I’m fully aware of that, but they’re going to have a hard time doing that without intruding into the 400’ airspace... a 500’ winch cable simply isn’t going to happen...
FAA Remote I.D.
- Thread starter dronesky
- Start date
But I can crop dust with nothing... that’s my point. It’s getting ridiculous. The government will keep usurping our rights if we let them. I at least will voice my opposition. There should be exemptions for non gps equipped/ no camera, no self stabilizing platforms that cannot fly beyond VLOS. I have no problem with the staying under certain feet or staying on my property, but I don’t want to have to join a crowded AMA club to do the same hobby I’ve enjoyed for almost 40 years.
I actually am a member of AMA and used to belong to flying fields back before 2.4 ghz when you use to have to claim your channel so nobody else turned on their RC and caused your aircraft to crash. Some days it was impossible to fly.
That’s why I moved where I did. I can fly my foamies around my house and grow my own vegetables too.
The American dream is getting more and more restrictive all the time.
In all seriousness, the majority of my real estate drone pictures and just slightly at or above roof level. A house on a hill makes it hard to get nice frontal pics if you don’t have a drone. I take pics of rear decks with my drone actually in the trees sometimes to get the shot.
There should be grandfather clauses for us “ mom and pop” operations. Above 400’ broadcast ID... below you’re good to go. Same limitations as now around airports etc.
This should not be a 1 size fits all thing. When I drive my car I have to avoid the deer... but there is always going to be that rogue person who will steer into me no matter what I do to avoid them. Same with drones. Do you really think a terrorist is NOT going to build his own uas without any of this? This isn’t about national security... it’s about getting all the little people out of the way for the big boys...
Last edited:
Crop Dusting in a manned aircraft isn't the same thing as what the NPRM is all about. You and I both know that's an empty argument.
DITTO! Actually, if I'm being totally honest I do resent MultiRotors (well technology in general) for ruining that aspect of the hobby. It was so much fun and "pure" back them. Of course that's how it goes in many industries... technology changes them greatly. The same thing happened with photography years ago. The electronic camera pretty much ruined the industry, at least from my point of view.
I think that there should be "waivers" or "exemptions" that we can Test Out Of. I'm like you, other than Emergency Services work most of my flying is done low and close unless it's a HUGE complex and then I'll relocated several times.
Ok, but say my foamie rc plane is broadcasting its ID as required, the crop duster isn’t even going to know about it.... seems like a fruitless endeavor in class G airspace.
Yes, there should be exemptions but the FAA doesn’t want them!
Some counties in PA require emission testing for cars, others don’t. I’m guessing the FAA could do the same type thing by airspace classification.
This isn't just about crop dusters and foam RC aircraft. This is a first attempt to define a system that comprehensively integrates sUAS into the NAS. And exemptions will depend on the characteristics and capabilities of the aircraft, not your personal assurances on how you will use them.
I'm in the same boat my friend. I've got a whole work shop full of foamies and more. I can't think of what it would cost to "equip" the fleet for no "Flying Field" operations.
But crop dusters fly in the NAS and don’t even need instruments... let alone broadcast their location or have radio equipment to talk with ATC...
If I can post this link, flying in my back yard, completely under control, below tree level... and now I can’t do this?
Look at the long old school antennae LOL!
Yep same here. I fly from my deck several days a week.
I understand but, as I said, the regulations are targeting long-range sUAS that are easily capable of interfering with other traffic. There will certainly be some types of aircraft and use cases that are negatively impacted by the restrictions, but the needs of the many etc...
I understand exactly what the intent of the new proposed regs are, unfortunately there are some unintended (maybe) consequences that come along with them.
There should be exemptions like I’ve stated above. I do agree that the majority of sUAS should adhere to these regs, but I also feel there should be some limited exemptions...
I’ve said my peace... I do appreciate the necessity to evolve... but like bigAl07 said... I miss the old days...
Go sub-250 grams and don't worry about any of this.
Of course, doesn't help with previous investments.
Of course, doesn't help with previous investments.
I have rc planes from when I was 10... 38 years going strong. Now in 3 years or so they all gotta stay grounded?
I think some of the pro rc helicopter/ airplane people and companies that rep them will push back some...
Next year when FAA opens up comments for new law wouldn't hurt to email your senator about your concerns heres the link & please remember to be nice
www.senate.gov
U.S. Senate: Contacting U.S. Senators
www.senate.gov
Would still have the same airspace restrictions regardless of size of drone if flown outside
At least my spark that I use for inside video tours would be exempt...
I'm pretty sure that the sub 250gr loophole is being closely "Evaluated".... remember this is a NPRM and there could be various "modifications/Tweaks" to come into play before this becomes REAL.
Similar threads
- Sticky
