

We have MANY outside interested parties in our Task Groups. In mine we have people interested in K-12 education who aren't 107 folks.

So -to everyone interested in flying drones for fun: GET INVOLVED - no one else is going to do it for you.

Yes, watch next month's meeting. If something interests you and you'd like to get more deeply involved, reach out to me and I'll hook you up with whatever subgroup you'd like to be on.

 

[eEridani]

I read that you are a member as an operator - but your organization DSPA has not participated in any tangible (recorded) way - if so, where are your names on any of the working groups or records of input to the committee? Is the annual tally incorrect? Are the latest task group reports in error?

It is one thing to be on a committee and sit in on meetings; it is an entirely different thing to be an active participant doing the hard work.

 

[Vic Moss]

I read that you are a member as an operator - but your organization DSPA has not participated in any tangible (recorded) way - if so, where are your names on any of the working groups or records of input to the committee? Is the annual tally incorrect? Are the latest task group reports in error?

Kenji is on Task Group 11, as well as the BVLOS ARC. He has multiple meetings per week.

It is one thing to be on a committee and sit in on meetings; it is an entirely different thing to be an active participant doing the hard work.

I'm on Task Group 12, and we also have meetings each week. We have a standing meeting every Wednesday. And we have a bunch of research and things to do between meetings.

The DAC does not set the agenda. The FAA sets the agenda, and then we advise on that agenda. The most recent exception to that is actually Task Group 12, which I am on. At February's meeting Kenji suggested that K-12 STEM education be looked at by the DAC. At the June meeting that TG was formed.

The reason Kenji and I aren't mentioned in the minutes is because we just joined. The FAA actually made the "Citizen UAS Operator" Stakeholder Group so they could have some people who actually fly drones on the DAC. We are the only two. Yes, we are commercial pilots, but we are also recreational flyers as well. We represent both.

So before you start accusing the hobby of not being represented, take some time and do your research about who does what and how the DAC actually operates.

And if you want help out, donate to DSPA. Kenji and I do not get paid to be on any of the DAC meetings, nor do we have a staff to help us in our research. As you mentioned, the other members are part of large companies, or large organizations where they draw salaries. Kenji and I own our own companies, and we don't get paid unless we're working. We are also responsible for our own expenses when we start in-person DAC meetings. The way it looks now, October's meeting will be the last remote one. That means Kenji and I have to pay our way to the next one.

Also, Kenji and I don't get paid by DSPA to be there. He and I (& others) have put 100's of hours in to keeping our hobby and industry as free of regulation as possible. And we haven't received one thin dime for ANY of that time.

So don't start at thread here with the accusations you're making without some serious pushback from me. I won't stand for it.

Do you research before you say we're not doing anything. Because you have ZERO idea about what you're talking about. I take that very personally.

 

[eEridani]

All I can say is : I'm be beating the drum for more public involvement from people here, because it isn't just my own voice that is important.

 

[Vic Moss]

All I can say is : I'm be beating the drum for more public involvement from people here, because it isn't just my own voice that is important.

No, all you're saying is that I don't do anything for this hobby or industry. And that pisses me off.