UAS: The FAA Tightens the Screws

[BigAl07]

In a story titled:
UAS: The FAA Tightens the Screws
Plane-ly Spoken
March 14, 2019 by Mark E. McKinnon

UAS operators will be facing greater oversight and inspections from local Flight Standards District Offices (FSDO) under a new National Policy recently issued by the FAA. The document requires all FSDOs to immediately update their 2019 National Work Program Guidelines to include new Required Surveillance Work Activities. (click the link below for the FULL story)


UAS: The FAA Tightens the Screws

 

[thefrozenhawaiian]

I hate to say it but we're seeing the consequences irresponsible drone use coming to bite us yet again.

 

[sadatoni]

I found this sentence interesting: Under this new system, when near mid-air collisions, accidents, incidents or compliance and enforcement actions reach a certain threshold, FSDOs must undertake additional Required Surveillance Work Activities.

 

[thefrozenhawaiian]

I found this sentence interesting: Under this new system, when near mid-air collisions, accidents, incidents or compliance and enforcement actions reach a certain threshold, FSDOs must undertake additional Required Surveillance Work Activities.

yeah I noticed that too. what I take that to mean is when enough "incidents" occur in a specific area FSDOs and probably local law enforcement will get tasked by the FAA to look into the registered/licensed drone pilots in that area, maybe find an excuse to start looking at peoples flight logs etc.

all that being said, despite the "scary" language of these policy updates the fact is that actually enforcing the UAS regs is incredibly difficult. the FAA just doesn't have the manpower to track down every single drone operator in the US. even registering your drones is kind of an "honor system" type thing. I was chatting with my grandfather who spent 35 years working for the FAA about this sort of thing and the long and short of it in his view was that drone registration regulations on a practical level are all but unenforceable just from the standpoint of available manpower if nothing else. alos coupled with the fact that enforcing drone regs is very far down the FAA priority list.

 

[djaco]

It still amazes me, when someone does something irresponsible with a drone, all drone operators are at risk, yet when someone shoots up a bunch of people, no one starts looking at all gun owners. Drones are small plastic radio controlled models, how did we get to this ridiculous situation. The FAA is supposed to oversee manned aircraft, not small models controlled by r/c.
Next they will have us register baseballs, golf balls and frisbees.

 

[Babaganoosh]

It still amazes me, when someone does something irresponsible with a drone, all drone operators are at risk, yet when someone shoots up a bunch of people, no one starts looking at all gun owners. Drones are small plastic radio controlled models, how did we get to this ridiculous situation. The FAA is supposed to oversee manned aircraft, not small models controlled by r/c.
Next they will have us register baseballs, golf balls and frisbees.

They absolutely do look at the rest of the gun owners. They do it thru legislation and new laws. Just like we are seeing happen with drones.

As with any subject matter new laws don't stop people who are intent on doing the wrong thing. That's why they are called criminals..

 

[WobblingWillie]

I'm sure that the primary focus will be on airport arrival and departure routes and emergency response areas.

 

[Jackcutrone]

I am sorry but I don’t see the problem. The.guidance says that when there are sufficient UAS incidents near an airport the FAA is going to try to conduct greater scrutiny at that airport. What other course should they take? It doesn’t say they are going charging all over the place looking for errant operators

 

[Bill combs]

They absolutely do look at the rest of the gun owners. They do it thru legislation and new laws. Just like we are seeing happen with drones.

As with any subject matter new laws don't stop people who are intent on doing the wrong thing. That's why they are called criminals..

its bugs me to no end when someone tries to use guns as a culprit or example

 

[Bill combs]

bad people do bad things its just that simple

 

[djaco]

its bugs me to no end when someone tries to use guns as a culprit or example

I'm not trying to say bad things about guns, what I am saying is that quadcopters/drones are not a danger to the public, unless someone does something stupid. A few people doing stupid things should not cause a knee jerk reaction against everyone, the gun issue was just to use a subject that can and has caused numerous deaths, yet I can buy one today without being vilified for doing so. The thought of more rules against me flying my r/c drone is absurd.

 

[BigAl07]

I'm not trying to say bad things about guns, what I am saying is that quadcopters/drones are not a danger to the public, unless someone does something stupid. A few people doing stupid things should not cause a knee jerk reaction against everyone, the gun issue was just to use a subject that can and has caused numerous deaths, yet I can buy one today without being vilified for doing so. The thought of more rules against me flying my r/c drone is absurd.

This created NO NEW RULES! None... Zero.. Zilche...

It just states that they are going to be more PROACTIVE and more REACTIVE going forward and it sets up procedures for doing so.

I repeat... this creates NO NEW RULES!

Now the new Hobby Rules... you're going to love those in the new future LOL! That's a whole other ball of wax outside of this topic.

