HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
This thread is privately moderated by zlite, who may elect to delete unwanted replies.
Old Feb 16, 2011, 06:03 PM
Registered User
brakar's Avatar
Asker, Oslo, Norway
Joined Feb 2009
423 Posts
Good availability of autopilots + new too stringent regulations = high number of unregistered sUAV operators + new black market for sUAS operations = more criminals + more uncontrolled aerial activity.
brakar is offline Find More Posts by brakar
Last edited by brakar; Feb 17, 2011 at 07:06 AM. Reason: math
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Feb 17, 2011, 05:02 AM
Registered User
Australia, QLD, Great Sandy Strait
Joined Jan 2011
33 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by brakar View Post
Good availability of autopilots + new too stringent regulations = high number of unregistered sUAV operators + new black market for sUAS operations + more criminals + more uncontrolled aerial activity.
AGREED! I got word today that a public announcement of some kind will be made in Australia early March!
CrayonBox is offline Find More Posts by CrayonBox
Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2011, 07:26 PM
Registered User
brakar's Avatar
Asker, Oslo, Norway
Joined Feb 2009
423 Posts
Another option would offcourse be to make rules that most sUAV operators could comply with in the first place. Then to rely on development of seriousness in the communiny, and to take out the bad apples along the way. This have worked when regulating new arenas before, but is probably not what is likely to be happening now, or ?
brakar is offline Find More Posts by brakar
Last edited by brakar; Feb 18, 2011 at 08:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 02, 2011, 03:45 AM
Registered User
Australia, QLD, Great Sandy Strait
Joined Jan 2011
33 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by simonHBX View Post
It is also highly recommend if clubs wish to allow the operation of UAVís or autonomous model aircraft at the facility the committee should obtain proof of insurance cover and a signed statement that the UAV operators were wholly and totally responsible for any claim arising during their operation at the flying site. Clubs should also be aware that if their lease with their land owner is for the flying of model aircraft, if UAV are allowed to be flown you may be invalidating you field lease"
So is this actually saying that I can not fly my developing "suav" (trex600esp) for flight practice and testing prior to certification. I am not performing commercial activity but this is potentially a commercial machine. If so this is getting very ridiculous and frustrating. If not then thank goodness. I am getting tired of the waiting.
CrayonBox is offline Find More Posts by CrayonBox
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 02, 2011, 10:52 AM
SlowStick Test Pilot
patrickegan's Avatar
Yumastan RCAPA.NET
Joined Feb 2003
5,999 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by brakar View Post
Another option would offcourse be to make rules that most sUAV operators could comply with in the first place. Then to rely on development of seriousness in the communiny, and to take out the bad apples along the way. This have worked when regulating new arenas before, but is probably not what is likely to be happening now, or ?

Very good!

This is the same stance I've taken. Most folks want to follow the law. Sure, some color outside of the lines now and again, but by-in-large they would follow the regulations.
patrickegan is offline Find More Posts by patrickegan
Reply With Quote
Old Jun 04, 2011, 07:31 PM
Registered User
brakar's Avatar
Asker, Oslo, Norway
Joined Feb 2009
423 Posts
Well, if people are suposed to be able to handle guns, cars, booze, small aeroplanes and bicycling without much restrictions, not being considered to be an unacceptable threat to our common health and safety, why not "toy aeroplanes"?

Some rationale from the makers of law should be anticipated. I think.
brakar is offline Find More Posts by brakar
Last edited by brakar; Jun 04, 2011 at 07:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 12, 2011, 12:39 PM
433rd FS
kestrel341's Avatar
Watauga, TX
Joined Nov 2006
78 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by patrickegan View Post
Very good!

This is the same stance I've taken. Most folks want to follow the law. Sure, some color outside of the lines now and again, but by-in-large they would follow the regulations.
However, these agregious government regulations now prohibit me from doing what I assumed, when I began acquiring equipment, could be a second career producing aerial HD images for real estate use. According to AUVSI, FAA has starting enforcement of the "law iz as Ah sez it iz" regarding commercial use of UAVs w/o a COA.

