Thread Tools
Jan 07, 2020, 04:04 PM
Safe landings!
Thread OP
Alert

You all fly "drones"


I see it over and over and over. Half the people respond to the new NPRM and say "they should only regulate those evil fpv drones and leave us line of sight people alone".

The FAA has stated multiple times the definition of a sUAS and its ANYTHING THAT FLIES WITHOUT A PERSON STRAPPED TO IT. This has been a constant since the first new laws years ago and you are not going to change it. Separating the RC community into even smaller segments is just going to make us lose the fight even quicker.

Either fight for the RC community as a whole, or quit the hobby.

The FAA has already considered and denied separating model aircraft.

Quote:
The FAA does not agree with the recommendation that model aircraft, referred to throughout this proposal as limited recreational operations for consistency with 49 U.S.C. 44809, should be excluded from the remote identification requirements. Unmanned aircraft used in limited recreational operations required to register under part 47 or part 48 would be subject to the proposed remote identification requirement. The agency is, however, proposing a means for such aircraft to operate without remote identification equipment. Under the proposed rule, UAS would be permitted to operate without remote identification equipment if they are operated within visual line of sight and within an FAA-recognized identification area.
Last edited by Space Goast; Jan 09, 2020 at 10:59 PM.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Jan 07, 2020, 04:10 PM
Team Futaba
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
Well, to be more accurate and to use the actual wording the FAA uses in regulations, we all fly "sUAS". Or Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems.

I do however disagree that traditional model airplane pilots should also fight for multi-rotor sUAS equipped with the ability for autonomous navigation, self-stabilizing and GPS-augmented flight controllers. VLOS or BVLOS makes no difference there. There is a fundamental difference between the two types of sUAS and to argue that both types should adhere to the same rules ignores those substantial differences.
Jan 07, 2020, 04:13 PM
Safe landings!
Thread OP
I agree with you that they are different. The FAA does not, has not, and never will.

Remember this is all about mitigation of potential threats. You can't have a bunch of 20 pound planes flying around that might be easily converted for bad uses in the future. Gotta ban'em all
Jan 07, 2020, 04:13 PM
Registered User
Seems to me BVLOS and autonomous (whether GPS or some other way) make all the difference. But the FAA doesn't see it that way, makes rules supposedly intended to enable BVLOS/autonomous, applies them to everyone... then still doesn't actually allow BVLOS/autonomous. Then they go high-five the ATLA and ATF and the Secret Service and DHS and perhaps engage in an evil laugh or three.
Jan 07, 2020, 04:26 PM
Registered User
aeronaut999's Avatar

annoying obscure terminology stuff


Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent-AV8R
Well, to be more accurate and to use the actual wording the FAA uses in regulations, we all fly "sUAS". Or Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems
Arguably, "sUA" (as contrasted to "sUAS") is also an appropriate name for the part that actually flies through the air. I.e. in some contexts it is arguably appropriate to delete the annoying final "S" for "system". In my own posts, when I write "sUAs", the final "s" is usually meant to simply indicate plural, not to indicate the word "system" or "systems". Athough we could also argue the plural form of "sUA" should really simply be "sUA", not "sUAs". I'll have to keep that in mind in the future. Just think how much shorter my posts could be, if I deleted that final "s".
Last edited by aeronaut999; Jan 07, 2020 at 05:03 PM.
Jan 07, 2020, 04:35 PM
Rust: The poor man's Loctite.
TomM's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Space Goast
I see it over and over and over. Half the people respond to the new NPRM and say "they should only regulate those evil fpv drones and leave us line of sight people alone".

The FAA has stated multiple times the definition of a sUAS and its ANYTHING THAT FLIES WITHOUT A PERSON STRAPPED TO IT. This has been a constant since the first new laws years ago and you are not going to change it. Separating the RC community into even smaller segments is just going to make us lose the fight even quicker.

Either fight for the RC community as a whole, or quit the hobby.
No Way !!! I prefer to fight for my old fashioned traditional LOS stick and covering scratch built airplanes and let the godless FPV and multirotor crowd be eaten by the federal wolves.
Jan 07, 2020, 04:54 PM
Registered User
Well, with all this talk about club members wanting to ban camera drones and FPV racers, and then wanting to continue setting up drone "prisons" for their stick builds.... It's looking more and more like the FAA will chuck it all into the circular file and impose the NPRM as it's written.
Jan 07, 2020, 05:01 PM
Registered User
aeronaut999's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorfolkSouthern
Well, with all this talk about club members wanting ... to continue setting up drone "prisons" for their stick builds....

