Ban Drones

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 161 - 180 of total 590 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
squishy

Mountain climber
Jul 30, 2015 - 12:26pm PT
http://www.wdrb.com/story/29670583/update-drone-owner-disputes-suspects-claims-produces-video-claiming-to-show-flight-path
nature

climber
Boulder, CO
Jul 30, 2015 - 12:49pm PT
don't blow my cover man! ;-)


oooppps... that pesky data that gets in the way of a good lie
squishy

Mountain climber
Jul 31, 2015 - 09:27am PT
lol...well...sorry to burst this for you...but elevation telemetry data on drones is not very accurate and usually is just a reference to where it took off, not it's true height.. I have seen more than enough baro readings on those boards to say they cannot be trusted. I'm not saying that's the case here, but we much acknowledge that fact too..

I had a naza that would never take off because it always thought it was under ground and the safety code kept it from arming. I had to disable it for the client.
NutAgain!

Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
Jul 31, 2015 - 10:52am PT
For any legislation related to this stuff- just considering a vertical plane above a person's property line would be an overly simplistic and insufficient way of measuring a person's reasonable expectation of privacy in their own home, let alone outside in their back yard.

A couple of weeks ago I had a drone hovering in front of the balcony of my house, definitely not more than 30-50 feet horizontally away and 10-20 feet higher, sometimes level with my house. No other ground-based person would ever have this view because I'm on the top of a hill, with a line of site over all the houses below mine. I normally feel comfortable being naked in my living room or bedroom, and only someone with a telescope spotting from half a mile away could make a line of site into a small part of my living room. This drone would have a very clear view looking in to all parts of my living room and bedroom. Should I need to buy curtains because drones have a right to hang out there?

They can do it without technically crossing my property line, just by hovering off to the side in an adjacent property.

So any laws about privacy zones in proximity to private property should be written with something like an inverted cone or pyramid like controlled airspace around airports. The idea is not to protect take-off and landing paths, but to restrict line-of-site views from within a certain physical distance. Of course powerful large optical lenses added to drones will still be able to skirt around the intents of the legislation, unless they make very conservative rules.
overwatch

climber
Jul 31, 2015 - 11:19am PT
I am not going back through this whole thread (talk about droning on) to find out maybe somebody already posted something but I would expect a response to the droners' right to fly with some kind of signal jammer similar to an EMP that just knocks them out of the sky without resort to firearms. you know it's coming if it's not already here.

the albatross

Gym climber
Flagstaff
Jul 31, 2015 - 06:39pm PT
Not sure if this has been posted or not on this thread, an interesting perspective with video on the drones which are harassing wildland firefighting aircraft (includes threats of prosecution for murder). Just home from a fire assignment up in Oregon, where a drone was spotted hovering over a wildfire. Please, if you own drones, do not be idiotic enough to use them around emergency situations without proper authorization.


http://www.myfoxla.com/story/29665536/a-pilots-view-of-drones-from-the-cockpit#.Vbo-b_Dqjhc.facebook


Until recently Captain Ryan Hales never worried about unmanned aerial vehicles - also known as drones. But, now, as he flies over wildfires to drop chemical retardant, he not only worries about watching for other aircraft, birds and thick drifting smoke, he thinks about the drones that might be out there. Another risk he describes as "huge" and worrisome.

San Bernardino County officials are cracking down on illegal drone operations. Supervisors are offering a hefty $75,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those who interrupted firefighting operations by flying drones during the North, Mill 2 and Lake fires.

RELATED: A Forest Service Pilot Speaks Out on Drone Dangers

Supervisor James Ramos says, "We have asked drone operators to keep their drones away from the fires. They have ignored us. They know their drones are putting lives at risk."

When asked about shooting down drones Sheriff John McMahon says it depends on the altitude and position of the craft. "It's a possibility," he adds.

