He's gonna ruin it for everyone!

[eckoner]

I have been flying RC's for years and have seen people get hurt by RC Helicopters, Fixed WIngs, Even Cars and Boats.
I have prided myself on considering myself a responsible pilot however i have at times flown higher than 400 ft.
I have prided myself on considering myself a responsible pilot however i have at times used my fatsharks or monitor
I have prided myself on considering myself a responsible pilot however i have at times flown over people and moving objects

These are things in some opinions are the worst thing i could do because i'm gonna ruin it for everyone else.
I remember last year i put stickers on my phantom after painting it black and some here were up in arms lol (he's gonna ruin it for everyone else) lol that was pretty funny but some here were serious in thier opinions. lol

The funny thing is i would bet every single pilot here has done something with thier Phantom that they could be spanked for.
I assure you every single person here period!

So as i step off my soapbox i ask you all a very serious question.

When you guys say "He's gonna ruin it for everyone" what does that really mean? What in your mind is going to realistically happen to Phantoms and the pilots who do nothing wrong?

Please have some understanding of our constitution, law, legal precedent and personal rights before embarrassing yourselves lol.

 

[BigTulsa]

I have been flying RC's for years and have seen people get hurt by RC Helicopters, Fixed WIngs, Even Cars and Boats.
I have prided myself on considering myself a responsible pilot however i have at times flown higher than 400 ft.
I have prided myself on considering myself a responsible pilot however i have at times used my fatsharks or monitor
I have prided myself on considering myself a responsible pilot however i have at times flown over people and moving objects

These are things in some opinions are the worst thing i could do because i'm gonna ruin it for everyone else.
I remember last year i put stickers on my phantom after painting it black and some here were up in arms lol (he's gonna ruin it for everyone else) lol that was pretty funny but some here were serious in thier opinions. lol

The funny thing is i would bet every single pilot here has done something with thier Phantom that they could be spanked for.
I assure you every single person here period!

So as i step off my soapbox i ask you all a very serious question.

When you guys say "He's gonna ruin it for everyone" what does that really mean? What in your mind is going to realistically happen to Phantoms and the pilots who do nothing wrong?

Please have some understanding of our constitution, law, legal precedent and personal rights before embarrassing yourselves lol.

I've done all of these things probably to the same minor extent you have, as I'm sure most or all of us has.

My issue is with the knuckleheads who crank their UAVs into the stratosphere to prove how high they can ascend.

With the chuckleheads who knowingly fly over crowds of people oblivious to the safety hazard they are creating. And at low altitudes to elicit a response.

Since I don't have an FPV system outside of my Vision app (which really isn't that great in the sunlight and I usually have a spotter when I use it) I don't worry about that so much. Not until I build a hex with a badass FPV system that is.

When I see people like that, I think "they're part of the problem". I typically get attacked by said person for being too critical of them.

I just don't want to see our hobby regulated into oblivion.

Especially as we see more and more news reports on UAVs that come in a critical light. It's the attention that we don't need to make our case. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[chuddly]

I don't know the back story on what prompted this post but let's try to steer it in a good direction . I think the reason guys get so vocal about things is the fact that "video evidence" is posted of the offence. Like you said we have all done it. But post g it here or YouTube or wherever is inviting other people (people not in the hobby and looking for ammo against us) free evidence and a solid argument to stand on to vocalize their opinions again our hobby. I'm not saying I condone the poor behavior or the rants of people on this site...but a saying my grandpa used to say comes to mind "don't give the Nazi's bullets from your pack"

 

[Wedeliver]

I take issue with the 400' elevation rule. Right next to where I live is a mountain, Timber Mountain. It is 1000' high and I am at the base. In order for an airplane to fly over Timber Mountain they must be over 1000' up in the air. I think this is an important issue. For instance. you go down into the Grand Canyon at some place where planes cannot fly. Should the 400' rule apply there? I have no idea if my thinking is correct, but it feels good and I am interested in the debate.

 

[BigTulsa]

I take issue with the 400' elevation rule. Right next to where I live is a mountain, Timber Mountain. It is 1000' high and I am at the base. In order for an airplane to fly over Timber Mountain they must be over 1000' up in the air. I think this is an important issue. For instance. you go down into the Grand Canyon at some place where planes cannot fly. Should the 400' rule apply there? I have no idea if my thinking is correct, but it feels good and I am interested in the debate.

typically it's 400' AGL, not MSL, obviously.

Let me ask you this. If you need to fly your copter over a peak 1000' high, do you still have the vehicle within your line of sight? Or are you relying on FPV? I think that's part of the debate going on right now. Flying, regardless of whether it's private pilots or RC pilots, is about situational awareness. With FPV only, you simple cannot have the same situational awareness, and I think that is what us as hobbyists AND the FAA are hashing out. 20 years ago, we don't have this debate because the technology wasn't there to let just anyone fly these things like they are now.

