Reckless flying- what are your thoughts?

[sar104]

Uh, no. The etymology of wreck and reck aren't even from the same language.

And if they were then the opposite would be true.

 

[Imagineimagery]

Yeah I really liked that comment when I read it, too. It’s a wicked flight, at some point he clips a wire, he got lucky. I wonder how many pilots can do stuff like this, I would not have thought this possible.

 

[Imagineimagery]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Rotor Riot unlisted this video so really had to dig for it.

Thanks for the dig.

 

[kensteele]

probably shouldn't have done that...that's about it.

 

[plextech]

The human race were crapped already when Adam and Eve did the misstake in paradise.[emoji6] Ever since the fall is endless.[emoji15]

They must have performed a Control Stick Cutout.

 

[deleted member 877]

why have you used the word reckless so many times? do you realize you actually have to have a wreck for your actions to be called reckless? there have been no to few deaths and no to few serious property damages so the only thing getting hurt is people's feelings. 2,000+ near misses, is that what we are talking about? i'll take 10,000 near misses if there are never any collisions. am i waiting for the first collision to take action? drastic action: yes; reasonable action: no.

it's funny how you don't call driving a car reckless after there are thousands of deaths and a million+ injuries and billions of dollars in damages but instead of tending to car problems, everyone want to fight the reckless drones. i'm practically the only person in my area flying drones and i'm not a reckless flyer so who are you talking about?

whatever we are doing now let's keep doing it. if we can repeat this for the next 20 years, the citizens are better off. when you start seeing some sort of trend which contains factual numbers that point to a problem, we'll address it. in the meantime, there is no reckless flying going on. perhaps there is some careless flying but it's hardly that since the rules are designed to ensure safety and when all the rules get broken, everyone is still safe so that says alot about the "rules"....don't you think? love the rules but c'mon.

There have been numerous reports of reckless drone flying - it's all over the mainstream press - and if you're suggesting that there has never been a mid-air collision then I seem to remember that you have previously been corrected in another thread on this forum.

A Phantom 4 drone hit a helicopter over New York

And what's with your constant, yet irrelevant, references to the automobile industry? Doing so only weakens your argument because it would seem to indicate a fundamental lack of understanding in regard to basic statistics.

 

[Imagineimagery]

There have been numerous reports of reckless drone flying - it's all over the mainstream news

And what's with your constant, yet irrelevant, references to the automobile industry? Doing so only weakens your argument because it would seem to indicate a fundamental lack of understanding in regard to basic statistics.

Let’s put something into perspective right off the top- every single day bad driving will cause more death and injury and damage than will happen from our happy little drones in 20 years. Every day!

Doesn’t that count for anything when we members are talking about drone safety?

As for when the media talks about drone safety....

The mainstream media relies upon conflict. That is a fact. Another fact is that people don’t want to hear about the hundred deadly accidents that occurred that day in their country from car wrecks- that gets old and boring. Who is going to continue watching that misery through to the commercials.
Don’t forget, if people don’t stay watching through to the commercials, which is the paycheck, there is no reason to air the story in the first place.
Rule number 1 in media is keep the eyeballs. Drones keep the eyeballs exceptionally well, don’t they?
Drones are sexy and exciting and that will definitely keep people watching through the commercials and will definitely sell papers the next morning. Drone close calls with other vehicles?? Yeah it’s hard to get any sexier that that for a media outlet... who isn’t going to be interested in hearing about a drone close call?
But is it actually that relevant to your life?
Why do you think drone close calls near the airport is that important if driving to the airport is factually, statistically, what is truly relevant to keeping your heartbeat going?
This is a bit more complex than one might assume and takes a bit of care to talk about, at least in my opinion.

On average 3,300 people die every single day from car accidents, millions injured, billions in property damage. That’s daily my friend.
That statistic belongs in any discussion of dangerous human activity simply because it is by far the most dangerous activity humans engage in every day.
I started this thread largely to try to understand how to talk about drone safety but I cannot see how to just leave out talking about car safety.
What am I missing?

 

[deleted member 877]

Let’s put something into perspective right off the top- every single day bad driving will cause more death and injury and damage than will happen from our happy little drones in 20 years. Every day!

Doesn’t that count for anything when we members are talking about drone safety?

No it doesn't, mainly because of the billions of cars on the road compared to the thousands of drones in the air. I will never understand why it makes any sense to mention road accident stats when discussing drone safety or reckless drone flying behaviour etc.

To suggest that it is like comparing apples with oranges is a huge understatement IMO.

 

[Imagineimagery]

I’m truly very curious how it is so easy for you. Please help me man- is there any way you could describe why it makes no sense to you to make any comparisons between the two activities?

 

[Maviac]

Uh, no. The etymology of wreck and reck aren't even from the same language.

Thank you. Ugh.... this thread is off the rails and far too many thousands of words of worthless (sorry, folks, but true) comments that are not helpful to any of us, and mostly incorrect, legally. Follow the rules (of whatever your jurisdiction is). And if you violate them, don’t brag about it on a public forum.

 

[Maviac]

Let’s put something into perspective right off the top- every single day bad driving will cause more death and injury and damage than will happen from our happy little drones in 20 years. Every day!

Yes! Today, anyway. But this is a huge false equivalency. Have you ever flown a plane and had to dodge a stupid drone flyer? I have! And I’m a drone pilot, as well as an airplane pilot!