Meanwhile, District Attorney Mike Ramos is blunt when he says to drone operators, "I just want you to know that if an intentional act of a drone was to cause one of these wonderful men and women fighting fires to go down and be injured or worse scenario killed... or another civilian on the ground .. we will prosecute you for murder."

Chewybacca

Trad climber
Kelly Morgan, Whitefish MT
Jul 31, 2015 - 08:50pm PT
Hey Squishy. Thanks for your comments here. I support responsible use of drones.

I've spent a fair amount of time in manned rotary winged aircraft and once had the experience of an auto-rotation landing (possibly the most helpless feeling I've ever had).

My question, are multi-prop drones capable of a relatively controlled landing if they lose power?
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 31, 2015 - 10:12pm PT
Drone ( shadow is seen in lower-edge, center-left on the first shot )

That's on my list. Kites are legal in National Parks / Wilderness.
nature

climber
Boulder, CO
Aug 1, 2015 - 09:32am PT
My question, are multi-prop drones capable of a relatively controlled landing if they lose power?

no - it falls out of the sky like a rag doll. which in a sense is a good thing since that's really what you want (rather then it having any horizontal component which is unpredictable).

If a quad loses one motor it can no longer fly. a hex, octo or X8 will continue to fly and depending on the controller you might not even notice. it might also rotate as there's an even number of clockwise and counter-clockwise rotating motors so if you take one out it'll want to yaw.

I flew around this morning. was a lovely day to be up in the air. didn't see a single drone. In fact all the pilots/instructors at the airport are really interested in seeing the technology so i'll probably do a demo in a couple weeks at their friday afternoon BBQ



in those photos in the first one you can see the white controller in the guys hand. f*#king phantom owners. f*#kers flying in the park. too bad the POS didn't loose power and take the 3000' freefall and end up in a million pieces. asshats.
i'm gumby dammit

Sport climber
da ow
Aug 4, 2015 - 12:16am PT
I like to fly, but if some drone invades my space without my permission, you know whats going to happen.

Yeah we know. You'll take it out like it's a can of biscuits.
squishy

Mountain climber
Aug 4, 2015 - 09:50am PT
wow thanks for the creative and original input, you scare monger...look at what you have become, over another subject, so biased..it's likes a subjective autism...unable to transcend...

I can throw out links and quotes too, so what?

Time Mag: http://time.com/3975103/robotic-sports-nfl/?xid=fbshare

and check this out bro!! http://droneworlds.com/

Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Aug 4, 2015 - 10:05am PT
Squishy, get real. There is or are some lunatics loose who are endangering
the lives of hundreds of people. If you can't admit that then you have issues.
This isn't some fun little video game.
squishy

Mountain climber
Aug 4, 2015 - 10:09am PT
If what you say is true, why are they not being caught or sought? Don't we have existing laws against such things?

Basically what you are painting for me is that we have laws that we cannot enforce..It's like saying "stop or I'll shoot" when you lack a gun...right?

I agree there might be some stupid people out there doing dumb things. Have I advocated once to not stopping them? I say go stop them, it's the people doing it..banning drones will do nothing to solve your problem..
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Aug 4, 2015 - 11:12am PT
Maybe they should start enforcing existing laws.

"Attempting to interfere with the operation of an aircraft" is already a felony. You can get twenty years for it.

This ass hole got fourteen years in the Federal Joint:

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/03/11/california-man-walloped-with-14-year-sentence-for-shining-laser-at-helicopter

His thing was shining lasers at aircraft. Fourteen years seems light to me.

The Feds can hit renegade drone pilots with the same shithammer, if they want. But it's more fun to be a Star, and go Hollywood with TV *press conferences*, whining about how there ought to be a law, than it is to just do their damn job with the tools we've already given them.

The "first responders" are great at busting idiots who shine lasers at them. Google "point lasers at planes arrests", and you'll mostly find stories about fools pointing lasers at police helicopters. The cops take it very seriously when they're the victim, not so much when non-cops are victims.
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Aug 4, 2015 - 12:16pm PT
cops take it very seriously when they're the victim, not so much when non-cops are victims.