I'm not saying that's right or wrong. I'm saying that's how it is right now. We have the power to affect the discussion, and some people are unknowingly skewing the discussion towards more stringent regulation.

 

[eckoner]

I don't know the back story on what prompted this post but let's try to steer it in a good direction . I think the reason guys get so vocal about things is the fact that "video evidence" is posted of the offence. Like you said we have all done it. But post g it here or YouTube or wherever is inviting other people (people not in the hobby and looking for ammo against us) free evidence and a solid argument to stand on to vocalize their opinions again our hobby. I'm not saying I condone the poor behavior or the rants of people on this site...but a saying my grandpa used to say comes to mind "don't give the Nazi's bullets from your pack"

Not really too much back story other than i see on other post;s and got a few myself of people saying i'm gonna ruin it for everyone.

My best friend who is a seargent for the LAPD who was out with me over the July 4th weekend flying called these guys a bunch of uneducated idiots because it seems the phrase is just echo'd without anyone actually reading the details of the offense they are refering to.

Thats just funny to me is all!

 

[ProfessorStein]

I'm a bit confused by your last line.

Last I checked, the founding fathers did not write anything about drones into the constitution, and there has been little legal precedent as of yet in terms of flying quads. There is no statute that gives one the inalienable right to operate any sort of RC craft, as far as I know. It's a privilege, just like driving a car or piloting a Cessna.
But there certainly are a number of communities, neighborhoods, cities and states that have moved or are moving to severely restrict the flying of UAVs by private citizens. So... at the very least... we could start there. The more stupid people get with their Phantoms or whatever, and the more that stupidity makes news, the more those restrictions are likely to come to a town near you. That, in my mind, would "ruin it".

http://news.msn.com/us/cities-and-state ... ban-drones

 

[eckoner]

I take issue with the 400' elevation rule. Right next to where I live is a mountain, Timber Mountain. It is 1000' high and I am at the base. In order for an airplane to fly over Timber Mountain they must be over 1000' up in the air. I think this is an important issue. For instance. you go down into the Grand Canyon at some place where planes cannot fly. Should the 400' rule apply there? I have no idea if my thinking is correct, but it feels good and I am interested in the debate.

typically it's 400' AGL, not MSL, obviously.

Let me ask you this. If you need to fly your copter over a peak 1000' high, do you still have the vehicle within your line of sight? Or are you relying on FPV? I think that's part of the debate going on right now. Flying, regardless of whether it's private pilots or RC pilots, is about situational awareness. With FPV only, you simple cannot have the same situational awareness, and I think that is what us as hobbyists AND the FAA are hashing out. 20 years ago, we don't have this debate because the technology wasn't there to let just anyone fly these things like they are now.

I'm not saying that's right or wrong. I'm saying that's how it is right now. We have the power to affect the discussion, and some people are unknowingly skewing the discussion towards more stringent regulation.

The FPV stuff bothers me too because most videos i see where FPV is used is by guys who live in rural area's and the most they will hurt is someones bales of hay. However i dont feel comfortable flying FPV in the middle of Los Angeles because of what you mentioned "Situational Awareness" and i agree 100%

 

[eckoner]

I'm a bit confused by your last line.

Last I checked, the founding fathers did not write anything about drones into the constitution, and there has been little legal precedent as of yet in terms of flying quads. There is no statute that gives one the inalienable right to operate any sort of RC craft, as far as I know. It's a privilege, just like driving a car or piloting a Cessna.
But there certainly are a number of communities, neighborhoods, cities and states that have moved or are moving to severely restrict the flying of UAVs by private citizens. So... at the very least... we could start there. The more stupid people get with their Phantoms or whatever, and the more that stupidity makes news, the more those restrictions are likely to come to a town near you. That, in my mind, would "ruin it".

http://news.msn.com/us/cities-and-state ... ban-drones

I want regulation
I want to be required to take some stupid test and give them my name and the SN of my Phantom
Thats what i want.

So when someone does something stupid with it the onus is on Law Enforcement to enforce whatever laws we put on the books at that time. Right now it's the wild wild west and i have 12 year old kids trying to criticize me for something they have heard echo'd over and over and they dont even know what they are talking about lol

 

[ProfessorStein]

I want regulation
I want to be required to take some stupid test and give them my name and the SN of my Phantom
Thats what i want.

But what if it goes beyond simple registration?

What if it results in you being outright banned from flying where you like to fly/need to fly.
I once had dreams of capturing stunning shots while flying my Phantom through the Grand Canyon or Joshua Tree. But now that's strictly forbidden (and yes, they absolutely enforce it)... even though the stupid tourist helicopters can still do whatever they want through there (how is that fair??)

