DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

Google doesn't like the new rules

Mrmund

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2018
Messages
269
Reactions
250
Age
48
Turns out google doesn't want shady people to know where they're flying anymore than us
 
Yes, but they are proposing being able to use internet based transmission instead. How will they be able to fly into rural areas with limited wireless internet? It is because of the current limitation that FAA agreed was impractical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scubadiver1944
Yes, but they are proposing being able to use internet based transmission instead. How will they be able to fly into rural areas with limited wireless internet? It is because of the current limitation that FAA agreed was impractical.
They'll just put GSM-based cellular radios in their drones. Or GSM and Iridium like what Zipline did with their drones.

Internet transmission wasn't their big concern. It was the privacy issue where people could identify where the drone started from and where it was heading. When people can track delivery drones, they'll be able to steal the packages as they are being delivered. Or divert them mid-flight.
 
I don't believe ANY consumer drone should be tracked by the federal government. The government has a nasty, sick, twisted, amoral history of abusing its powers. There is no danger to manned aircraft flying some 1 pound drone under 400 AGL, far away from airports, etc.. Hell, I've never flown higher than 300 feet in my life and have no interest to do so because the wind velocity is too high where I live. I see the ability to track drones a violation of the First Amendment. Citizen journalists and news organizations should be very upset about these new rules. This is what happens, folks, when you grant the government more and more power.
 
Last edited:
They'll just put GSM-based cellular radios in their drones. Or GSM and Iridium like what Zipline did with their drones.

Internet transmission wasn't their big concern. It was the privacy issue where people could identify where the drone started from and where it was heading. When people can track delivery drones, they'll be able to steal the packages as they are being delivered. Or divert them mid-flight.

To quote Another lab...
It was the privacy issue where people could identify where the drone started from and where it was heading. When people can track(my drone and where I'm standing)delivery drones, they'll be able to steal (mug me for my gear)the packages as they are being delivered.

If a company like Google expects that to happen shouldn't I be afraid? I live in Brooklyn, more than once I've been concerned that the person approaching me is more interested in taking my stuff then in how far it flies.
 
There is no danger to manned aircraft flying some 1 pound drone under 400 AGL, far away from airports, etc.
This has been discussed many times. There are many legitimate reasons for aircraft (especially helicopters) to be below 400ft. There have been examples of drones hitting aircraft and this video was made to show the sort of damage that could be done:

 
Turns out google doesn't want shady people to know where they're flying anymore than us
I felt terrible when I first read this.

1609540866659.png

But, then I remembered being told that as far flying a hobby drone:

IF YOU ARE NOT A CRIMINAL THEN YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR

So what are they crying about?
 
I felt terrible when I first read this.

View attachment 120591

But, then I remembered being told that as far flying a hobby drone:

IF YOU ARE NOT A CRIMINAL THEN YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR

So what are they crying about?
The privacy concern is not with the authorities knowing what you are doing, it's with the general public being able to access that information. I'm 100% fine with the information broadcast, but it should be encrypted so that only LEO and First Responders can access that information. While that still leaves too many ways of the information getting out, it's better than what the FAA is going to implement.

Here's a scenario where it can go wrong:
Someone, let's call him "Casey", is flying a drone and making a nuisance of himself. "Angry Carl" comes running outside, armed with his phone and a baseball bat. Carl runs the app that shows RID messages. Casey's drone has already crashed and is no longer transmitting.

"Oscar" is just finishing up a commercial gig and bringing his drone in for a landing. Carl sees only the RID messages from Oscar's drone. Carl puts 2 and 2 together and gets 5.

Carl locates Oscar's position and he smashes Oscar's drone with the baseball bat and runs off. While Carl has committed numerous offenses, that doesn't help out Oscar. His drone is broken and his business has been impacted. Not to mention the stress he suffered by being threatened by a lunatic with a baseball bat.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Ex Coelis
The privacy concern is not with the authorities knowing what you are doing, it's with the general public being able to access that information. I'm 100% fine with the information broadcast, but it should be encrypted so that only LEO and First Responders can access that information. While that still leaves too many ways of the information getting out, it's better than what the FAA is going to implement.