Sounds kinky. What are you talking about?
Jan 07, 2020, 05:12 PM
Team Futaba
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by aeronaut999
Arguably, "sUA" (as contrasted to "sUAS") is also an appropriate name for the part that actually flies through the air. I.e. in some contexts it is arguably appropriate to delete the annoying final "S" for "system". In my own posts, when I write "sUAs", the final "s" is usually meant to simply indicate plural, not to indicate the word "system" or "systems". Athough we could also argue the plural form of "sUA" should really simply be "sUA", not "sUAs". I'll have to keep that in mind in the future. Just think how much shorter my posts could be, if I deleted that final "s".
As is often the case I have no idea what you are trying to so cleverly state. It seems to be that you feel there is some distinction in the regulations based on the aircraft versus the entire system. Yet all laws and regulations apply to the entire sUAS. Perhaps you should take this up with Congress and the FAA?
Jan 07, 2020, 05:46 PM
Safe landings!
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by aeronaut999
Sounds kinky. What are you talking about?
I assume he means the FRIAs. Since they will be tiny places your aircraft will be limited to.

More accurately they are death row because it's just a matter of time before they are all terminated...
Jan 07, 2020, 07:22 PM
Balsadustus Producerus
Quote:
Originally Posted by Space Goast
I see it over and over and over. Half the people respond to the new NPRM and say "they should only regulate those evil fpv drones and leave us line of sight people alone".

The FAA has stated multiple times the definition of a sUAS and its ANYTHING THAT FLIES WITHOUT A PERSON STRAPPED TO IT. This has been a constant since the first new laws years ago and you are not going to change it. Separating the RC community into even smaller segments is just going to make us lose the fight even quicker.

Either fight for the RC community as a whole, or quit the hobby.
Not really. Perception is just as important. Tell us what you find when Googling 'rc drone':

https://www.google.com/search?q=rc+d...w=1920&bih=975

and what you find when Googling 'rc model airplane':

https://www.google.com/search?q=rc+m...w=1920&bih=975

I've been warned not to fly any drone within the mobile home park where I reside, but quiet model airplanes are OK with certain limitations.

If you can change public and political perceptions for these, it will go a long way to preserve what is left of the hobby. Let me know if I've slanted these definitions in any way.
Latest blog entry: Single Channel Case
Jan 07, 2020, 07:29 PM
Safe landings!
Thread OP
Regardless of public perception, these laws apply to anything that flies. You are not going to change the FAA's mind by demonizing a part of the hobby they are trying to ban. Any ammo you give them will be used against you as well as your RC brethren.

The FAA is a giant government entity, sUAS was defined legally years ago and they are not going to undo that. You are lumped in with FPVers and DJI pilots. Whether you realize that now or after they ban the whole hobby is up to you.

Just because your neighbors don't decide to call the police on your plane doesn't make it legal to fly.
Jan 07, 2020, 08:25 PM
Registered User
kell490's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent-AV8R
Well, to be more accurate and to use the actual wording the FAA uses in regulations, we all fly "sUAS". Or Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems.

I do however disagree that traditional model airplane pilots should also fight for multi-rotor sUAS equipped with the ability for autonomous navigation, self-stabilizing and GPS-augmented flight controllers. VLOS or BVLOS makes no difference there. There is a fundamental difference between the two types of sUAS and to argue that both types should adhere to the same rules ignores those substantial differences.
One would think it's common sense, but lot of this is coming from LE like Home land security and the FBI who worry about the worst happening. Someone weaponizing a sUAS using it against high value targets. I'm not so sure any of the things FAA is doing would even have much impact on someone who wants to do harm they just buy what they need get around any laws. If someone is going to commit murder not worried about breaking FAA rules.

I blame the Drone manufactures like DJI who marketed BVLOS capabilities when they knew that type of flying was illegal.
Jan 07, 2020, 08:57 PM
Team Futaba
Silent-AV8R's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by kell490

I blame the Drone manufactures like DJI who marketed BVLOS capabilities when they knew that type of flying was illegal.
I agree. TO this day DJI makes noise about how safety driven they are and impose restrictive geofencing on their equipment, and then turn around and advertise how far beyond LOS you can fly. I posted a video on another thread where a guy flew the new Mavic Mini to 3 miles distance. He was on Hwaii and almost hit two sets of power lines as it landed with Zero battery on the return trip. Kewl Dewd!!!
Jan 07, 2020, 09:15 PM
Registered User
Quote:
Originally Posted by Space Goast
I assume he means the FRIAs. Since they will be tiny places your aircraft will be limited to.

More accurately they are death row because it's just a matter of time before they are all terminated...
That is exactly what I'm referring to!


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Careful! Avoid "ready to fly quads" AT ALL COSTS! Genetics101 Vendor Talk 0 Jan 03, 2016 04:47 PM