Is FAA rules such a BIG deal?

[BluesDragon]

Popcorn! Peanuts!!

Here... hold my beer... watch this...

 

[flockshot]

So you can see and hear a military jet going mach 2 at 1000 feet and can get out of it's way before your drone gets sucked into an engine? Good luck with that.

mach 2 at 1000 feet. That would be the highlight of my day.

 

[ascension]

mach 2 at 1000 feet. That would be the highlight of my day.

It would also blow out a bunch of windows and really bother animals and people.

 

[Qoncussion]

Devil's Advocate: Understanding that WE must give way to manned aircraft - what is going to happen when the military jet, mentioned sooo many times above, comes in low (below 400ft) at near mach speed, and collides with a drone IN OUR AIRSPACE? At near mach speed, a drone pilot would never hear it coming, and would not be able to take evasive actions. Let's also assume that this is a safe fly zone for the drone to be flying (no NFZ for miles around).

I already know that the media will crucify the drone pilot in the eyes of the public, when technically - the fault would lie with the military pilot.

 

[ascension]

The short answer is that it isn't "your airspace."
Never has been.
Operators using airspace in visual conditions, ie., not on instrument flight plans, don't own airspace, and the rule is "see and be seen" with codified right of way rules, of which the drone operator is at the bottom.

The longer answer is that a military airplane doing that would either be in a restricted area, warning area, or on a military training route, which are depicted on sectional charts.

So...to use your words, the claim that the military pilot would be at fault is erroneous.

 

[flockshot]

Devil's Advocate: Understanding that WE must give way to manned aircraft - what is going to happen when the military jet, mentioned sooo many times above, comes in low (below 400ft) at near mach speed, and collides with a drone IN OUR AIRSPACE? At near mach speed, a drone pilot would never hear it coming, and would not be able to take evasive actions. Let's also assume that this is a safe fly zone for the drone to be flying (no NFZ for miles around).

I already know that the media will crucify the drone pilot in the eyes of the public, when technically - the fault would lie with the military pilot.

It is not 'our' airspace? It is class G airspace that 'anybody' in aviation can use.
So let's assume for just a moment that this could happen. It is your responsibility (and mine) to give way to that aircraft. Period. That is the law. sorry.
P.S. It is also his responsibility to not hit us. Crash avoidance extends to all pilots.

 

[sar104]

Devil's Advocate: Understanding that WE must give way to manned aircraft - what is going to happen when the military jet, mentioned sooo many times above, comes in low (below 400ft) at near mach speed, and collides with a drone IN OUR AIRSPACE? At near mach speed, a drone pilot would never hear it coming, and would not be able to take evasive actions. Let's also assume that this is a safe fly zone for the drone to be flying (no NFZ for miles around).

I already know that the media will crucify the drone pilot in the eyes of the public, when technically - the fault would lie with the military pilot.

That's only going to happen in MTRs, and it should not be that low outside restricted areas or MOAs. And it's not our airspace. None of it is our airspace, whether around an MTR or not.

 

[Qoncussion]

That's only going to happen in MTRs, and it should not be that low outside restricted areas or MOAs. And it's not our airspace. None of it is our airspace, whether around an MTR or not.

My bigger picture point was that, I could see this happening some day, where the drone pilot was flying perfectly legally - by the book - but no matter, the media would chew us up for breakfast, and spit us out before the noon news cycle. I think we always have to be a little safer than safe...

 

[sar104]

My bigger picture point was that, I could see this happening some day, where the drone pilot was flying perfectly legally - by the book - but no matter, the media would chew us up for breakfast, and spit us out before the noon news cycle. I think we always have to be a little safer than safe...

That is likely true - if it happens. However - as is frequently pointed out, the probability of collision is quite low to start with and the only documented collision so far, and all the near misses that I've heard about, were in situations where the UAV operator was clearly not following rules or guidelines. So, hopefully, your scenario won't happen.

 

[larrythedirtbag]

Lately just browsing through the posts I have seen lots of people nagging on others about how to stay within line of sight, or "Legal altitude" but are these rules really something to take into account? To be honest, who's going to catch you when your 2 miles away and 1500 feet up getting a shot of a life time like I like to do. Just curious on everyone's opinion of following all the rules.

This is great bait! well played!

 

[Taylor1430]

I'm curious about the comments about changing altitude or position when other aircraft are in the area....how do you know what other aircraft are nearby when you are 2 miles away at 1600 feet?
I agree the odds of a collision is low...but here is another factor. When the FAA gets pissed off enough about drone pilots out flying willy nilly with no regard to the laws, rules, and regulations, what do you think their response will be? It's likely one of two things will happen. We'll see bans on drones entirely with high penalties for breaking this. The more likely scenario is the simple process of registering your craft is going to get rather expensive and complicated. If we can't follow the established rules, then who is to say they wouldn't require hours of hours of training from some certified instructor? And then testing and test flights, etc..and expense. Think of what a small plane pilot has to go through to get a license and to maintain that license. What if the FAA decides they want to institute similar practices because you like to go out with no regard for what they already require of us.