 

[Imagineimagery]

Thank you. Ugh.... this thread is off the rails and far too many thousands of words of worthless (sorry, folks, but true) comments that are not helpful to any of us, and mostly incorrect, legally. Follow the rules (of whatever your jurisdiction is). And if you violate them, don’t brag about it on a public forum.

Ok so help me out here- here is how my thinking goes, maybe if you could tell me where you think I go off the rails.
You say, “Follow the rules.”
I want to immediately say that people don’t follow basic rules of the road and not following those rules is much more important than not following drone rules.
Is that off the rails?
I guess I just feel there is a legitimate argument to be made that it makes no sense to ask people to follow the rules, when it is highly unlikely you follow much more important rules of the road.
I mean I guess I can see how you can say one has nothing to do with the other but can’t you see how so many people think it is ridiculous to hear people complain about drone safety when they have no problem putting people’s actual lives at risk driving everyday?
It’s like, why listen to you about keeping in vlos when you are texting next to me on the road. (I’m pretending you’ve texted before while driving, maybe you haven’t.)

Yeah sorry wordy but I find this a tricky thing to figure out and it’s important to me and it’s seems difficult to describe why it seems so obvious that there is a a discrepancy that needs some squaring.
imo

 

[Imagineimagery]

Yes! Today, anyway. But this is a huge false equivalency. Have you ever flown a plane and had to dodge a stupid drone flyer? I have! And I’m a drone pilot, as well as an airplane pilot!

I can’t fathom how scary that must have been. Crazy.
Surely though you have much closer calls in your car over the years?
I don’t get how this is a huge false equivalency?

Overall, over your lifetime, what will pose the greater risk to your injury or death, a drone or a car?
I mean that’s all I’m really trying to get at anyway.
That seems rather meaningful to me when trying to figure out how droning and drone safety play a part in my life.

 

[deleted member 877]

I’m truly very curious how it is so easy for you. Please help me man- is there any way you could describe why it makes no sense to you to make any comparisons between the two activities?

Ok then let’s imagine that the number of cars on the road equalled the number of drones in the air and that all of the cars were driverless and didn’t even carry passengers. Then make it so that there were few or zero obstacles to worry about. Then factor in a much larger number of cars with drivers and passengers (manned aircraft equivalent) but these cars would never share the same roads as the driverless cars unless a tiny minority of driverless cars broke the law by being there.

This is the scenario you need to think of if you want to compare drones with cars when arguing your point in regard to regulations imposed by the airspace regulators - it represents a level playing field. In the abovementioned scenario, how much risk of injury or death do you think there would be?

But none of it really matters because we need to come back and properly understand and appreciate why the airspace regulators have to be strict when it comes to regulating the drone flying community. It’s all about the worst-case scenario regardless of how unlikely it is. Hope this helps you understand what happens in the real world and why.

 

[Imagineimagery]

This is the scenario you need to think of if you want to compare drones with cars when arguing your point in regard to regulations imposed by the airspace regulators - it represents a level playing field. In the abovementioned scenario, how much risk of injury or death would there be

I appreciate the thoughtful response, I will be rereading that a few times I bet in the morning, sounds like it is a good description of what is ahead for the regulators, not sure if I was comparing for that reason.... alright wait, you added something relevant just there about the how your scenario change the ratio, gotta reread in morning.
Maybe that somehow squares up what seems to be an incredible hypocrisy I think exists. Too tired to think straight.

 

[Quebecnewf]

The flying is top class . Some rules broken for sure . I’m quite sure a crash would have no neg. effects on train . Would love to know equipment used

Quebecnewf

 

[BigAl07]

Would love to know equipment used

It's all listed in his description:

My radio:
Futaba 18SZ // http://amzn.to/2kYG8O9 TBS Crossfire // http://bit.ly/2BVwMgX

My Goggles:
Fatshark Dominator HD3: http://bit.ly/2BpdCw4 Furious FPV TrueD V3: http://bit.ly/2BQaDhm

My Freestyle Drone:
Motors: T Motor F40 Pro V2 2400kv // http://bit.ly/2BnsECL ESC: T Motor F30A 2-6s // http://bit.ly/2BXRc8P Flight Controller: Omnibus // http://bit.ly/2kFQpzI VTX : TBS Unify // http://bit.ly/2kYGWmd Receiver: TBS Crossfire Micro // http://bit.ly/2pfQH4W RX Antenna: TBS Immortal T // http://bit.ly/2pcDcmI Frame: SMWYG Steeze // http://bit.ly/2BRbsq6 Camera: Runcam Micro Swift 2 // http://bit.ly/2C2autG Lipo: http://amzn.to/2zhErAF

 

[Mr. Salty]

Yes of course this flight is illegal, wow, I completely forgot about that whole VLOS thing for a minute.

Everybody keeps saying this but it's not necessarily true. The posted video is years old. The rules have changed a lot over the years.

 

[BigAl07]

Everybody keeps saying this but it's not necessarily true. The posted video is years old. The rules have changed a lot over the years.

But those are just details and they are very inconvenient

 

[kensteele]

so if the rules change tomorrow from 400 agl to 300 agl, is it dangerous and unsafe to fly at 350 agl all things being equal? ok, i get it. the rules don't change like that unless other factors are involved. so yes, it's now unsafe. got it!