Originally Posted by brakar

Good point, but also: "The lesser laws, the more lawlessness."

brakar

(PS: Mayby the right thing to do would be to find an equilibrium?)

There is a solution to this. Lease and sell vehicles. What the customer does with them is then his own business.

How about the crazy concept of preparing to comply with any regulations that might come.

Going and taking PPL groundschool and getting a medical might be a good start. For the writtens the questions are multiple guess and all the questions are in the public domain.

Originally Posted by Gary Mortimer

How about the crazy concept of preparing to comply with any regulations that might come.

Going and taking PPL groundschool and getting a medical might be a good start. For the writtens the questions are multiple guess and all the questions are in the public domain.

I already have to get a HAM license if I want to use anything but short range 2.4 GHz, so that's already a tax and an impediment. Not that I said I wouldn't benefit from the education. I have a Cobra 40 channel with sidebands, and all of 20 W. I need a HAM for it too.

Groundschool would probably make me a better RC pilot --- and would give me time to get in shape for the medical!!!

So you could be prepared when they do say you need a fullscale. Well, OK. Still, the concept of using this as an excuse to go ultralight (no pilot's license needed, you better have ground school or really good medical/life insurance) sounds intriguing.

Wonder if I could sell that to the wife??

So what's the diff between FPV and UAV?

Originally Posted by razorseal

So what's the diff between FPV and UAV?

Based on what I understand, if you are flying outside of visual range, over 400 feet, or using FPV headgear without a spotter, your aircraft could be classifed as a UAV. If you have an autopilot capable of programmable GPS waypoints, your aircraft could be called a UAV. If you are using your aircraft for commercial purposes, you are definitely a flying a UAV. All the multitude of emerging commercial applications have already been reserved for the big players by the FAA by the regulatory burden.

Based on what happened today (supposed plot to hit the Pentagon with RC planes packed with explosives) ANY RC aircraft could be considered a UAV by the FAA tomorrow,and subject to all the restrictive FAA regulations currently in place per current guidelines.

Guys, if I have misstated the case, please correct me.

kestrel341

another classification is when money changes hands. RC to UAS in one dollar...

Based on what happened today (supposed plot to hit the Pentagon with RC planes packed with explosives) ANY RC aircraft could be considered a UAV by the FAA tomorrow, and subject to all the restrictive FAA regulations currently in place per current guidelines.

Might be a fair assessment of the situation. Let's only be glad the person did not include a car in his plans, which might have been worse even to most of us with this niche interest for suavs;

Based on what happened today (supposed plot to hit the Pentagon with CAR packed with explosives) ANY CAR could be considered a "CAR" by the FAA tomorrow, and subject to all the restrictive FAA regulations currently in place per current guidelines.

(Not to mention what might have happened to the GUN regulations - if the person in question actually had included the use of "GUN" in his plans)

This is all about reason and very logic, (just have a look at my avatar).

Just saw this:

http://www.ainonline.com/?q=aviation...anned-aircraft

As a hobbyist who also does some academic research here and there, I'm concerned about the impact of whatever is coming our way. I'd like to think that last week will eventually be remembered as just some lone wolf nut case with a lame scheme, but knee-jerk reactions are common in government. Keeping my fingers crossed.

Tony

Oddly, if model UAVs are classified as weapons, the NRA may intervene and invoke the second ammendment.

Tom

Except BATF is even worse than the FAA.

Andy

Originally Posted by zlite

Q) Okay, I'm obeying all the rules. Are there any other guidelines for safe and responsible UAV operations?

A) Yes. RCAPA (the RC aerial photography association) has some excellent guidelines that are a great place to start.

The 'excellent guidelines' link is dead. Current link:

http://www.rcapa.net/guidelines.aspx

(Looks like they just changed web server software. pity.)

We have more guidelines here...

http://www.suasnews.com/2012/01/1103...ed-guidelines/

Good luck Patrick, the greatest drawback to what you have proposed is that it is logical and makes sense. These are things the government can't allow. You may recall I was working on software, what you show here for the logging and reporting matches closely with what I have designed so far. Unfortunately for me my software went nowhere. I hope you have much better luck with these proposals.

The shark has to move forward. I thought your software idea had legs just no market, yet. Lot's of stuff going on... going all the way.

I am pondering a smaller version of the software, and also looking at moving it to the android platform. As far as the logging and reporting is concerned I think I am fairly close to what will be needed (someday) and would not have a problem tweaking things to meet any actual requirements that might someday happen. I still keep watching developments. At the moment I am working a contract in south Florida and have spent the last 7 months in a hotel. Yeehaw.