Frankly, I don't see many 12 year old kids flying Phantoms. And I still think it's a bit better than the "wild wild west". What I see is a hobby community that is trying to police itself. Some times more successful than others. I don't see a problem with the occasional infraction. But when it starts to become habit... when a pilot can't go out without "pushing it"... then I think there's a problem.

 

[BigTulsa]

I want regulation
I want to be required to take some stupid test and give them my name and the SN of my Phantom
Thats what i want.

But what if it goes beyond simple registration?

What if it results in you being outright banned from flying where you like to fly/need to fly.
I once had dreams of capturing stunning shots while flying my Phantom through the Grand Canyon or Joshua Tree. But now that's strictly forbidden (and yes, they absolutely enforce it)... even though the stupid tourist helicopters can still do whatever they want through there (how is that fair??)

Frankly, I don't see many 12 year old kids flying Phantoms. And I still think it's a bit better than the "wild wild west". What I see is a hobby community that is trying to police itself. Some times more successful than others. I don't see a problem with an infraction or two. But when it starts to become habit... when a pilot can't go out without "pushing it"... then I think there's a problem.

And here lately, as proven with both the incident I found from Florida that happened last week, and the incident in Alabama (which was handled quite well by a poster on this board)...as well as this new incident near the GW Bridge, we're not being painted in the greatest of light.

If these quads didnt' have cameras on them, they'd be a non issue for the most part.

 

[seminole360]

In my opinion the worst case scenario is the FAA restricts flying drones/rc airplanes (whatever you want to call them) to designated areas like RC clubs.

 

[ProfessorStein]

I guess it all depends on what you use your drone for. I bought mine as an aerial photography/videography platform. Flying in a designated area/field would be next to useless in that regard. It would essentially shut my hobby/parttime business down. So, yes, for me that's a HORRIBLE worst case scenario.

 

[seminole360]

...So, yes, for me that's a HORRIBLE worst case scenario.

Agreed... I'd pretty much pack it in at that point and find a new hobby.

 

[macheung]

What's wrong with using fatsharkd or monitors?

 

[ProfessorStein]

What's wrong with using fatsharkd or monitors?

Nothing. Unless you're using them as your sole navigation tool. No current FPV system is going to give you the amount of environmental awareness you need to safely pilot for any length of time. You just don't know what hazzards are lurking in your blindspots.

 

[BigTulsa]

What's wrong with using fatsharkd or monitors?

As the professor said, nothing per se.

But you're not going to be able to see that hawk dive bombing you from $600 fatshark goggles. Line of site or a spotter if you're using goggles. I've had medium size birds take a run at mine already.

 

[seminole360]

What's wrong with using fatsharkd or monitors?

In a nutshell, the FAA banning the use of goggles to fly model aircraft.

https://www.federalregister.gov/article ... l-aircraft

 

[eckoner]

I want regulation
I want to be required to take some stupid test and give them my name and the SN of my Phantom
Thats what i want.

But what if it goes beyond simple registration?

What if it results in you being outright banned from flying where you like to fly/need to fly.
I once had dreams of capturing stunning shots while flying my Phantom through the Grand Canyon or Joshua Tree. But now that's strictly forbidden (and yes, they absolutely enforce it)... even though the stupid tourist helicopters can still do whatever they want through there (how is that fair??)

Frankly, I don't see many 12 year old kids flying Phantoms. And I still think it's a bit better than the "wild wild west". What I see is a hobby community that is trying to police itself. Some times more successful than others. I don't see a problem with the occasional infraction. But when it starts to become habit... when a pilot can't go out without "pushing it"... then I think there's a problem.

So lets say i fly my Phantom into City Hall and hurt the mayor, he gets pissed and says no one can fly in the city of Los Angeles.
Ok so i live 3 mins away from LA borders. I go over to Culver City (Oh joy) But that will never happen.

I think it's really about understanding how regulation/restrictions work.

I can tell you this (IMO)
The Feds will never never never outright put a blanket ban on what we are doing and if you think so i got an iceberg for ya!
It will be left up to counties and individual organizations to rightfully so say yes you can or no you cannot fly that here.
To be honest with you i dont have a problem with that and i dont understand why anyone would.

Also i agree with a community policing itself but the blatantly funny thing is the ones trying to police continuously spread propaganda and hyperbole that simply is not factual, then all of the other clones start reciting the same non-factual crap and i'm sorry but i'm a bit to educated to listen to that over and over and over. Thats why i say you guys need to read the laws for yourselves then form opinion because most of the people peeping here unfortunately have no clue what they are talking about.

 

[eckoner]

I'm a bit confused by your last line.

Last I checked, the founding fathers did not write anything about drones into the constitution

Nor did they right anything about citizens having the right to own ASSULT RIFFLES! lol