Separate names with a comma.
Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information
Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Boomerang, Jul 10, 2014.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcne ... t-flights/
that's scary. I guess I'm guilty of not officially commenting, basically for the reason he said it's just so darn complicated. I'll be making my voice heard through!
I wish the guys that made the fireworks videos had the forethought to linkthat article or the FAA comment or something :/
Thank you for sharing - I commented and passed on to a friend, hopefully more do the same!
I posted this before but repeating it here:
You can officially make comments on this and the FAA is obligated to review those comments:
http://www.regulations.gov/#!submitComm ... -0396-0001
You'll need to make them in a professional manner to be taken seriously. There's a guideline for comments here:
http://www.regulations.gov/docs/Tips_Fo ... mments.pdf
If someone wants to write up a template or paragraph or two that succinctly explains why commercial use of UAV should not be treated as aircraft, we can all cut and paste it and get everyone else to do the same.
This is what I wrote:
Well said Ian. I'll be using your statement if you don't mind with this added in after the paragraph about the FAA applying general aviation regulation to model aircraft:
"Instead of accepting the decision of the NTSB the FAA immediately appealed to the full NTSB board and doubled down on their efforts to outlaw commercial use of model aircraft. This can easily be viewed as a waste of tax payer dollars and quite honestly absurd. The FAA has been mandated by Congress to integrate UAVs into the NAS. This mission to punish those breaking no existing laws is a waste of resources and causing further delays to create a safe integration of UAV’s into the NAS."
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDe ... -0396-0001
Would somebody please sticky that link?
There are 12099 people registered on PhantomPilots alone, DJI alone has 135K followers on their facebood page, and we can't get more than 3500 people to give enough of a shite about their own hobby to spend 5 minutes intelligently commenting? C'mon people.
The number of replies has jumped about 1000 in the last couple days. We still have two weeks for submissions. I imagine the numbers will go up dramatically the closer we get to the 25th.
We need 1,000s more. Your average non-contentious issues get 10s of thousands of comments.
The crappy response will be used by the FAA to show that this is not a big deal. As I have often said, we are our own worst enemies.
AMA alone has 165,000 members and if every single one of the FAA responses were AMA members it means less than 2% responded. Then add in the non-AMA community and it tells the FAA that we just don't care.
I think a lot of people went to some of the various petitions that were floating around. Those are meaningless to the FAA and will have zero effect on anything.
Is there a way for the admins to send everyone a PM about commenting or making this a sticky?
Very well done. If you are looking for another job, I think you would do very well writing speeches for some of the politicians in Washington.
Yes, great writing. And thus I have inocculously bumped this topic
I know this isn't a popular view...but I don't care. It's pretty clear that as a community we're pretty divided. You've got the "do anything I want when I want, and the FFA has no authority" crowd and then the other side that advocates safe responsible flying, and we're NEVER going to agree.
Let them do their worst and clear out the riffraff.
It really does feel like no one really cares or cares to read. I posted in the FPV section about the FAA criminalizing FPV and nobody seemed to give a rats as. Oh well, I tried. I don't fly with FPV goggles, currently, but thought it would be nice to bring attention to the matter for all my brethren pilots. It's going to be a lot easier for the FAA to get something passed on criminalizing FPV then it is to criminalize drones, and they know most drone pilots use FPV.
I am not sure those things are mutually exclusive. I like to think I can advocate and practice safe responsible flying but I also think the FAA has got its head up its backside. Multi-rotors and FPV are not only fundamentally changing the RC space, they're placing entirely new demands on the NAS. Most importantly, they are introducing all sorts of new opportunities. The FAA has been negligent in their lack of readiness to meet these demands. Their lack of foresight has led them to make foolish and impulsive decisions in a failing attempt to fill the void.
Even under the direct orders of Congress, they have failed to make anything work even on a transitional basis.
So, I think there's a lot at stake and we should all care. Ask a realtor. Ask a farmer. Ask a firefighter. Ask a filmmaker. Ask an FPV enthusiast who flies responsibly. And you have to balance that with the interests of privacy, nuisance, public safety, etc. Not to mention keeping the skies safe for all the aircraft that are already flying in it.
I don't read the FPV section. In fact, I am so glad it exists because it means I don't have read the "which FPV should I get" posts 30 times a day! You should repost it in this thread.
What I posted in the FPV section was a direct link to this thread and another of the same matter, as to not make multiple threads of the same issue. just trying to call attention to the issue at hand since the FAA's ruling will highly impact any FPV'er out there.
Without doubt there are those that span both sides, people with keen minds and good intentions. I'd stand up for people like that, but you know I'm not talking about you.
the part of this position that confuses me is how you think the FAA is just going to clean out the riffraff and leave you alone to enjoy your hobby. They aren't trying to "clean out the riffraff" they want to regulate quadcopters and 5ghz FPV video transmission out of existence completely... so guess what I'm the riffraff, you're the riffraff, we're all the riffraff.
Sort of. From what I can see they want to stop all BLOS flying and/or the use of goggles. But there is so much more they want to do as well. Like cripple the model industry's ability to develop, test, and market new RC aircraft, require people to get permission to fly within 5 miles of an airport as opposed to simply notifying the airport, subject all modelers to enforcement using Part 91 manned aircraft rules as they see fit, and they laid the groundwork to use their ability to formulate new rules affecting airspace that may ultimately end much of the current RC hobby (aerobatic flying, soaring, jets, etc.)
So this thing is so much more than just the VLOS/FPV googles issue.
I live on a farm in rural Indiana, so I'll always be able to fly. If the FAA requires us to be licensed, I'll comply, in fact I hope it's that easy. Don't really care about FPV...so I guess that covers it.