We have a lot of questions about "drones." I don't know how many come from Americans, but often it seems the authors are not aware of the evolution of regulations in the USA. If you fly in the USA, you should be aware of this new regulation effective February 25, 2019:

https://contentsharing.net/actions/...0n_X-ZglYpZ7z_drehc4-BEx0DtraGHsskbv7PPB9ZEVG

I do not know the penalties for non-compliance. The old rule only required that the number be posted inside "drone" and accessible without the use of any tool, which of course, I have done.

 

https://www.faa.gov/uas/ might help also.

 

I registered my property as a no fly zone for drones. Any that I see will be shot at...

 

This fight will continue.

https://dronebusiness.center/noflyzone-is-no-more-10537/

 

Required registration of toys -- Ya gotta love bureaucrats

One wonders how 'they' feel about the 'specter' of payload-toting trained birds (of the 'feathered variety') bearing leg-tag mounted radio receivers/cameras (so as to facilitate long-range 'command-ability')

Psssst! Big-Bro -- Buy a clue! - Everything-but-everything is 'weaponizable'! --- Instead of regulating 'sticks and stones' perhaps you might give robust enforcement of existing law prohibitive of inherently criminal activity a whirl? --- Ah! I see! - A 'tasty' placebo indeed is reactive legislation -- golly, golly!

SMH
HP

 

One wonders how 'they' feel about the 'specter' of payload-toting trained birds (of the 'feathered variety') bearing leg-tag mounted radio receivers/cameras (so as to facilitate long-range 'command-ability')

HP it's like u say! Cuz of idiot legislators law is totally knee-jerk! So they won't feel anything abt it until some moron gives them excuse to try to stop crime by outlawing and punishing everything EXCEPT root criminality...

Now I'm nervous trying to figure how many crows it takes to carry tzar bomb!

 

The old rule only required that the number be posted inside "drone" and accessible without the use of any tool, which of course, I have done.

"Although this rule was flexible and allowed the registration marking to be placed in an enclosed compartment, law enforcement officials and FAA partners have expressed concerns about the safety risks a concealed explosive device could pose to first responders when opening a compartment to find a registration number."

First, I wonder how critical it is for "first responders" to have the registration number to begin with. What are they going to do with it during the "first response" phase on an incident?

Second, it strikes me as the same old fallacy that makes an argument based on the assumption that evil doers will follow the rules? "Hey, Mr. Terrorist, be sure to put that FAA registration number that we know you applied for and received on the outside of the drone you're going to pack with explosives and fly into some public event. If you don't, we'll come after you!"

 

Not a single drone incident that I have read about involved registered drones or pilots. While extreme and not a drone per se, was 9/11 perpetrated by appropriately licensed and registered pilots?

 

No they weren't registered. However, there were some of middle eastern decent who stopped by a small town airport inquiring about flying lessons.

Now the person that was asked didn't put two and two together until after 9-11. I'm sure that was inquiry was done elsewhere in the country as well.

 

No they weren't registered. However, there were some of middle eastern decent who stopped by a small town airport inquiring about flying lessons.

Now the person that was asked didn't put two and two together until after 9-11. I'm sure that was inquiry was done elsewhere in the country as well.

Gee, I recall going into a small town airport and inquiring about flying lessons.

Seems like lots of people of all kinds go to small town airports and inquire about flying lessons all the time.

The seemingly more suspicious behavior was the one (ones?) that went to an airline flight training facility, taking perfectly legal and normal use of their public relations sponsored programs to let civilians get familiar with what is involved in flying an airliner by getting time in their simulators. Those programs usually, but not always, include all of the normal phases of flight. But this person was only interested in the in-flight portion and not in takeoff or landing. Afterwards, everyone was quick to say that this was a red flag and should have been reported. Uh, no. It wasn't a red flag. It was not out of the ordinary at all. People that do those courses are interested in all kind of things and naturally tend to want to focus on what they are interested in and skip what they aren't since their actual time in the simulator is very limited. Lots of people want to fly the simulator around the big city buildings or through mountain passes. Many of those flights end in intentionally flying the plane into a building or mountain. The training facility doesn't care since it's not real training and they want the folks to leave happy. When I was with a group that went with on one of those events all I was really interested in was landing the plane because I figured that that was the most interesting and challenging part of flying a large aircraft. Should they have called the FBI because I might be planning to hijack a plane, kill the cockpit crew, and fly the airplane to another country and land it there with all my hostages?

