Isn't it time to form an association?

[zozie]

Hello all. I've been flying R/C planes and helis for about 5 years now. I've done a few UAV projects in the past as well. (some of them can be found here) now I run my robotics company (www.rotoconcept.com) but my interest really lies in UAVs.

After reading all the posts and ranting about the FAA / Trasport Canada regulations, I'm beginning to think that we should form a small UAV association. By small I mean for UAVs that weigh less than 40 lbs let's say. If we stick with that weight and gather a few hundred of us, we may be able to collectively fight the regulations and maybe get an insurance company that would cover small privately owned UAVs for for recreational or research purposes. For that tho we would have to come up with standards and stick with them. Not just technically but also ethically. when there is a will there is a way.... If there is enough of us I'm sure we could get the legal assistance as well. I really think it's only a question of time before the private UAV sector blows up and becomes a huge industry world wide. Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to bash FAA/TC or the authority of Gov't. I hold a commercial helicopter license myself and I can see the dangers of UAVs, however I also believe technology is on our side.

What do you think?

[mecevans]

there are UAV organizations but i have not really found anything like "Amateur UAV's". the FPV and AP crowd are getting really active and organized. if we are going to make an organization its going to take allot of work and nobody really has come to the plate. if were going to do it we need to do it now before they completely shut us out. most seem to just keep on the DL with there UAV's hoping that no one will bug them. i say make it a poll. if its a yay then do it. i just hope you actually pull through with it.

[zozie]

I think if we can get 100 ppl interested and ready to do their on research then we can get somewhere. I'm all for it.

[mlbco]

Zozie,

This might be a good idea, but I'm in favor of trying to nudge the AMA first because they have over 150,000 members and therefore more influence with the FAA:

http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11983814&postcount=37

If this doesn't work then a separate association is the way to go.

Steve

[zozie]

That is a nice letter indeed but if you cannot go beyond visual range, what's the point? I don't think AMA or MAAC would want to get involved anyway... It should be a completely different entity. North American UAV association maybe? I have a hard time imagining maac or AMA would even want to hear about autonomous flight.

[zlite]

That is a nice letter indeed but if you cannot go beyond visual range, what's the point? I don't think AMA or MAAC would want to get involved anyway... It should be a completely different entity. North American UAV association maybe? I have a hard time imagining maac or AMA would even want to hear about autonomous flight.

The AMA is willing to discuss autonomous flight but not beyond visual range.

I think this really is a question of whether the association would be for hobbyists, in which case perhaps line of sight would be acceptable, or professionals doing real work with UAVs, in which case you'd want to go beyond line of sight and would have a much harder regulatory challenge.

[NorthwestWolf]

I think this really is a question of whether the association would be for hobbyists, in which case perhaps line of sight would be acceptable, or professionals doing real work with UAVs, in which case you'd want to go beyond line of sight and would have a much harder regulatory challenge.

You've hit on what I was going to address in a longer response I was working on. The issue I see is that quite a few of us as well as many that will come into this community will be both or have ambitions to become professionals.

In fact I find the term "hobbyist" in regards to UAVs to be quite odd. I'm sure that there will be a few people that might like to watch their planes fly hands free, carry out programmed actions, etc. and do this every time they go out to fly, week after week. However I think that most modelers, buying off the shelf gear are mostly looking for a small set of desirable features (RTL for example) and not much more. For the most part they aren't people developing hardware or writing software. This is the key difference.

The people developing hardware, writing software, and testing in the field regularly aren't what I would call hobbyist and I would wager to say that the majority of them have some desire to move their work into the professional or commercial sphere in some capacity in the future.

What I see are two groups. One group actively engaged in the development and/or application of UAV technology (ableit small scale) and another group who are RC modelers who would like to use some of the features that are applicable to the modeling activities they already enjoy (FPV, aerial photography).

Do people developing systems need safe, legal, and readily accessible sites to develop new systems? Absolutely. Myself, I have held back from working on anything for several years waiting for some kind of clarifications on regulations and also because of fear of being throttled and fined by the one of several federal agencies.

But I also don't think the majority of people with career ambitions or business ambitions would be well served by having their activities lumped under the term "hobby" or being bathed in the light of "hobbyist". It seems like a bad idea to corner ourselves willingly into being perceived and defined legally as guys flying for the fun of it.

Like I've said my premise is that there are few true "hobbyist" in the sUAS community. However anyone is free to correct me if they feel I'm wrong on that one. I'm more than open to a discussion about it.

[zlite]

In fact I find the term "hobbyist" in regards to UAVs to be quite odd.

Well, the term really matters, since it's the big distinction the FAA makes, between commercial (highly regulated) and non-commercial (lightly regulated) use. The FAA term for the latter is "recreational".

Basically, the difference between commercial and recreational is night and day. It's hard to imagine one association serving both groups equally well.

[Tom Harper]

I believe the starting point has to be the AMA. It is the established national organization.

The attitude of the AMA will grow with the technology. A year ago the organization would not even talk about UAVs. Now, Zlite says they are ready to consider line of sight. Let's start there.

Tom

[NorthwestWolf]

I believe the starting point has to be the AMA. It is the established national organization.

The attitude of the AMA will grow with the technology. A year ago the organization would not even talk about UAVs. Now, Zlite says they are ready to consider line of sight. Let's start there.

Tom

You say starting point, but I wonder where you'd like to see UAVs and the AMA going, or where you see it going in the future.

