I have given him a break but **** I really want to smack him over the head just once ?
Texas Pilot crashes drone into the world trade Center
- Thread starter Drone_Pilot
- Start date
JJ, we are giving WAY too many breaks, free passes, "forget about its" to WAY too many people. This is why regulations are getting tougher and tougher. One of the very LAST things we need is more negative exposure for our industry/community. The only way this could have been worse is if there was an innocent person hurt or if there was a UAS to Manned Aircraft incident. This is going to give us a serious Black Eye and feed the anti-drone trolls for months to come.
Look at it from a new point of view.... up until a few years ago we had basically none to minimal rules and regulatiosn for UAS. I could (and did) fly from just about anywhere in the US without a worry. I was filming in some of the most beautiful places in the country and my only concern was creating my invoices and making sure the $$ was coming in. Fast forward to today, we check airspace, create flight plans (and submit them when requested), get Airspace Authorizations, get WAIVERS etc just to make the same $$ we were making previously. It's not just an inconvenience it takes $$$ off my table and solely because of DUMB actions like this 22y/o kid did.
You can bet your bottom dollar that those who HATE our industry are already writing the letters and building their cases for MORE restrictions.
And as long as these incidents keep happening the laws are going to be getting harder and harder on us
iReviewFrozenDinners
Well-Known Member
No damages, except there is now a lipo battery stuck on the building, which is probably a fire hazard.
cgmaxed
Well-Known Member
cgmaxed
Well-Known Member
He was using the automated orbital shots and the circumference was too large. But large enough to hit the Trade center. Oops.
cgmaxed
Well-Known Member
Hi again. I understand your point I think, but maybe not. I mean no disrespect. Are you saying, If the punishments were more severe, then drone pilots would be more careful and not try performing risky flights as this kid had done. Then we would see less accidents? And, or are you saying to increase the charges against the kid and make an example of him, so the general public doesn't feel like their voices and concerns regarding drones aren't being ignored? Maybe a little of both?
I don't think disciplining him more or letting him skate will change how the public and intern, the politicians, will react to these accidents. I think the accidents themselves create the new laws we see, not the punishment handed down to the perpetrator of these accidents.
My best hope would be this: I can see increasing the punishment, causing a feedback loop to the drone user, making them think twice about the risks they are taking and the punishment they'll receive if they actually do get into an accident. An increase in the punishment would probably reduce the number of accidents as drone pilots would be in fear of the repercussions.
Here is an example of drunk driving statistics and how the newer severe punishments have affected DUI rates: See attached pics. The new laws have decreased drunk driving accidents by 50% on average. People are very aware of the punishments they will receive if caught. That's my take anyway.
Attachments
There has to be consequences for your actions. If you're flying a drone driving a car flying an airplane you need to know the rules of the area. If the speed is posted 55 why are you going to go 80 the consequence is to get a speeding ticket and maybe points in your driver's license. The kid deserves some sort of a punishment (NOT JAIL) but fines, public or or community service going around talking about the safety of drones. Just thinking out loud ?
the Forbes one of post #9..........in the correction section no less lol
Furthermore I'm a firm believer that all drone Pilots whether you are a recreational or a 107 should you show in a controlled course they have the capabilities of flying and controlling there drones before their issued their 107 or recreational license. Anybody can put a drone up or down piloting the drone is a different situation knowing. Similar to getting your driver's license for the first time.
Just my opinion
Furthermore I'm a firm believer that all drone Pilots whether you are a recreational or a 107 should you show in a controlled course they have the capabilities of flying and controlling there drones before their issued their 107 or recreational license. Anybody can put a drone up or down piloting the drone is a different situation knowing. Similar to getting your driver's license for the first time.
Just my opinion
I have ALWAYS felt like a it was imperative to demonstrate some "practical flying abilities" as well. The license with no actual flight proficiency segment is only worth the paper it's written on. Show me you can fly when GPS drops out... show me you can fly the aircraft "visually" when your viewing device fails... show me you can safely fly it back to the launch point W/O hitting RTH and the list goes on.
