Daylight only operations as per FAA- no more night flights

At the end of the day the media has created a threat when little to none really existed and now John Q. Public is genuinely afraid for their life and privacy every time anything that even remotely resembles a "MultiRotor" goes into the air.

Boy, is that spot on or what . . . ?
 
I'm more concerned about the requirement of us having to physically go to a location to pass a test and then have to be vetted by the TSA.
... do you realise this is a proposal for a replacement for the 333 exemption system for commercial flying - not for recreational pilots.
 
I love the new proposed guidelines, the test should be like the FAA's test for your private pilots test...

You get a study book and you can goto ground school and then take a test on a computer

For drones it could just be an 8 hour class then the test

Again, this is only for commercial operations

It's a hell of a lot better than having a private pilots license and a 333 exemption

Matthew
 
Im I reading this right ?? is a proposal....which means ???


See below
OK... That would ruin my ability to photograph my country home with Christmas Lights on a snowy Winters Night Under a Full Moon... I hope the FAA is proud of ruining my joy! (';')
 
  • Like
Reactions: ronmcq
I always thought there was no night flying. Pretty sure that bit is law and not currently a proposal.

According to the most recent AMA email update I received, it is stated that night flying is NOT restricted to AMA members but I think that applies to all quads as long as they are abiding by the AMA safety guidelines. I suspect those are the same as the FAA guidelines just about word for word.
 
As Meta implied above, maybe the OP should have included, and maybe we should all read the leading sentence of this proposal:

Executive Summary

A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action

This rulemaking proposes operating requirements to allow small unmanned aircraft systems (small UAS) to operate for non-hobby or non-recreational purposes.


...

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_poli.../2120-AJ60_NPRM_2-15-2015_joint_signature.pdf
 
I love the new proposed guidelines, the test should be like the FAA's test for your private pilots test...

For drones it could just be an 8 hour class then the test

Matthew

What on earth could they build a class on that could possibly last eight hours? I could give that class in 30 minutes, maybe even 15 minutes.

Electrical Theory, Brush up on Newton's gravity experiments, Theory of Relativity, Eyeglass cleaning prior to takeoff, Not texting or answering phone while flying.

Oh, and going to an approved FAA site for the test. 200 miles away, and only on Tuesday afternoon between 1pm and 3pm.

Got it.
 
In the first couple decades of the 20th century, there were no requirements for driver's licenses. You'd could drive all day and probably not encounter another car. You'd probably have had a much bigger chance of colliding with a runaway horse than another car...or pedestrian. Today, the U.S. has over 300 million motor vehicles. Some sort of driver qualification and licensing is needed. Fortunately, according to many surveys, 90% of our drivers consider themselves to be "above average," so we only kill 35,000 and injure another million or more annually.

Similarly for our drones. A few thousand drones is quickly exploding into millions. With this, the danger to the public is rising. Some sort of licensing and control is inevitable and IMO desirable.

As for flying at night, the flashing flight lights enable me to keep track of my P2 further away than I can in the day. But at night FLV is mostly useless, and I can't see the obstacles or judge distance as well either.

I think that many of the proposed rules are just common sense, but so many of the operators have virtually no common sense. So we'll have rules and regulations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigAl07 and JTC
What on earth could they build a class on that could possibly last eight hours? I could give that class in 30 minutes, maybe even 15 minutes.

Electrical Theory, Brush up on Newton's gravity experiments, Theory of Relativity, Eyeglass cleaning prior to takeoff, Not texting or answering phone while flying.

Oh, and going to an approved FAA site for the test. 200 miles away, and only on Tuesday afternoon between 1pm and 3pm.

Got it.
They'll do the testing online like they do for safe boating courses. It'll lower the bar so anybody can pass (an online test is like an open book exam). But the average person will absorb something, so it'll do some good. And when somebody breaks the rules, they won't be able to say, "Nobody told me..."
 
No offense to you "Othan1" but I'm using you as an example but at the same time adding to your quote to prove a point. At no time did you say what I am posting below but over the last couple of years many others have so I'm ad-libbing here so please don't take it personal. This is my 2 cents and my rant so take it for what you paid for it :)

On one hand we want our hobby to be taken seriously and not called a "toy". We want the freedom and respect of not "just playing with toys". We want to be big boys in a sense so we buy aircraft (that's what they are now) that are very complex and capable of not only long range but autonomous long-range flight. This enables them to operate in a much broader area than a simple "flying field" down on the farm. This allows them to at least "potentially" (intentionally and unintentionally) operate in the National Air Space which is where manned aircraft operate. So by not calling these a toy anymore and because they care very capable of operating within the NAS they are now subject to big-boy rules/regulations (in some cases laws). Everyone is in an up roar because all of a sudden their "hobby" is now being restricted, registered, and regulated like never before. Unfortunately part of the responsibility of operating in manned airspace will be getting "vetted" and taking a very simple and basic knowledge test.

