Prop Guard Required in the future?

[dirkclod]

I was joking, I am sure there are far worse accidents. But got to admit, probably the one that got the most attention by the general public.

Might have been but a kid losing his eye is worse than him being
being a idiot. I still keep the kids picture as my screen saver since that happened just to wake me up before I fly. Any accident is bad
but that one got to me being my grandboy I raised has been with me everytime I fly since I’ve been flying till he started school a few years back.
Makes me more aware what can happen.

 

[kjonyou]

I see videos all over the place launching drones from their hands. Got to admit that makes me nervous at eye level. Safety goggles might be a good idea but I dought people are going to do that. The baby that got it's eye slashed was really a one in a million freak accident. Flying through a car window right? I mean how many kids are killed every day in normal car accidents?

 

[dirkclod]

Flying through a car window right? I mean how many kids are killed every day in normal car accidents?

Lots I’m sure but this isn’t a car forum and if you had took the time
and read the story in the link you would know what happen.

Mr Evans said: "It was up for about 60 seconds. As I brought it back down to land it just clipped the tree and span round.

Now this thread is turning so no more horrifying stories and let’s get back on track.

 

[ScottTX]

What is

You are referring to the video about operation over people. Prop guards will not be necessary for flights NOT over people. This video gives a good explanation of OOP.

What constitutes "Over People"? Directly Over People?

 

[Vic Moss]

What is

What constitutes "Over People"? Directly Over People?

Imagine a column of air in the same shape as looking down on a person. If your drone enters into any part of that column, the FAA considers you "over people".

 

[vindibona1]

Imagine a column of air in the same shape as looking down on a person. If your drone enters into any part of that column, the FAA considers you "over people".

It’s the column conical or cylindrical?

 

[Vic Moss]

It’s the column conical or cylindrical?

Same size and shape as the person.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

It's quite a lax ruling though, isn't it ?
A drone would rarely fall straight down, nor would a person be in the same spot when a drone falls from a reasonable height.
Mostly countries seem to have a 30m rule, a 30m radius / 60m dia cylinder around a person(s) we Australian pilots must avoid to fly by the rules.
I feel reasonably ok with that, in the UK it is 50m !

 

[ScottTX]

Imagine a column of air in the same shape as looking down on a person. If your drone enters into any part of that column, the FAA considers you "over people".

Thanks for the clarification. I wanted the FAA's position on this, as here is a common scenario that I/we deal with.
There is a local (large) park that I fly at. This time of the year, it is generally sparsely "occupied" by the other park goers, especially in the morning hours. So it is easy to maintain a good distance between them and my drone. As the day progresses however, more and more people show up.
I always maintain a "safe" distance but if I inadvertently/temporarily got closer, it's good to know what, from the FAA's perspective, what flying "over" people means. The 30/50/60 meter (98'/164'/197') rules would definitely be harder to adhere to.

 

[eEridani]

For guards I always think conservative: if a finger can touch the blades, the guard isn't good enough. Watch people when they have a bird flying around them, hands and fingers extended as a defensive posture.

As for OOP: again, if it's possible for a drone to fly into people, you are OOP. So whether a straight drop or a slow glide, if you can hit a person you are over them.

But I usually err on the side of conservative safety for product liability reasons.