You hit the nail on the head here
Hope Vic Moss reads this and maybe bring it up to the FAA. It will weed out those that just want to have the license for the purpose of saying that they have it versus those that really want to learn how to fly properly and safely and enjoy the hobbyI have ALWAYS felt like a it was imperative to demonstrate some "practical flying abilities" as well. The license with no actual flight proficiency segment is only worth the paper it's written on. Show me you can fly when GPS drops out... show me you can fly the aircraft "visually" when your viewing device fails... show me you can safely fly it back to the launch point W/O hitting RTH and the list goes on.
You hit the nail on the head here
cgmaxed
Well-Known Member
They just let him get off scott free?! I had no idea. Oh wait, he did get a ticket for breaking the city ordinance of "no drone area". At least that's what I assume it is. I'm thinking, the whole area is a no take off and land area, regardless if you take off from a balcony or the ground. Maybe the FAA will pursue this case further?
You may get a kick out of this, but maybe not. I was doing the exact same thing you said in your example. 85 in a 55mph zone. Got pulled over. Reckless driving. Given a ticket. I hired a company of lawyers called "Ticket Clinic" . They actually got the ticket thrown out with no points. It cost me only 300 dollars to higher the law company. What's my point. There is none. Just thought I'd mention how the law works in this country. You really never know what will happen.
Last edited:
I've been friends with Vic for a good while and have read many of his posts here and other places and I'm pretty sure this is one topic we don't exactly agree on. I'm not sure that's accurate but I do remember him stating that the current wording/framework for Part 107 wouldn't allow "Flight Proficiency Demonstration" but there is an allowance (or was) for Flight Training. For instance I can TRAIN someone for Part 107 in Emergency Services even though they do not have Part 107. The training, although FOR getting Part 107, is flown under Recreational guidelines and that's how we've been able to (before LAANC) fly in controlled airspace for flight Training only.
@Vic Moss chime in and let's discuss
Thanks BigAl for your input on the thread. A drone is a flying vehicle (UAV) so why not treat it as one and show that you have the capability of flying that vehicle and you can safely take off and land that vehicle. You AMA can take on that duty of having an obstacle course to show your abilities in piloting a UAV. And the AMA can charge for you using their facilities to prove that you have that ability in piloting your droneI've been friends with Vic for a good while and have read many of his posts here and other places and I'm pretty sure this is one topic we don't exactly agree on. I'm not sure that's accurate but I do remember him stating that the current wording/framework for Part 107 wouldn't allow "Flight Proficiency Demonstration" but there is an allowance (or was) for Flight Training. For instance I can TRAIN someone for Part 107 in Emergency Services even though they do not have Part 107. The training, although FOR getting Part 107, is flown under Recreational guidelines and that's how we've been able to (before LAANC) fly in controlled airspace for flight Training only.
@Vic Moss chime in and let's discuss
I have ALWAYS felt like a it was imperative to demonstrate some "practical flying abilities" as well. The license with no actual flight proficiency segment is only worth the paper it's written on. Show me you can fly when GPS drops out... show me you can fly the aircraft "visually" when your viewing device fails... show me you can safely fly it back to the launch point W/O hitting RTH and the list goes on.
You hit the nail on the head here
I agree. My Part 107 certificate allows me to fly a drone that weighs nearly 50 pounds and flies at nearly 100 mph. That's a significant amount of energy and mass to be putting into the sky without any demonstration of flight proficiency. It's one thing to memorize regulations and learn how to read weather reports and sectional charts and get a 107 certificate. It's another thing entirely to fly a UAS.
There's a serious need for educating recreational flyers. Right now, there are a lot of people buying drones and learning only the very basics of operation without understanding anything about addressing problems in flight or regulations. And it seems like common sense isn't built into a lot of folks, as this WTC incident points out.
I'm guessing that there's soon going to be some further differentiation in FAA certifications, with flight tests to qualify for flying drones larger than the typical models available on Amazon and at Costco.
Similar threads