 

[ascension]

My bigger picture point was that, I could see this happening some day, where the drone pilot was flying perfectly legally - by the book - but no matter, the media would chew us up for breakfast, and spit us out before the noon news cycle. I think we always have to be a little safer than safe...

The point is that the right of way rules don't care how fast or how low the airplane is flying.
If it is operating legally, in this case in a restricted, warning, or low level training route depicted on sectionals, it is the drone operators responsibility to grant right of way.
Not doing so, regardless of who is involved or how the performance differential matches up is not "operating by the book."

 

[jpbluzharp]

Lately just browsing through the posts I have seen lots of people nagging on others about how to stay within line of sight, or "Legal altitude" but are these rules really something to take into account? To be honest, who's going to catch you when your 2 miles away and 1500 feet up getting a shot of a life time like I like to do. Just curious on everyone's opinion of following all the rules.

Ever play music with a soloing musician who is so bad that he or she doesn’t even realize that they’re playing in the wrong key? Ever see a military aircraft demonstrate how jets can surprise the enemy because they’re on you before you hear them? If you caused a death or injury to someone because you thought the shot was worth it, do you think your victims’ families would share your opinion?

There are rules for a reason. There are also ways to get clearance for certain instances when one can stretch the rules.

Responsible flying benefits our entire community. One selfish accident can seriously damage or destroy it.

 

[dirktwa]

Yesterday I almost crashed into a 747. Lucky they saw me in time and changed direction last minute. I was not going to, it would ruin my video. I still hit the tip of the wing, but I only had minor rotor damage. Next time I hope they see me earlier.

 

[Farmboy666]

Your original post stated:

"who's going to catch you when your 2 miles away and 1500 feet up getting a shot of a life time like I like to do"​

Now you say that you rarely do that. Which is it? Was that a serious post or are you just here trolling?

Why can't it be both? Just because he rarely does it doesn't mean he can't be caught.

 

[Farmboy666]

I recall a couple of years ago and attended to a body. It was being treat as suspicious circumstances until we retrieved the memory card from his camera.
In an attempt to ‘take the shot of a life time’ this gent had climbed over a safety barrier and onto the outside of a bridge which was fitted with anti climb guards as well. He obviously thought the rules didn’t apply to him...which was probably his last thoughts on Earth because when he slipped and fell off the bridge, landing many feet below, the lens of his Nikon smashed through his forehead and embedded itself into his brain causing instant death.

That's called thinning out the herd. If he's that stupid we don't want those genes passed along.

 

[kschori]

Lately just browsing through the posts I have seen lots of people nagging on others about how to stay within line of sight, or "Legal altitude" but are these rules really something to take into account? To be honest, who's going to catch you when your 2 miles away and 1500 feet up getting a shot of a life time like I like to do. Just curious on everyone's opinion of following all the rules.

Keep in mind too that everything done with the DJI Drones is being recorded. Stick movements, location, altitude etc. I don't know if any of that goes to DJI once you are in WiFi etc.

 

[delgross]

Just have to throw in my two cents. I'm one of those people who speeds. For years the LAW was 55 on the highway was stupid. I'd do 70 because it was reasonable. Now the limit is 70 and I still do 70. Those people on this thread continually citing the law should read the book "A felony a day". There are laws you violate everyday and don't know about it because they are stupid and designed to be selectively enforced. Would everyone here citing the law really want to be subjected to every dumb law and regulation the government has managed to fabricate. Just think of that guy who was chocked to death a few years ago for selling individual cigarettes.

I think the FAA rules should be relaxed. Shouldn't there have to be some justification for these rules. Just got done doing the F107 course. Most of this seems to be pulled from thin air because no one has any experience and its just easier to ban stuff. Seems stupid to fly over 400 feet and the risk of collision with an aircraft is real. I live in a rural area and still helicopters are flying in to the local hospital. 5 miles from every airport. I think that's dumb if I am only at 400 feet, but do my best. Not over people. Makes sense. Line of sight. Spotter needed with googles. Give me a break, I'm not flying an F16. Then again, when I was pulled over for speeding, I paid the fine. If something happens with the drone I'll accept the consequences.

 

[3Thumbflyer]

Well when out flying, I live in the country, and aircraft's are common yes, but I can hear and see them due to my land that I live on being open. So usually when I hear one I look around as most fly (what looks like) lower than 400 feet. So most of the time I am no where near one but when it is in the general area I turn sport mode on and fly away or come down or go up depending on where it is. My concern also isn't really getting caught because there isn't a way that I know of, of getting caught as they won't know who's flying it, so that doesn't really concern me unless they find a way to track me. Also the "Keep within line of sight" gets me because if I'm only 200 feet up and a couple miles away, I'm not sure whats wrong with that. I personally trust DJI but I'm not sure about anyone else.

 

[Classic flyer]

So your concern is only about getting caught? Do you ever worry about colliding with an aircraft?

Tell him bro...there's a lot more to it than getting caught