 

[Thoraldus]

When a federal agency doesn't have sufficient manpower to meet all its defined objectives they will just go for the "low hanging fruit" with the manpower they have. IMHO

I doubt very much that FSDO personnel will ever step foot in my area out here in the boonies. (+6000' west slope of Rocky Mountains)

 

[Babaganoosh]

its bugs me to no end when someone tries to use guns as a culprit or example

It bugs me to no end when people don't understand the similarities when you use guns as an example. Usually it's because they are blinded by anti gun bias but I'm sure there's other reasons.

It's very similar in so many ways. You have an item that has a potential to kill people when used incorrectly. You have a person behind the trigger or rc remote controller the item. You have people who aren't familiar with intricacies of both items. You have a media who uses fear mongering when either of the items is used in a harmful way and the result is more scared and uneducated people. Eventually the "we need to do something about _____" insert guns or drones here. Cue the politician who don't really care about people, just their votes and to be seen "doing something about ____" once again insert guns or drones here. Politicians aren't educated or knowledgeable about either item but then proceed to make laws against them. End result is all the law abiding people have their hobbies made less enjoyable, more expensive, and with a stigma against them.

Sounds pretty accurate to me but what to I know.

 

[Jackcutrone]

Can we stick to drones as a topic. People on both sides of the gun control controversy have strongly held views and debate about them is good. But not here IMO

 

[Bigbird48]

I'm really curious as to how many people drones have killed? Theres so much worse then Drones or guns but you don't see much effort to make new laws to ban cars, or bad Dr's,U.S. vehicle deaths topped 40,000 in 2017, National Safety Council estimates. U.S. vehicle deaths barely declined in 2017 but remained notably higher than in 2015, according to a new report. The National Safety Council estimated automotive fatalities topped 40,000 for the second consecutive year.
Seems like if its necessary very little happens but if its a hobby of fun thing they want to stop it. I really wish people that make the rules had functioning BRAINS!!

 

[dronerdave]

you don't see much effort to make new laws to ban cars, or bad Dr's,U.S. vehicle deaths topped 40,000 in 2017

But the media did try to vilify SUV's for some time. Typical media BS you see on almost every channel. One thing I always remember is that flying model aircraft (in the USA) is a privilege, not a right. Fixed wing stuff has been around well before anybody was thinking of terrorist use and the media never attacked it like they are with the drone operators.The best we can do is follow the rules the FAA has put forth and hope it can be fine tuned more to our drone hobby down the road. We get lumped into the large (up to 55 LBS) drone catagory or commercial operations and at least IMO a Mavic isn't one to compare to a 30 pound home made FPV quad. Has anybody actually done a comprehensive risk assessment of something as small as a Mavic AC doing heavy damage to anybody or anything? The limiting factor will be if people continue to fly with an entitlement attitude that some have thinking they have a right to fly where and/or however they want.

 

[Wille]

This is very curious to me you being the United States.

You have a history of those states making up their own laws.
Marrying your cousins in Alabama, Poligamy, owning a Rocket Launcher
in Texas? (sorry only the weird ones come to mind).

I understand it is the "Federal" Aviation Authority, but do it's Drone laws really cover all 51 states?
Was it always this way, or did the FAA get more power in 2001?

 

[DroningOn]

This is very curious to me you being the United States.

You have a history of those states making up their own laws.
Marrying your cousins in Alabama, Poligamy, owning a Rocket Launcher
in Texas? (sorry only the weird ones come to mind).

I understand it is the "Federal" Aviation Authority, but do it's Drone laws really cover all 51 states?
Was it always this way, or did the FAA get more power in 2001?

It has NEVER been legal in this country to marry one’s sister nor has polymagy been legal anywhere. And while owning a “rocket launcher” is legal the amount of regulation and hoops to jump through that are required to do so would make an Australian blush. Where do non-Americans get this garbage from????

Oh, p.s. there are only 50 states

 

[dronerdave]

This is very curious to me you being the United States.

You have a history of those states making up their own laws.
Marrying your cousins in Alabama, Poligamy, owning a Rocket Launcher
in Texas? (sorry only the weird ones come to mind).

I understand it is the "Federal" Aviation Authority, but do it's Drone laws really cover all 51 states?
Was it always this way, or did the FAA get more power in 2001?

Your examples are hilarious. States do make law yet so do counties and cities. Some of these agencies try to regulate our privileges and/or rights and is why some end up in court. The FAA is part of the Department of Transportation & sets aircraft standards. The FAA has the power to regulate all aspects of civil aviation in the US and its territories as well as over its surrounding international waters. Its powers include the construction and operation of airports, air traffic management, the certification of personnel and aircraft.