I hope you're not imagining that you'd start with acceptance of VLOS and then somehow they'd loosen the rules to allow flights beyond VLOS. Remember many, many AMA flying sites are surrounded by residential areas and other property that they already don't allow model aircraft to fly over.

I suppose my question is, and this goes out to zlite also, who is this idea of the AMA allowing sUAS really supposed to benefit?

[zlite]

I suppose my question is, and this goes out to zlite also, who is this idea of the AMA allowing sUAS really supposed to benefit?

I support the AMA and admire its safety guidelines and flying field program. Right now we, as UAV hobbyists, are not allowed at AMA fields. But I think it would be good for us and good for the AMA to find a way to incorporate us.

Right now all anyone is talking about broaching with the AMA is RTL, within line of sight, as a safety measure to prevent flyaways. And that is driven as much by the increasing adoption of some forms of autonomy in RC gear, from OSDs to Co-Pilots, which will eventually require the AMA to have some sort of acceptance path. But over time, as the technology matures, I imagine that it will go beyond RTL.

My vote would be for working with the AMA to include UAVs, rather than starting a new association for UAV hobbyists/non-commerical fliers.

[NorthwestWolf]

I support the AMA and admire its safety guidelines and flying field program. Right now we, as UAV hobbyists, are not allowed at AMA fields. But I think it would be good for us and good for the AMA to find a way to incorporate us...

Thanks for the response. It's good to know what the dialog between the hobbyist UAV community and the AMA is, as well as what the laundry list of technologies that are under discussion.

I also have a level of respect for the AMA for establishing a safety code and developing a large number of flying sites. I also know, as you've said that eventually they will have to come to terms with the technology that comes from the development of autonomous systems. It's better they adopt the technology early on rather than later.

However this further leaves the small operator out in the dark. He can't meet the daunting or ambiguous federal regulations due to the nature of being small or just being in the early phases of his business/development yet he also isn't recreational or his needs aren't met by the restrictions of the AMA fields rules.

It seems a shame to create a hard place in addition to the rock that is already there for so many operators that have been shut down.

Consider the AP pilot who uses an onboard autopilot to run a set of waypoints in completing a job. Do you think he wants to be restricted to circling the field and taking pictures of the strip and the pits?

[NorthwestWolf]

Zlite,

I think I have a good idea what you're trying to accomplish and I can't say I can't blame you. If your interest in unmanned technology will solely remain a hobby it makes a fair degree of sense to join up with the AMA and gain flying sites, instant political clout and a public venue for the hobbyist applications of autonomous technology.

If you succeed and there is sufficient interest perhaps we'll see more legal sanctioned UAV competitions for non-university students.

By the way, congratulations on your win at the Sparkfun competition.

I think that's about it for me. Take care and the best of luck in your future endeavors.

[Tom Harper]

Wolf and Zlite,

Visual range or near visual range covers most applications of small UAVs. It definitely covers UAV use in urban areas.

AMA sanction will serve us far better than membership in a splinter group.

Tom

[waqa]

More private sector organized competition events may help convince the AMA that the amatuer UAV community has a lot to offer in the form education, technology advances, safety etc. If we prove to be a valuable part of the community they may be more inclined to include us and I think we need to come out and show them there are a lot more of us that enjoy the hobby within the confines of FAA regulations than those who don't. Why does DARPA get to have all the fun :D ? Anyone up for a SoCal high desert UAV challenge?

[Tom Harper]

Good points!

[Jack Crossfire]

Eegan's been trying to do this for years, but the law is so rediculous, convincing people to spend money on an association is like spending money on an association to legalize chewing gum.

[NorthwestWolf]

More private sector organized competition events may help convince the AMA that the amatuer UAV community has a lot to offer in the form education, technology advances, safety etc. If we prove to be a valuable part of the community they may be more inclined to include us and I think we need to come out and show them there are a lot more of us that enjoy the hobby within the confines of FAA regulations than those who don't. Why does DARPA get to have all the fun :D ? Anyone up for a SoCal high desert UAV challenge?

I for one would like to see more private sector events. Waga, you've brought up some great points about the amateur community organizing competitions. What it also might do, is attract some very positive press for the community, especially if these events are bringing in new people and introducing them to the amateur UAV community.

Indeed DARPA and AUVSI shouldn't get to have all the fun.

A SoCal high desert UAV challenge? Fall 2009, after summer retreats? Rabbit Dry Lake or El Mirage?

We'd have enough people within driving distance to make it interesting, enough space to compete and demo aircraft, and enough lead time to plan it all. Sounds good to me.

Don't forget there are also no limitations on indoor UAVs and there are more than a few very large hangers not in use here in SoCal. A blimp or micro UAV competition would be a heck of a lot of fun also.

[zlite]

Don't forget there are also no limitations on indoor UAVs and there are more than a few very large hangers not in use here in SoCal. A blimp or micro UAV competition would be a heck of a lot of fun also.
We're organizing an autonomous blimp competition as part of the FIRST Robotics League events. There was a demo using our Blimpduino (http://www.usfirst.org/who/content.aspx?id=4190) autonomous blimp this weekend at the FIRST National Championships (http://www.usfirst.org/who/content.aspx?id=4190) at the Georgia Dome.

[patrickegan]

It's like herding cat's :) There are so many facets to it that it can't be put into one post. If anyone can come up with about a half million $'s and some serious people, count me in.