At the end of the day flying in NAS (or having the potential to do so) is not a God given right but a privilege and with that comes responsibility and accountability. I'm not saying the new hobby registration system is perfect or close to it but it's needed. To be perfectly honest I sincerely feel like if the AMA membership had been made mandatory years ago (like a radio operator's license used to be) then the registration system would be a moot point right now. With that being said I can only imagine if everyone wanting to fly a multirotor was told today that they have to pay $56 ($75 now) per year to the AMA in order to fly they would blow a gasket. That's how we've flown R/C for decades but today it's a different time and "thought process" which in and of itself has helped created this public fear monster we are now subject to.

Think of the "required testing and vetting" is like going to get your driver's license. You don't have to drive but if you're going to drive on public roads etc you'd better follow the rules and get your driver's license etc. Very much like flying our "aircraft" today. You "can" drive without a license etc but if you get caught the penalties can add up and be painful in a hurry.

At the end of the day the media has created a threat when little to none really existed and now John Q. Public is genuinely afraid for their life and privacy every time anything that even remotely resembles a "MultiRotor" goes into the air. You can bet your bottom dollar that John Q. Public has a much louder voice than every single R/C aircraft operator in the world and John Q. Public will cause further legislation, regulation and ultimately restrictions until something else comes along that unites the many for a common goal regardless how unfounded and pointless it is or is not.

Again this is not directed at any one person but simply my 2 cents.

This is right on point - besides, the test will not be difficult so why all the worry? In California where I live, the test required to purchase a firearm is so moronically simple - and it's easy to have an accident with a firearm - so using that as a watermark the FAA test will not be difficult and should be required for anyone operating a drone of the sophistication of a Phantom. 15 - 20 questions to make sure you're not an idiot. I would be more concerned that the TSA is involved - they are inept at the core.
 
You have to understand, right now it's mainly hobbyists and pro video/photographers who are using drones. That's a very very very minutely small percentage. The drone industry is slated to go from $2bil to $12 bil in two years time and keep growing exponentially. Now imagine 1000's of drones flying all over the city on a given weekend/day. There are so many chances of things going wrong that there needs to be some rules in place. I can already foresee a lot of incidents due to any of the below:
1) Some idiot decides to fly the drone right after receiving it, without any prior flying experience or reading the manual
2) Pushing your luck by flying it in a congested area (tall buildings, trees)
3) Flying on low battery: I'll-just-fly-for-two-quick-minutes and then charge it afterwards (if that opportunity ever comes)

These accidents are pretty much already a given. With 10,000+ people flying, i would estimate at least 20% will cause some trouble.

As with everything as time passes and things become the norm, laws will change, but right now it's too soon to be flexible. This forum community and yourself won't be representing a majority of the drone users out there, and just think about the 10,000's of other people out there looking to purchase their first drone sometime in the next two years.

Just like with anything else laws will change in time. I bet when cars first came out there were some pretty strict rules on how to drive them, but over decades rules changed and took different forms.

Don't honestly know if it's true or not - supposedly, in 1904, there were two automobiles registered in the city of St. Louis. They ran into each other one day! It sounds preposterous, but I can just imagine the scene - "I had the right-of-way. I was here first. You should have gotten out of the way!" LOL
 
Don't honestly know if it's true or not - supposedly, in 1904, there were two automobiles registered in the city of St. Louis. They ran into each other one day! It sounds preposterous, but I can just imagine the scene - "I had the right-of-way. I was here first. You should have gotten out of the way!" LOL

My info (born/raised in KCMO) - "First automobile accident in Kansas City involved two cars in 1901 at 11th and Locust Streets between the first two automobiles." Reportedly a game of "chicken".
 
My info (born/raised in KCMO) - "First automobile accident in Kansas City involved two cars in 1901 at 11th and Locust Streets between the first two automobiles." Reportedly a game of "chicken".

Sorry for any confusion by my "sweeping generalization" about driving in the early 20th century. It's amusing, but not totally surprising that two cars in 1901 (or whatever) could have collided.

After all, even incidents that are "vanishingly small" to individual actors, become a near certainty given enough time and players. That, for instance, is the big bog-a-boo affecting the nuclear power industry. It's also why we all climb into our automobiles without fear. But we all know people who have been killed or maimed in them...right? About one chance in about 150 you'll be killed in an auto accident in your lifetime in the U.S.

Anyway, as the number of drone-flying-hours increases, the vanishingly small chance of major incidents will increase. It's inevitable.

That's Freakenomics for ya.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigAl07
Sorry for any confusion by my "sweeping generalization" about driving in the early 20th century. It's amusing, but not totally surprising that two cars in 1901 (or whatever) could have collided.

After all, even incidents that are "vanishingly small" to individual actors, become a near certainty given enough time and players. That, for instance, is the big bog-a-boo affecting the nuclear power industry. It's also why we all climb into our automobiles without fear. But we all know people who have been killed or maimed in them...right? About one chance in about 150 you'll be killed in an auto accident in your lifetime in the U.S.

Anyway, as the number of drone-flying-hours increases, the vanishingly small chance of major incidents will increase. It's inevitable.

That's Freakenomics for ya.

That's pretty much what I said, but in a lot more words :p
 
i fly mine and my sons at night we have 2 sets of lights one white headlight and his is blue led and mine red led all around it. we fly in north las vegas and film each others units in the sky - its really cool in 2k uhd. no one has ever said anything to us at all. most stick around for the show.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,354
Members
104,934
Latest member
jody.paugh@fullerandsons.