 

Nobody gave it a thought. This person stopped his 18 wheeler to inquire. Hell, till 9-11 happen most would think it was someone wanting to get new skills.

 

Nobody gave it a thought. This person stopped his 18 wheeler to inquire. Hell, till 9-11 happen most would think it was someone wanting to get new skills.

I missed something. I don't get the reference to someone stopping his 18 wheeler.

 

I missed something. I don't get the reference to someone stopping his 18 wheeler.

They were passing through. This was at small town with an airport, on US287, about a couple of hours from you. All it did to me was re-enforce that hindsight is 20-20.

 

They were passing through. This was at small town with an airport, on US287, about a couple of hours from you. All it did to me was re-enforce that hindsight is 20-20.

There are certainly plenty of small towns with airports up that way -- I've flown into and out of most of them -- and all of them get a regular stream of people walking in asking about learning to fly. It is, after all, what many of the operations at those small airports are there for.

So I still don't understand what hindsight being 20-20 really has to do with it. The notion of 20-20 hindsight is that, after the fact, you realize that there was something you could have or should have seen or done differently. I just doesn't apply if there's nothing you could have or should have done differently.

If a cop pulls someone over for speeding and gives them a ticket and the stop goes exactly like nearly every other stop they've ever made and it later turns out that the person they stopped was on their way to commit mass murder (and does so), what does the infamous 20-20 hindsight say that the cop should have done differently? Nothing!

What should those flight schools have done differently? And why?

 

every state has different laws for operating drones, it is fully law able to operate it under recreational hobby or as a video vlogger, but some specific areas are a no-fly zone and you have to need special permission from property owner to use it.

By "state," I assume you mean country. In the United States, airspace is controlled by the FAA. There may be some add-ons by states applicable to drones (e.g., a state could assess taxes on drones as they do personal aircraft, restrictions on flying from public parks, use by state agencies, landing fees), and any liability claim would probably be adjudicated in a state court. That is distinct from common carriers covered by tariffs and other Federal laws (https://planecrashlawyersnetwork.com/liability/ ).

The fact that one is operating as a hobbyist does not modify applicable Federal regulations for such operation.

 

What the heck is that rule supposed to solve? Are terrorist having trouble getting there own number?


eT

 

The news had a story that a division of Google ("Wings") is now delivering packages by drone in a limited number of places.

However, I'm wondering about who/how is going to manage the additional air traffic? Are these drones going to be flying in conventional "navigable air space" as defined by the FAA or only at a few 1000 feet above ground level? There are 100s of high rise buildings in large cities so it seems the drones will have to fly in regular airspace along with all the manned aircraft already up there. .

 

I ain't sure how they'll work it all out. But I can't wait. Amazon.....same day delivery.

It will probably take A.I. What a mess.

Maybe power line corridors.

 

This is an old thread, but here is an update (see attachment, highlighting is mine). That 400,000 new commercial drone operations surprises me! Total AMA Membership is only 195,000, and it has been around a long time.

 

The news had a story that a division of Google ("Wings") is now delivering packages by drone in a limited number of places.

However, I'm wondering about who/how is going to manage the additional air traffic? Are these drones going to be flying in conventional "navigable air space" as defined by the FAA or only at a few 1000 feet above ground level? There are 100s of high rise buildings in large cities so it seems the drones will have to fly in regular airspace along with all the manned aircraft already up there. .

Cruise missiles have been able to fly around and between buildings, avoiding the hotels the press are in, on their way to the target. This is now old technology so I can see that drones should be able to do much the same. They would however still need to avoid each other!