Shop our Airplanes Products Drone Products Sales
Thread Tools
May 05, 2014, 10:40 PM
Registered User
leadpan's Avatar

FAA Head: Safety, Privacy Concerns Abound In Regulating Drones

On the news today on NPR, FAA Administrator Michael Huerta discusses use of drones.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
May 05, 2014, 10:55 PM
Registered User
Daemon's Avatar
Heard this live on the radio earlier today.
Expected more from NPR, but story was every bit as thin and fluffy as what I'd expect to see
on the local nightly news. Talked about commercial, educational and public sector operations
and implied that everyone is just sitting on their hands, waiting for FAA to do something, and the floodgates
will open when the new regs are out. That's not true. The floodgates are already
open. There's thousands of commercial operators who are just ignoring the FAA. I say, more
power to em. Maybe it'll encourage FAA to get off their asses eventually.

All we got from the FAA head was evasion.
The NPR reporter asks what's wrong with using model aircraft for commercial
aircraft, when flown close and under 400ft. The FAA Administrator didn't answer, but
implied that commercial sUAS were operating in same airspace as full scale aircraft,
which is simply not true. (Most commercial operations are within
VLOS range, and below 400ft, and much of it isn't even FPV piloted). No follow-up.

NPR reporter asks a question about whether he can shoot down an "unwanted"
drone hovering over his house (with a surprising amount of fear mongering
thrown in). FAA admin evades saying only that there are privacy concerns and that it's
a discussion we should have. Duh. That wasn't the question. The question was
really about whether you own/control the airspace above your property. FAA used to
be pretty clear about that and I don't see any any advantage for them to be unclear about it now.
The answer should have been "No. All airspace that you don't build a structure
into, is in the public domain. You can't shoot at aircraft over your property."
Last edited by Daemon; May 05, 2014 at 11:01 PM.
May 06, 2014, 12:19 AM
fly by night
BCSaltchucker's Avatar
FAA said this. FAA said that. Not really. Some guy who didn't research and prepare his talking points and happens to be the guy the FAA sent to talk to NPR said this and that. If it's like Transport Canada, you get a different answer from every different person you talk to that 'represents' TC when it comes to model planes, drones, sUAS and birds.
May 06, 2014, 12:30 AM
Team Futaba
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
"Some guy" is Michael Huerta, the current Chairman of the Federal Aviation Administration. Head honcho, HMFIC, the boss.
May 06, 2014, 12:54 AM
Registered User
Daemon's Avatar
May 06, 2014, 12:58 AM
fly by night
BCSaltchucker's Avatar
tongue tied FAA honcho, I guess
May 06, 2014, 01:02 AM
Registered User
Daemon's Avatar
He wasn't tongue tied. He was very strategically evasive.
The text summary on the link is pretty worthless. Listen to the audio.
May 06, 2014, 09:07 AM
Too many numbers
On the difference between model aircraft and drones

Model aircraft are generally used by hobbyists, they're much more limited in range and they don't have the same performance characteristics. ...
Ummm, bull pucky???

On whether a person can shoot down a drone hovering over his property

We do have a lot of laws in the country that are designed to protect property or to protect your privacy. The question that is starting to be asked is, does this technology in any way change that?

You shouldn't be shooting anything down. What is clear is that you have a right to be concerned about: Is an unmanned aircraft over your property infringing ... your right to privacy? And I think that we as a government need to figure out, is there something unique about this technology that would cause us to treat it differently than the constitutional protections you already have?
Would you shoot down a helicopter hovering over your property? If so, you'll get the chair. Shoot down my hex, and you should get 5 years....

Is there a link for the actual audio? The stuff posted in the article is kind of general.
May 06, 2014, 09:25 AM
Registered User
leadpan's Avatar
On the link, there's a "Listen to the Story" button near the top.
May 06, 2014, 09:35 AM
Too many numbers
Awesome, thanks.

EDIT: Lol, I just listened to it. So basically they found the biggest moron they could to talk to this guy, right? I mean, what kind of questions were those? And the first question wasn't even answered. No wonder he only made it to NPR. He can speak well, but has little between the ears. I guess his only option was to work for NPR- or become President of the United States...
Last edited by c131frdave; May 06, 2014 at 09:42 AM.
May 06, 2014, 02:34 PM
UAV Integrations
I'm forever amused by the concept of "privacy concerns" as related to drones when the sheeple of the world fail to recognize the complete and utter violation of ANY AND ALL privacy when programs like PRISM are in effect.

A drone can only physically "see" you when you are outside (where you generally have no "right" to privacy, anyway). PRISM can listen to your conversations, sift through your email, look at the pictures and videos on your phone, track your online surfing and shopping habits, track your physical location through THAT is some effective spying!

But hey, the sheeple won't recognize and raise "privacy concerns" over PRISM because they get to use their cell phones! They don't get to use the drones.

Idiot public. Privacy concerns over drones, when a government program like PRISM is already up and running and has been since 2007! Pathetic.

Quick Reply

Thread Tools