Here's a scenario where it can go wrong:
Someone, let's call him "Casey", is flying a drone and making a nuisance of himself. "Angry Carl" comes running outside, armed with his phone and a baseball bat. Carl runs the app that shows RID messages. Casey's drone has already crashed and is no longer transmitting.

"Oscar" is just finishing up a commercial gig and bringing his drone in for a landing. Carl sees only the RID messages from Oscar's drone. Carl puts 2 and 2 together and gets 5.

Carl locates Oscar's position and he smashes Oscar's drone with the baseball bat and runs off. While Carl has committed numerous offenses, that doesn't help out Oscar. His drone is broken and his business has been impacted. Not to mention the stress he suffered by being threatened by a lunatic with a baseball bat.
Never mind mistaken identity. Casey doesn't have to crash and he gets smashed by Carl.

One YT had read through the comments during the proposal phase and FAA's response to the concerns of safety for the operator was dumb. Operator should take necessary actions and precautions to protect themselves, correlating to a cockpit being locked after 911. Really?
 
They'll just put GSM-based cellular radios in their drones. Or GSM and Iridium like what Zipline did with their drones.

Internet transmission wasn't their big concern. It was the privacy issue where people could identify where the drone started from and where it was heading. When people can track delivery drones, they'll be able to steal the packages as they are being delivered. Or divert them mid-flight.
That's just it. GSM isn't available everywhere either. That's why FAA abandoned that requirement.
 
That's just it. GSM isn't available everywhere either. That's why FAA abandoned that requirement.
That's why Zipline has Iridium as a backup for when GSM isn't available.
 
I don't believe ANY consumer drone should be tracked by the federal government. The government has a nasty, sick, twisted, amoral history of abusing its powers. There is no danger to manned aircraft flying some 1 pound drone under 400 AGL, far away from airports, etc.. Hell, I've never flown higher than 300 feet in my life and have no interest to do so because the wind velocity is too high where I live. I see the ability to track drones a violation of the First Amendment. Citizen journalists and news organizations should be very upset about these new rules. This is what happens, folks, when you grant the government more and more power.
While I agree about government getting (taking) more and more power, I can't agree with the ability to track drones being a violation of the first amendment. With that thought process, should a manned aircraft not be tracked, if it happens to be carrying a reporter? What about tracking of individual cars? Tesla does it today with their cars.
If tracking of location/altitude of a drone is necessary to prevent collisions, surely you'd agree that would be OK - I certainly would.

What concerns me is the creation of databases of who has been where, when, with whom, etc., and then using it for whatever purpose some faceless bureaucrat comes up with in the future. Imagine getting a notice from the FAA that an analysis of archived data indicates that you broke the 400 ft rule by 40 ft, seven months earlier, and the fine is $$$$...how do you defend yourself?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mrmund
....What concerns me is the creation of databases of who has been where, when, with whom, etc., and then using it for whatever purpose some faceless bureaucrat comes up with in the future. Imagine getting a notice from the FAA that an analysis of archived data indicates that you broke the 400 ft rule by 40 ft, seven months earlier, and the fine is $$$$...how do you defend yourself?
I think the better use case is identifying the person who flew their drone near an accident and prevented a helicopter from landing.
 
What it sort of boils down to on some levels, is that Congress has abdicated its responsibilities to sets of faceless bureaucrats in many cases.. They impose rules, fines, and more without any corresponding legislation to give them the right to actually do so.

Some bill that perhaps gives them that right IMHO is unconstitutional. Every situation where these bureaucrats impose themselves should be properly written into legislation and voted on. This does 2 things, one it provides accountability and probably would slow down even more the implementation of random rules from slews of agencies, many of which are useless in most cases.
 
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,586
Messages
1,554,115
Members
159,586
Latest member
DoubleBarS