You're probably onto something there, Chaz.
big ears

Trad climber
?
Aug 4, 2015 - 05:17pm PT
Smuggling drugs...... Can't decide if this is a pro drone argument or anti drone argument lol

http://www.vice.com/read/a-drone-dropped-a-bunch-of-drugs-in-an-ohio-prison-yard-ending-in-chaos-vgtrn-999?utm_souce=vicefbus
nature

climber
Boulder, CO
Aug 4, 2015 - 06:06pm PT
^^^^ Hey! I have an idea. Let's do the same with guns.
nature

climber
Boulder, CO
Aug 4, 2015 - 06:19pm PT
Truth is DMT none of that will ever happen. Ever. Not for the hobbiest.

But here's a good read for you. This is are the conditions set forth in current 333 Exemptions by the FAA allowing for commercial operations. Sorry for the long read.

Conditions and Limitations
In this grant of exemption, Kentucky Windage UAV, LLC is hereafter referred to as
the operator.
Failure to comply with any of the conditions and limitations of this grant of exemption will be
grounds for the immediate suspension or rescission of this exemption.
1. Operations authorized by this grant of exemption are limited to the AgEagle Robotic
Aircraft System when weighing less than 55 pounds including payload. Proposed
operations of any other aircraft will require a new petition or a petition to amend this
exemption.
2. Operations for the purpose of closed-set motion picture and television filming are
not permitted.
3. The UA may not be operated at a speed exceeding 87 knots (100 miles per hour). The
exemption holder may use either groundspeed or calibrated airspeed to determine
compliance with the 87 knot speed restriction. In no case will the UA be operated at
airspeeds greater than the maximum UA operating airspeed recommended by the
aircraft manufacturer.
4. The UA must be operated at an altitude of no more than 400 feet above ground level
(AGL). Altitude must be reported in feet AGL.
5. The UA must be operated within visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC at all times.
This requires the PIC to be able to use human vision unaided by any device other than
corrective lenses, as specified on the PIC’s FAA-issued airman medical certificate or
U.S. driver’s license.
6. All operations must utilize a visual observer (VO). The UA must be operated within
the visual line of sight (VLOS) of the PIC and VO at all times. The VO may be used
to satisfy the VLOS requirement as long as the PIC always maintains VLOS
capability. The VO and PIC must be able to communicate verbally at all times;
electronic messaging or texting is not permitted during flight operations. The PIC
must be designated before the flight and cannot transfer his or her designation for the
duration of the flight. The PIC must ensure that the VO can perform the duties
required of the VO.
7. This exemption and all documents needed to operate the UAS and conduct its
operations in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated in this grant of
4
exemption, are hereinafter referred to as the operating documents. The operating
documents must be accessible during UAS operations and made available to the
Administrator upon request. If a discrepancy exists between the conditions and
limitations in this exemption and the procedures outlined in the operating documents,
the conditions and limitations herein take precedence and must be followed.
Otherwise, the operator must follow the procedures as outlined in its operating
documents. The operator may update or revise its operating documents. It is the
operator’s responsibility to track such revisions and present updated and revised
documents to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request. The
operator must also present updated and revised documents if it petitions for extension
or amendment to this grant of exemption. If the operator determines that any update
or revision would affect the basis upon which the FAA granted this exemption, then
the operator must petition for an amendment to its grant of exemption. The FAA’s
UAS Integration Office (AFS−80) may be contacted if questions arise regarding
updates or revisions to the operating documents.
8. Any UAS that has undergone maintenance or alterations that affect the UAS operation
or flight characteristics, e.g., replacement of a flight critical component, must undergo
a functional test flight prior to conducting further operations under this exemption.
Functional test flights may only be conducted by a PIC with a VO and must remain at
least 500 feet from other people. The functional test flight must be conducted in such
a manner so as to not pose an undue hazard to persons and property.
9. The operator is responsible for maintaining and inspecting the UAS to ensure that it is
in a condition for safe operation.
10. Prior to each flight, the PIC must conduct a pre-flight inspection and determine the
