Drones : Threat or Menace?

Henning said:
It's true, I know it first hand from a friend I have known since before we went to kindergarten together, the only reason he didn't become a serial killer is excellent parenting, but he's still a sociopathic psycho/arsonist that will torture animals, he just didn't go violent.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that the existence of people for whom it's apparently true proves that it's true for all of them?
 
yhuubert said:
Big question in this is how to define a drone. Is a $20 supermarket helicopter, model plane or quadcopter one? What about a $100 one? Does it depend on weight? Max altitude? Battery life? Where does a toy end?
Click to expand...

I favor an FAA certificate for anyone who charges money to fly a drone.

For persons flying a drone for non-commercial reasons then they should held to strict civil liability and/or prosecution for reckless endangerment if they fly outside of the current AMA R/C modelers guidelines.
 
JimNtexas said:
I favor an FAA certificate for anyone who charges money to fly a drone.

For persons flying a drone for non-commercial reasons then they should held to strict civil liability and/or prosecution for reckless endangerment if they fly outside of the current AMA R/C modelers guidelines.
Click to expand...
So someone should be charged with a felony for not following the rules of a private club? F'your world.
 
JimNtexas said:
I favor an FAA certificate for anyone who charges money to fly a drone.

For persons flying a drone for non-commercial reasons then they should held to strict civil liability and/or prosecution for reckless endangerment if they fly outside of the current AMA R/C modelers guidelines.
Click to expand...

So if I fly my little 3lb plastic toy around my house to take pictures of it, that should be just fine. But if my neighbor wants to pay me for some photos of his house to use in a real estate ad, I need an $8,000 private pilot's license or I'm a life threatening danger to the national airspace? Ok, that makes perfect sense.... :mad2:

I also have a huge problem with legislation that requires to pay to join a club (the AMA) in order to fly my owner personal model aircraft on my own personal property on my own personal time. I'm fine with a set of common sense rules that non-commercial users must abide by. I'm not ok with requiring membership.
 
I listened to the house hearing on this stuff yesterday and one thing that came up was the need for them to return to base if they loose signal etc. What if some guy is 2 miles away and had just maneuvered his "Drone" to avoid traffic coming his way when all of a sudden he loses signal and the "Drone" goes right back into the path of the aircraft?
 
I noticed a few of these consumer "Drones" weigh over 6 lbs and can carry a heavier load. The 3 lb argument is not reality. what if we are talking about a 10lb or 15+lb "Drones" as things to hit while flying?
 
JimNtexas said:
q1olFxy.png
Click to expand...


LOL! That's a keeper.
 
A requirement on the users will never work, as there are too many selfish ***holes around.

However, they are aircraft, and subject to the ADSB-out mandate just like the rest of us. With a microcontroller and GPS, a more enforceable mandate would be for the aircraft to ship with ADSB-out or limit altitude to 500 AGL. A side effect is that ADSB would become massively cheaper for the rest of us.

It could be defeated, but that would require a selfish, smart ***hole, a much more difficult combination.
 
MAKG1 said:
A requirement on the users will never work, as there are too many selfish ***holes around.

However, they are aircraft, and subject to the ADSB-out mandate just like the rest of us. With a microcontroller and GPS, a more enforceable mandate would be for the aircraft to ship with ADSB-out or limit altitude to 500 AGL. A side effect is that ADSB would become massively cheaper for the rest of us.

It could be defeated, but that would require a selfish, smart ***hole, a much more difficult combination.
Click to expand...

The user requirements will work fine if they are made simple enough. Most the problems to be seen in the early stages of adoption are simply due to ignorance of a few key issues. If there is an operations video <5minutes long, you can cover all those points and prevent 80%+ of the incidents from happening. Most people aren't malicious in their operations, they are just stupid.

Look to the recreational SCUBA industry to see how to best manage the risks and liability. They have done a very good job at maintaining safety across the industry in a popular sport that has very lethal potential.

Why do you think that the addition of ADS-B to drones will affect the costs to those with certified aircraft? :dunno: The marketplace doesn't function like that, if it did all certified glass panels would cost the same as experimental. You have to eliminate the legislated leverage the market has over the owners of certified aircraft in order for that to happen. The market will not lose the opportunity to fleece anyone at disadvantage.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
A requirement on the users will never work, as there are too many selfish ***holes around.
Click to expand...

I agree that there are selfish ***holes, but the fact that not everyone will care about safety should not stop us from educating the ones who will.
 
Drones, laser pointers, and guns all share something in common. They can be fun and/or useful devices, or they can be deadly in the hands of a dumb*ss or criminal.
 
woodchucker said:
Drones, laser pointers, and guns all share something in common. They can be fun and/or useful devices, or they can be deadly in the hands of a dumb*ss or criminal.
Click to expand...


And well over 99% of users of them fall on the non-deadly side of things, but government is so bored and life is so good, people demand the ridiculous: Put unreasonable mandates on the 99% in a futile effort to make the 1% stop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top