Comments
FAA Rules On Drones Vs. Model Aircraft Protested
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
David F. Carr
50%
50%
David F. Carr,
User Rank: Author
7/29/2014 | 10:25:11 AM
Re: I don't envy the FAA's task
Drones with cameras and drones with guns, those are real issues / dangers but probably largely outside the scope of FAA regulation. There will probably be a whole separate set of regulations / laws from law enforcement to privacy to telecommunications (radio spectrum) governing unmanned aircraft, with more needed as time goes on for complications that have yet to arise.

The FAA's main charge is to make sure these things can operate safely in public airspace (which I guess might include that they're not carrying gun turrets), with some reasonable accommodation for hobbyist / noncommercial use of small unpiloted planes that fit into the traditional model aircraft niche. I think that's part of the White House's logic behind having another agency take the lead on the privacy / bandwidth issues (assuming the Politico report is correct).
Paul Burnett
50%
50%
Paul Burnett,
User Rank: Apprentice
7/28/2014 | 11:58:40 PM
Re: I don't envy the FAA's task
"(imagine a drone controlled by a paparazzo)" Imagine a 12-gauge shotgun...
asksqn
50%
50%
asksqn,
User Rank: Ninja
7/28/2014 | 5:00:14 PM
Base Regulation on Who Manufactured the RC item
Putting the regulation of drones/hobby planes under the NTIA umbrella sounds practical in theory, NTIA is, after all, an arm of the Commerce Dept.,but then again, one of the agency's stated goals is to keep phone and cable TV affordable.  Anyone who subscribes to either utility knows that the NTIA has epically failed on that count.  All that being said, and in consideration of the gnashing of teeth from both opponents as well as advocates with regard to the FAA's criteria, the only solution with regard to regs is to distinguish between manufacturers - was it a consumer product oriented company selling RC hobbyist items, or a civilian contractor manufacturing drones? 
Thomas Claburn
50%
50%
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Author
7/28/2014 | 4:48:37 PM
Re: LoS part, okay. Commercial part, huh?
I actually sympathize with the FAA. Crafting rules to cover all the possibilities is thankless and there's no way to please everyone. 
Laurianne
50%
50%
Laurianne,
User Rank: Author
7/28/2014 | 2:58:18 PM
Re: More objections to the FAA drone / model aircraft rule
The photography questions with regard to drones have just started. We will need much more privacy protection as consumers than the current laws ever envisioned us needing.
David F. Carr
50%
50%
David F. Carr,
User Rank: Author
7/28/2014 | 1:35:53 PM
More objections to the FAA drone / model aircraft rule
Academics have their own objections to the lines the FAA is trying to draw:

Professors object to FAA restrictions on drone use - Associated Press - POLITICO.com 
jries921
100%
0%
jries921,
User Rank: Ninja
7/28/2014 | 11:14:52 AM
I don't envy the FAA's task
For starters, it couldn't possibly be fun to try to apply existing statute to a brand new category of aircraft (acts of Congress tend to be horribly complex, but its the bureaucrats who get blamed for it).  Then we have the privacy concerns (imagine a drone controlled by a paparazzo), and public safety concerns (imagine a privately owned automated bomber).  And we have model aircraft hobbyists who don't want their options limited any more than they have to be.

This is definitely not a good time to be a rule writer for the FAA.

 
Zman7
0%
100%
Zman7,
User Rank: Strategist
7/28/2014 | 10:55:08 AM
Not sure if these people know what they're doing...
The LOS part stinks.  Many model aircraft flyers go out by themselves. I wouldn't want the requirement to have someone to tag along if I had first person view equipment.  The advances in technology will far outstrip any laws these clowns want to write today.

 

I appears to me that the gov't is trying to figure out a way to get additional tax money from drones.  If people are flying them as a hobby, then it's a hobby.  If they use them in business, then they should be treated like trucks and cars currently used as business equipment.  The FAA should simply specify what space they can fly in - period.
David F. Carr
50%
50%
David F. Carr,
User Rank: Author
7/28/2014 | 10:21:11 AM
Re: LoS part, okay. Commercial part, huh?
If you're thinking commercial use of small drones / model aircraft should be unregulated, you'd have to take that up with Congress. The only lattitude FAA would have is exactly where to draw the line. I thought the hobbyist group quoted in the story made a reasonable point about one sale of one photo not being enough to qualify as a business in the eyes of the IRS, so maybe the FAA should allow some latitude there.
UberGoober
0%
100%
UberGoober,
User Rank: Strategist
7/28/2014 | 10:12:44 AM
Thank You Big Gubmint
Everything not mandatory is forbidden.
Page 1 / 2   >   >>


Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Tech Digest, Dec. 9, 2014
Apps will make or break the tablet as a work device, but don't shortchange critical factors related to hardware, security, peripherals, and integration.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
InformationWeek Radio
Archived InformationWeek Radio
Join us for a roundup of the top stories on InformationWeek.com for the week of December 14, 2014. Be here for the show and for the incredible Friday Afternoon Conversation that runs beside the program.
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.