FAA proposed rules for UAVs

[clipshot62]

A pilot friend of mine sent me links to the new FAA proposed guidelines for UAVs announced this morning.

Review
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcne ... gulations/

FAA pdf
http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Sm ... uation.php

 

[flyNfrank]

I'm glad they are only proposed rules at this time. But I have to think they are real close to what they roll with unless some convincing takes place on our side. I just read through some 80% of it, but all of what had to do with our aircraft. The one alternative that I spent the most time thinking over was of coarse Alternative #3. It includes such things as:

*would not travel higher than 400 feet AGL
*would not exceed an airspeed of 30 knots
*would be flown within visual line of sight
*first-person view would not be used during the operation
*would not travel farther than 1,500 feet away from the operator

I myself, as well as others, could write a book on their opinions on just these 5 that I added. I don't want to get in any arguments from those that may not agree with my opinion. So I wont go over all of them.

I would like to say something about the First-Person View(FPV) not being used the operation. To me that has to be that single most jacked up subject on the list. FPV is 95% of the hobby. It is the ONLY part that even attracted me in the 1st place. Remembering back to after my very 1st flight with a Phantom 2 Vision, my wife asked me what I thought. Even then I said it was so cool and I can't wait to see the video of the flight, but I can tell if the camera wasn't part of it, I could see getting bored with just flying it around. She said, Really? I said, Yeah...about like flying a kite on a windy day. And I said, Just to stand there and watch it from the ground wouldn't be much different then watching a bird fly around like they do.

Taking FPV away, would be the death of it. There is no real attraction whatsoever without the ability to view from a monitor and shoot video & pics. Someone somewhere has not put any thinking into things. How bad those companies feel that have invested into the manufacturing of FPV Products, ect must feel about this.

 

[Meta4]

maybe you need to read the other 20%.
Here's a summary from FAA
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/media/021515_sUAS_Summary.pdf

They aren't suggesting that cameras aren't allowed. They are saying aerial photography is one of the big uses for small drones.
Just that flying is done within visual line of sight and not depending on FPV systems - like goggles when flying off in the distance.
Plus . the proposed rules are for commercial use - and won't apply to recreational use.

 

[JKDSensei]

As a responsible person who does not fly in such a way as to endanger others or impose upon others, I find these knee jerk reaction moves by politicians to be insulting. Instead of attacking the hobby and "everyone" carte-blanc, they should instead be focusing on making examples of those few who prove they have no regard for others or any care to play by reasonable rules and stop making the enjoyment of life illegal.

Instead they want to throw down a gauntlet and stifle the entire hobby because of their misdirected fears.

Like gun laws, more legislation only hurts the law abiding, caring citizens. Noone who will use a drone in a dangerous or reckless manner is likely to be affected by any of the knee jerk rules that are being drafted out of emotional response.

Instead, many otherwise great people will be caught up in the legislative web of idiocy and become marred over something small like an accidental flight just out of bounds.

There are apparently too many humans telling us what we can and cannot do who are just plain incompetent or irrational.