UAS is in a condition for safe flight. The pre-flight inspection must account for all
potential discrepancies, e.g., inoperable components, items, or equipment. If the
inspection reveals a condition that affects the safe operation of the UAS, the aircraft is
prohibited from operating until the necessary maintenance has been performed and the
UAS is found to be in a condition for safe flight.
11. The operator must follow the UAS manufacturer’s maintenance, overhaul,
replacement, inspection, and life limit requirements for the aircraft and
aircraft components.
12. Each UAS operated under this exemption must comply with all manufacturer
safety bulletins.
13. Under this grant of exemption, a PIC must hold either an airline transport,
commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate. The PIC must also hold a
current FAA airman medical certificate or a valid U.S. driver’s license issued by a
state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, a territory, a possession, or the Federal
5
government. The PIC must also meet the flight review requirements specified in
14 CFR § 61.56 in an aircraft in which the PIC is rated on his or her pilot certificate.
14. The operator may not permit any PIC to operate unless the PIC demonstrates the
ability to safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be
operated under this exemption, including evasive and emergency maneuvers and
maintaining appropriate distances from persons, vessels, vehicles and structures. PIC
qualification flight hours and currency must be logged in a manner consistent with
14 CFR § 61.51(b). Flights for the purposes of training the operator’s PICs and VOs
(training, proficiency, and experience-building) and determining the PIC’s ability to
safely operate the UAS in a manner consistent with how the UAS will be operated
under this exemption are permitted under the terms of this exemption. However,
training operations may only be conducted during dedicated training sessions. During
training, proficiency, and experience-building flights, all persons not essential for
flight operations are considered nonparticipants, and the PIC must operate the UA
with appropriate distance from nonparticipants in accordance with 14 CFR § 91.119.
15. UAS operations may not be conducted during night, as defined in 14 CFR § 1.1. All
operations must be conducted under visual meteorological conditions (VMC). Flights
under special visual flight rules (SVFR) are not authorized.
16. The UA may not operate within 5 nautical miles of an airport reference point (ARP) as
denoted in the current FAA Airport/Facility Directory (AFD) or for airports not
denoted with an ARP, the center of the airport symbol as denoted on the current
FAA-published aeronautical chart, unless a letter of agreement with that airport’s
management is obtained or otherwise permitted by a COA issued to the exemption
holder. The letter of agreement with the airport management must be made available
to the Administrator or any law enforcement official upon request.
17. The UA may not be operated less than 500 feet below or less than 2,000 feet
horizontally from a cloud or when visibility is less than 3 statute miles from the PIC.
18. If the UAS loses communications or loses its GPS signal, the UA must return to a
pre-determined location within the private or controlled-access property.
19. The PIC must abort the flight in the event of unpredicted obstacles or emergencies.
20. The PIC is prohibited from beginning a flight unless (considering wind and forecast
weather conditions) there is enough available power for the UA to conduct the
intended operation and to operate after that for at least five minutes or with the reserve
power recommended by the manufacturer if greater.
21. Air Traffic Organization (ATO) Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA). All
operations shall be conducted in accordance with an ATO-issued COA. The
6
exemption holder may apply for a new or amended COA if it intends to conduct
operations that cannot be conducted under the terms of the attached COA.
22. All aircraft operated in accordance with this exemption must be identified by serial
number, registered in accordance with 14 CFR part 47, and have identification
(N−Number) markings in accordance with 14 CFR part 45, Subpart C. Markings must
be as large as practicable.
23. Documents used by the operator to ensure the safe operation and flight of the UAS and
any documents required under 14 CFR §§ 91.9 and 91.203 must be available to the
PIC at the Ground Control Station of the UAS any time the aircraft is operating.
These documents must be made available to the Administrator or any law enforcement
official upon request.
24. The UA must remain clear and give way to all manned aviation operations and
activities at all times.
