General > General Technical Chat
For the Love of Radio Controlled Aircraft in the US, New Rules Possible.
LaserSteve:
I filed my comments. I also noted the cellular packet data idea is really BAD. I also mentioned that there is a reserved band at 5 Ghz for transportation communications that is 1. International in two of the three ITU world regions, , and 2. Currently Unused. However in the US, cellular companies are lusting and lobbying for that spectrum to be reassigned.
In my case I argued for a STEM education exemption as I work at a University that has a model aircraft design competition team. I'd hate to see students loose access to any kind of pre-professional competition, as many of them really benefit from an exposure to actual design and hands on skills.
I also suggested a separate rule for models that do not have a INS, GPS, or Camera, basically for the old school types like me.. I also argued for flight on private property for models at 400 feet max altitude and 1000 foot LOS radius. With the opportunity to request a waiver for larger/higher. The way I read the proposal was restriction to a 400 foot cube.
Thirty four thousand comments, mostly against new rules from what I have read, and climbing. Just now the NPRM is getting generic press notice.
Getting 34K people to mostly agree on anything other then pizza or Chinese takeout is tasty is amazing.
Steve
beanflying:
--- Quote from: edy on March 01, 2020, 08:58:02 pm ---
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 01, 2020, 03:34:11 pm ---As I hinted in my other post, I think it may just be a preliminary step to prepare for a world where drones (and otherwise flying devices) could become much more ubiquitous than they currently are - not to address the current situation, which indeed doesn't pose any significant problem at the moment.
--- End quote ---
So how far up do you "own" the airspace above your house or land? If an Amazon drone decides to fly over my property to fulfill a delivery, do they have to pay me? Do I have the option to use it for target practice? >:D
--- End quote ---
The simple answer in most countries you don't own any airspace.
Rules for overflying private property are a country by country thing but in Oz providing you conform to the relevant ANO (Air navigation order) for the R/C aircraft or Drone (I draw a real distinction between the two and I own both) it is absolutely ok to do so. HOWEVER what is not OK is to invade the privacy of people in that property and that is where the rise of Drone usage in particular idiot owners of them has caused the need for increased regulation. In Oz my Drones or R/C aircraft are LEGAL so shooting one down would be illegal not that we generally have that sort of issue. Even if one of my airframes came down on private property it remains mine and 'legally' I can retrieve it and if the property owner refuses then they would be effectively at fault. But the simple answer is you shouldn't be over private property if you can't clear that property if it goes wrong and it does.
Way back in time well over thirty years ago when I started flying R/C usage was in the main constrained to registered flying fields and was very much a Hobby as the airframes were scratch built from plans or 'sometimes' from a kit for those who could afford them. The exception to this was those of us who flew Gliders as we tended to hang out on Hills and Cliffs ridge soaring. Come forward 30 years and MOST now buy ready to fly or maybe screw the gear in airframes and almost no one builds from plans or from scratch and unassembled kits are as rare as rocking horse poop and cost more than prebuilt RTF airframes.
Add to this ease of access has seen a major decline in numbers joining these formally peak national bodies so by number they clout with National Governments is in decline. This apart from cheaper access came about with the increase in Electric Aircraft has made it noise friendly enough that you could drop down toy your local park and have a fly without upsetting the noise sensitive ears of the neighbors. That said I have had a noise complaint and the Police dropped around when I was flying an Unpowered Glider from a Bungy launch :palm:
This get online and buy a cool thing because you can afford it doesn't give the numpty allegedly in control any clues on weather or what happens if or how should I behave around people, buildings etc so Governments who in the main used to reply on input from the R/C bodies have decided to go draconian whenever possible. Canada was last year brought in one of the most kneejerk set of dumbass regulations in the World not sure if it has been moderated at all since?
Like a lot of things in this world banning or tightly controlling them is easier than seeking a workable compromise or extending a former compromise that is/was decades old |O
The excuse of it will stop the bad guys is more than ever :bullshit: you can buy a RTF unit already built that is not DJI or GPS locked strap an exploding rock to it and off you go. If you are really serious about doing harm from a distance you would use fixed wing (much higher speed and payload for way less $) and fly line of sight with that rock. 100MPH+ 2-3kg of exploding Rock and accurate at 500-1000m for a few hundred $ without a GPS on low frequency AM or FM and no where near the current Drone jamming gears range. This is where some of the fear and smear merchants and media just don't get it. This sort of device is decades old and harder to stop than a 'Drone'.
Sorry for being a bit long winded but why we are now here is the result of where we used to be and so called 'progress'
Good Luck to the USA mob if it passes I am sure our turn will come soon after |O
LaserSteve:
So I spend much of the night realizing my 7400 word essay was overkill, although the proposal within was very logical except for the backhaul. I read about thirty pages of the comments. I even came up with a term for non INS/GPS based models vs over the horizon capable drones. My term was "Traditional Model Aircraft". Imagine my surprise when I came across the attached Gem of a comment from a former FAA employee...
Enjoy... Its a public document by nature of being submitted...
Steve
SiliconWizard:
--- Quote from: beanflying on March 02, 2020, 07:58:45 am ---
--- Quote from: edy on March 01, 2020, 08:58:02 pm ---
--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 01, 2020, 03:34:11 pm ---As I hinted in my other post, I think it may just be a preliminary step to prepare for a world where drones (and otherwise flying devices) could become much more ubiquitous than they currently are - not to address the current situation, which indeed doesn't pose any significant problem at the moment.
--- End quote ---
So how far up do you "own" the airspace above your house or land? If an Amazon drone decides to fly over my property to fulfill a delivery, do they have to pay me? Do I have the option to use it for target practice? >:D
--- End quote ---
The simple answer in most countries you don't own any airspace.
--- End quote ---
Yup...
This is a very nasty topic actually, a HUGE can of worms.
If your neighbour flies a drone over your house, neither of you owns the airspace, but you can have them stop it for the annoyance: noise, potential risk, and invading your privacy if the thing has a camera.
Now if a private or public company has gotten official authorization to fly over your house, there's probably very little you can do about it.
You can probably try the same as above: sue them for the annoyance - if you can prove it's really an annoyance, which may not be that easy to do once some laws have changed - but not for violating your property.
As to exactly how much height above ground you "own" (that is considered part of your property), I guess it depends on local regulations, and I admit I have no clue. Is it the top of your tallest tree if you have trees? Is it the top of your roof? Dunno.
angrybird:
Actually, not even a company can fly over your house if they are using a camera (and better yet, a microphone) that can see more than the naked eye can easily see from a commercial aircraft as this would fall under privacy and eavesdropping laws. The only reason we haven't seen (many) lawsuits over the satellite imagry available online is because the resultion is poor enough that the argument can be made that anything visible in those satellite pictures would be visible from a commercial aircraft in controlled airspace to the naked eye. There won't ever be any "satellite voyeurism" with google earth, looking into people's windows and backyard fenced in pools.
Mark my words, if the industry blindly moves forward with this pipe dream and commercial drones start flying over private property, they are going to have so many "drone shot out of the sky" cases to investigate and attempt to prosecute that they will be busy for decades. People will quickly wise up to the fact that Amazon drones have "stuff" on them, and the criminals who are shoplifting now will be knocking drones down later.
As far as private property, you don't fly a drone or any other UAV over private property without permission from the owner. You just don't. If you do, next thing you're liable to hear is BANG and your UAV is falling out of the sky. Does the UAV have a camera? You have likely violated reasonable expectation of privacy and can be charged with both criminal and civil crimes over this. Don't make the argument that "oh, I think it is is illegal to shoot down drones" because people don't care - At least half of us are wise enough to understand what tyranny is and I'm pretty sure half of the USA is about read to start shooting over it!
While it is true that Americans have given some leeway to utility companies to run power/water/etc lines over/under their private property, the drone thing is a different situation and we are already at (and even past) the "enough is enough" level. Politicians won't even try to address the out of control costs in the healthcare industry, yet they want to legislate for drones over your home? Ha! This is a comedy :-DD
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version