This is how they are going to capture an emerging industry for themselves and their corporate associates. This will all but deny the garage UAV builder (I thought invention was politically correct) the ability to create an occupation for himself. So InSitu Scan Eagle gets the police market, that's great for Boeing. But if I just want to collect images, I can't even sell them as photographic art if they were acquired using a UAV. That would be a commercial use.

This is a government sponsored corporate seizure of an emerging market with literally hundreds of useful (hence marketable) applications. If I was Burt Rutan, I wouldn't have a problem getting a COA, but anybody besides a government or academic institution will be hard pressed to obtain a COA.

I think it's UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Do you think the ACLU would take the case?
kestrel341 is offline Find More Posts by kestrel341
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 12, 2011, 01:33 PM
Registered User
Joined Sep 2010
204 Posts
If any agent of the government tries to stop me from flying ANYTHING I want to fly on my own property and airspace, they will regret it for as long as it takes them to bleed to death. That is freedom.
DON"T TREAD ON ME.
DHjets is offline Find More Posts by DHjets
Last edited by DHjets; Aug 12, 2011 at 02:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 12, 2011, 04:22 PM
SlowStick Test Pilot
patrickegan's Avatar
Yumastan RCAPA.NET
Joined Feb 2003
5,999 Posts
I've been at this now for 6+ years. The only times ACLU has weighed in on UAS was on privacy. The FAA is operates the way it wants to with no oversight and very little accountability.
patrickegan is offline Find More Posts by patrickegan
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 12, 2011, 08:20 PM
Registered User
Joined Sep 2010
204 Posts
the problem being; before we know it, Or maybe already, the government will
characterize use of full FPV equipment and or fully autonomous flight as "terroristic" and "subversive" and prosecute under the Patriot act or Department of Homeland Security.( Achtung!)

Already, it is completely prohibitive to use equipment with any power to enjoy because of licensing requirements/radio operator certificates.

BUT, fortunately they do not have the man power to enforce the ridiculous
corporate lobby driven laws.

Bottom line.... I have a right to my piece of the sky and radio frequency too. With that comes the responsibility to operate safely so as not to cause damage or injury to anyone or anything.
DHjets is offline Find More Posts by DHjets
Last edited by DHjets; Aug 12, 2011 at 08:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 13, 2011, 02:54 AM
Gaftopher
Gary Mortimer's Avatar
Nottingham Road South Africa/Bedford UK
Joined Feb 2007
3,975 Posts
Gosh are they proposing laws, that's new!

Its a pity that no one saw it coming and a coherent group had a chance to get together and present the case for commercial sUAS and FPV. Maybe set out some informal rules. That group could have had the support of a wide group of disciplines and formed a voice for many.

Just think to the FAA it might look now like a disconnected group of whinging people that continue to break many laws whilst claiming imagined rights. Perhaps that group might have done so much damage that fundamental aeromodelling rights could just go down the tubes in the USA after the NPRM.

Still as its been impossible to see this coming that could not have happened.

Whilst in lots of ways commercial sUAS and FPV are arriving much in the same way as CB radio that did not have the potential to affect airline passengers. No need to guess what the answer would be to regulation if you asked a que of people waiting to get on an A380.

Other countries have regulation and its working. America is actually falling quite far behind because of a lack of regulation. You can't really write a business plan to show the bank manager in the USA at the minute as their are no rules.

That's hampering small business.

There are many talented and clever people that have designed stuff that can't be really sold as the end user is doing something illegal with them.

Thats hampering small business.

America needs small business more than ever now to recover from the bottom up. Oh and just like the rest of us never trust those bankers again.

http://www.suasnews.com/2010/11/2782...come%E2%80%A6/
Gary Mortimer is offline Find More Posts by Gary Mortimer
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 13, 2011, 12:51 PM
433rd FS
kestrel341's Avatar
Watauga, TX
Joined Nov 2006
78 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DHjets View Post
the problem being; before we know it, Or maybe already, the government will
characterize use of full FPV equipment and or fully autonomous flight as "terroristic" and "subversive" and prosecute under the Patriot act or Department of Homeland Security.( Achtung!)

Already, it is completely prohibitive to use equipment with any power to enjoy because of licensing requirements/radio operator certificates.

BUT, fortunately they do not have the man power to enforce the ridiculous
corporate lobby driven laws.

Bottom line.... I have a right to my piece of the sky and radio frequency too. With that comes the responsibility to operate safely so as not to cause damage or injury to anyone or anything.
BUT, if the government is denying me the right to work in my chosen field, at a time in which the technology is all coming together at once to make it possible for me, a retired scientist, to make a good living, that is denying me God given rights as set out in the Declaration of Independence:

Life (gotta work), Liberty (in a field that presents a danger to no one as long as altitude/range and payload weight guidelines are followed). Hell, you could even keep it in line of sight, and carry insurance. Not to mention the Pursuit of Happiness (this is the kicker; I have been dreaming and planning this for at least 5 years).

At the risk of being overdramatic, I am afraid that it is time to, as in the dying words of Frederick Douglas:

"Agitate, Agitate, Agitate..."

If used by a private citizen for the production of art prints or real estate photographs that could be printed in Architectural Digest, these should be protected uses (self expression and individual commerce). It's the PD and HS use that puts a bad taste in the ACLU's mouth. The ACLU, while acquiring a bad rep due to their dogged pursuit of individual rights at the expense of the majority, has previously teamed up with the NRA to protect the 2nd Amendment. It is primarily the Constitution that they are concerned with; they are not, as some would have us believe, a subversive organization with a monolithic agenda.

We all saw what happened to the FDA once Big Pharma got its "streamlined" approval process; they became infiltrated by industry people who didn't quite renounce their allegiance to their old masters. Hence, now most generic drugs (and almost all antibiotics) are made in China, yet the FDA has no permission to do spot facility inspections there, as they do on any manufacturer in the U.S. This even after several people died as the result of contaminated heparin made in China. Of course, even the U.S. inspections are probably watered down now too. We don't want to hurt business.

Similarly, will the FAA only allow Big AeroDrone to fill all of the tiny service niches suddenly made available by the new RC technology? Number one, they can't possibly fill all of the needs that could be met, and number two, why should they want to? There's no big money there. This is putting the brakes on a huge emerging market, but they just want it all for themselves.

This may demand a break with the AMA, as now they will likely accept any conditions in order to preserve the hobby. BTW, guys that fly the Nationals make big money on endorsements (no?). If so, is this not commercial use of a UAV? There's Big Hipocracy afoot here also.

We are giving up rights for the sake of security. And you know what Ben Franklin said about that...


kestrel341
kestrel341 is offline Find More Posts by kestrel341
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 13, 2011, 01:20 PM
433rd FS
kestrel341's Avatar
Watauga, TX
Joined Nov 2006
78 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by brakar View Post
Good availability of autopilots + new too stringent regulations = high number of unregistered sUAV operators + new black market for sUAS operations = more criminals + more uncontrolled aerial activity.
"The more laws, the more criminals."

Lao Tzu
kestrel341 is offline Find More Posts by kestrel341
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2011, 06:48 PM
Registered User
brakar's Avatar
Asker, Oslo, Norway
Joined Feb 2009
423 Posts
Good point, but also: "The lesser laws, the more lawlessness."

brakar

(PS: Mayby the right thing to do would be to find an equilibrium?)
brakar is offline Find More Posts by brakar
Last edited by brakar; Aug 15, 2011 at 07:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2011, 08:38 PM
SlowStick Test Pilot
patrickegan's Avatar
Yumastan RCAPA.NET
Joined Feb 2003
5,999 Posts
Here are some guys that are looking out for you


http://secondtonone.org/
patrickegan is offline Find More Posts by patrickegan
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion beginners' faq for edf somewhere? xorbe Electric Ducted Fan Jet Talk 0 Jun 28, 2006 06:36 PM
need FAQ for castle! DavidB. Castle Creations 2 Jun 08, 2004 06:05 PM
A FAQ for building LiPos? mikeb33 Batteries and Chargers 0 Apr 29, 2004 09:17 PM
FAQ for true newbie? fdisk Parkflyers 2 Sep 25, 2003 03:07 PM