25. The UAS may not be operated by the PIC from any moving device or vehicle.
26. All Flight operations must be conducted at least 500 feet from all nonparticipating
persons, vessels, vehicles, and structures unless:
a. Barriers or structures are present that sufficiently protect nonparticipating persons
from the UA and/or debris in the event of an accident. The operator must ensure
that nonparticipating persons remain under such protection. If a situation arises
where nonparticipating persons leave such protection and are within 500 feet of
the UA, flight operations must cease immediately in a manner ensuring the safety
of nonparticipating persons; and
b. The owner/controller of any vessels, vehicles or structures has granted permission
for operating closer to those objects and the PIC has made a safety assessment of
the risk of operating closer to those objects and determined that it does not
present an undue hazard.
The PIC, VO, operator trainees or essential persons are not considered
nonparticipating persons under this exemption.
27. All operations shall be conducted over private or controlled-access property with
permission from the property owner/controller or authorized representative.
Permission from property owner/controller or authorized representative will be
obtained for each flight to be conducted.
28. Any incident, accident, or flight operation that transgresses the lateral or vertical
boundaries of the operational area as defined by the applicable COA must be reported
to the FAA's UAS Integration Office (AFS−80) within 24 hours. Accidents must be
7
reported to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) per instructions
contained on the NTSB Web site: www.ntsb.gov.
If this exemption permits operations for the purpose of closed-set motion picture and
television filming and production, the following additional conditions and limitations apply.
29. The operator must have a motion picture and television operations manual (MPTOM)
as documented in this grant of exemption.
30. At least 3 days before aerial filming, the operator of the UAS affected by this
exemption must submit a written Plan of Activities to the local Flight Standards
District Office (FSDO) with jurisdiction over the area of proposed filming. The 3-day
notification may be waived with the concurrence of the FSDO. The plan of activities
must include at least the following:
a. Dates and times for all flights;
b. Name and phone number of the operator for the UAS aerial filming conducted
under this grant of exemption;
c. Name and phone number of the person responsible for the on-scene operation of
the UAS;
d. Make, model, and serial or N−Number of UAS to be used;
e. Name and certificate number of UAS PICs involved in the aerial filming;
f. A statement that the operator has obtained permission from property owners
and/or local officials to conduct the filming production event; the list of those
who gave permission must be made available to the inspector upon request;
g. Signature of exemption holder or representative; and
h. A description of the flight activity, including maps or diagrams of any area, city,
town, county, and/or state over which filming will be conducted and the altitudes
essential to accomplish the operation.
31. Flight operations may be conducted closer than 500 feet from participating persons
consenting to be involved and necessary for the filming production, as specified in the
exemption holder’s MPTOM.
Unless otherwise specified in this grant of exemption, the UAS, the UAS PIC, and the UAS
operations must comply with all applicable parts of 14 CFR including, but not limited to,
parts 45, 47, 61, and 91.

And for what it's worth once the NRPM is finalized there will be less restrictions than set forth there (no pilots license required).

And though I'm sure you commented on the NRPM it is now closed to comments and expected to be finalized middle of next year.
nature

climber
Boulder, CO
Aug 4, 2015 - 06:28pm PT
I think you fail to understand what is going on in the industry in my a*#essment. you say it's simple. I could not disagree more with that "simple" statement.

You do it not through regulations. You do it by stiffening the laws. The regulations are not going to happen the way you put forth. No matter the "backlash".

And your characterization of squish is pretty wrong as well.
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Aug 4, 2015 - 09:52pm PT
Nature, what's the ratio of 'responsible flyers' to nutjobs? Yes, like guns, it doesn't matter.
What's wrong with requiring a unique ID # and a transponder on every one sold? Yeah,
the transponder could be turned off and the numbers ground off but then only criminals would
do that.
Messages 161 - 180 of total 590 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta