Excellent news concerning Drones

tbstanto said:
I get it, you know the word "draconian". Congratulations.

Would you object to the creation of a certificate/licensure process? Make operators take an FAA written test demonstrating knowledge about airspace and FAR's as they relate to them. That would be a pretty good start. And maybe an age restriction? Then, if they do commit a violation, there is no complaint that they did not know they were breaking the rules.

Would those steps be considered "draconian"?

You have to take a test to operate a ham radio, how would this be different?
Click to expand...

Read my previous posts. I favor some smart regulations and certification to fly in high risk areas, like near airports or at higher altitudes.
 
PhilosopherPilot said:
Read my previous posts. I favor some smart regulations and certification to fly in high risk areas, like near airports or at higher altitudes.
Click to expand...

And what should be done with the tens of thousands of operators that have no idea what the rules/regulations are, think of these as just "toys", and are not responsible with them? There is no mention of regulations when you buy them from Amazon.com for $499.
 
tbstanto said:
And what should be done with the tens of thousands of operators that have no idea what the rules/regulations are, think of these as just "toys", and are not responsible? There is no mention of regulations when you buy them from Amazon.com for $499.
Click to expand...

READ MY PREVIOUS POSTS.

Change the manufacture process to keep them at low altitudes if bought off Amazon or from Bobs hobby shop. If you want a "commercial" version, you have to prove that you have a UAV certificate.

Include a CD or something in the documentation of EVERY UAV that includes rules about where they may be flown, including a Google Maps app that shows your present position in relation to areas that are sensitive, such as airports.

Look, there are any number of real solutions. But overarching, draconian (yes I said it again because it's the right word) regulations are not the answer.
 
Itchy said:
Why? Unless your buzzing your uncles house in a glider, it should never be an issue. Anyone operating can hear full scale noise an act appropriately.
Click to expand...

So are you suggesting that all operators should be required to hear? To what level? Is a medical required? Hearing test? What if I wear hearing aids, but I turn them off because the RC is loud? What if I want to wear earbuds with "Top Gun" soundtrack blasting when I fly it? Is there any rule against that?

If there is no regulation, you can not assume that people can "hear and avoid".

Oh, and it is You're - not your.
 
A Life Aloft said:
We need a little fleet of these puppies with some tiny hellfire missiles.....that'll show those little camera drones a thing or two. :)


Click to expand...


Clearly, that man has no regard for the safety of public. I mean, he is flying a miniature attack helicopter. Those things aren't allowed in the hands of the public because they are considered WMD's. And that thing looks to have a full miss out. BAN ASSAULT RC HELICOPTERS!
 
Sorry TBS, you got me on the your. You win.

You obviously have no idea what you are talking about, but you win. I bow to your great sense of regulation.
 
Itchy said:
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about, but you win. I bow to your great sense of regulation.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you finally figured it out! :):sarcasm:

If you say that people will "hear and avoid", you are assuming that the person can hear. If you say they will see and avoid, you are making assumptions that they have good vision. Can you operate these things when you have been drinking alcohol? How about using drugs? Responsible people would not do it, but are there any laws that prevent it?

If there is no regulation, you can not assume those things. How is my argument invalid?
 
tbstanto said:
Can you operate these things when you have been drinking alcohol? How about using drugs? Responsible people would not do it, but are there any laws that prevent it?

If there is no regulation, you can not assume those things. How is my argument invalid?
Click to expand...

Just listen to what you're saying. There are laws to prevent that kind of thing driving AND flying. But people still do it. Every. Single. Day.

I'm not against regulating "drones." But leave the hobbiest alone.
 
Last edited:
ATN_Pilot said:
So are you advocating getting rid of the laser laws? If not, then your point is invalid.
Click to expand...
Eh?
My point was there are already existing laws on the book to "prevent" these occurrences. They obviously don't weed out the bad characters. That was my point. If you go back to my first post in this thread, I stated that it was not the commercial operators crews have to worry about, it is the Richard Cranium with his new "toy".
How is it you want to twist those words?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top