What this is really about (my opinion)

I notice that you didn't address a single point that I made in any of my previous posts, and so I'm not going to bother addressing yours. For what it's worth, which is very little on an internet forum, I'm a physicist and a state search and rescue Incident Commander.

Look I agree with rules, I just don’t drink the cool-Aid if you know what I mean.

The people that make the rules don’t end up enforcing them. Thank God for officer discretion.

I’ve done some SAR myself over the years... but then usually I’m up in the state police helicopter.

Truce!
 
I’ve been in law enforcement for almost 29 years. I’m exempted from 107 but took it to see how effective it is... plus I need it for my part time job.

If the police think the law is overbearing, the general public probably should too.

The general drone flying public I see have no idea about the law and I’m supposed to notify the FAA???

I’m not arguing with you, just telling you my opinion. If you like big laws, the more power to you.

What do you do for a living if I might ask?

Hmm...I’m not sure what to make of an LEO implying significant and default contempt for the very concept of “law”. THAT’s a bit scary.
 
Hmm...I’m not sure what to make of an LEO implying significant and default contempt for the very concept of “law”. THAT’s a bit scary.

Don’t misquote me, I think the FAA is overstepping... i don’t have contempt for the FAA or law and it’s ridiculous of you to say that.

There are lots of overstepping laws in Venezuela too, like the Government confiscates all the civilian guns (sound familiar). Now the public can’t fight back against a dictator. Hence our 2nd amendment which some in the government want to change. Won’t affect me, but should concern you!!!

The police don’t make the laws... we protect the public.... sometimes from their own stupidity.
 
Don’t misquote me, I think the FAA is overstepping... i don’t have contempt for the FAA or law and it’s ridiculous of you to say that.

There are lots of overstepping laws in Venezuela too, like the Government confiscates all the civilian guns (sound familiar). Now the public can’t fight back against a dictator. Hence our 2nd amendment which some in the government want to change. Won’t affect me, but should concern you!!!

The police don’t make the laws... we protect the public.... sometimes from their own stupidity.

I didn’t “quote” anything.

“Sound familiar”? Only to folks who have willing invited Faux News and InfoWars to install nonsense in their heads for 20 years.

Comparing anything about Venezuela to the U.S. (at least until the current Marmalade Clown took office), is absurd and monumentally ignorant.

Lest you dismiss me as some sort of liberal kook, I am at this very minute going out to test some new hunting loads in my back-yard; I just know how to think critically.
 
I didn’t “quote” anything.

“Sound familiar”? Only to folks who have willing invited Faux News and InfoWars to install nonsense in their heads for 20 years.

Comparing anything about Venezuela to the U.S. (at least until the current Marmalade Clown took office), is absurd and monumentally ignorant.

Lest you dismiss me as some sort of liberal kook, I am at this very minute going out to test some new hunting loads in my back-yard; I just know how to think critically.

Don’t compare the USA to Venezuela? Are you kidding me? Look at all the socialist democrats in office/ running for office....Then look at how great it worked in Venezuela.

You better hold on to your guns... you might need them. Todays college are teaching our kids to be embarrassed to be an American. Former President Obama went on an apology tour.. if we ever get attacked invaded by a foreign government, I’m afraid some of these people might join their cause not fight for ours.

You might be able to think “critically” but a lot of Americans can’t. If they think they are oppressed now, God help them if they have to learn to speak Chinese or N Korean or Russian... yes I know Chinese and N Korean aren’t languages, was making a point!!!!

Sorry off topic.....
 
Don’t compare the USA to Venezuela? Are you kidding me? Look at all the socialist democrats in office/ running for office....Then look at how great it worked in Venezuela.

You better hold on to your guns... you might need them. Todays college are teaching our kids to be embarrassed to be an American. Former President Obama went on an apology tour.. if we ever get attacked invaded by a foreign government, I’m afraid some of these people might join their cause not fight for ours.

You might be able to think “critically” but a lot of Americans can’t. If they think they are oppressed now, God help them if they have to learn to speak Chinese or N Korean or Russian... yes I know Chinese and N Korean aren’t languages, was making a point!!!!

Sorry off topic.....

You really have lost the plot entirely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheKestrel
I got this email from Skyward today, who was excited about the future of 5G and drones.

The new drone rules are about money and commercial use of autonomous drones. DJI is all in on it, which is why they supported this and I believe they are going to eventually abandon consumers. How many consumers are going to pay enough to add remote id to their existing or future drones. It's not gonna be free. Prices going up will push the small operators out of the business, which is what the big guys want...0-400 feet.

Here's one quote:
"There’s just one problem. Without a system for universal air traffic management – which would allow air traffic controllers and law enforcement to understand where drones are flying and for what purpose – utilities, telecommunications companies, engineering firms, and freight carriers can’t safely deploy autonomous drones, even if they are connected to 5G.
Last September, I testified before the House Subcommittee on Aviation to help our representatives understand the technical and regulatory updates we need to realize the transformational power of drones. Part of the solution is a requirement for something called remote identification – a “digital license plate” for drones – whether flown for fun or commercially. Remote ID for drones would allow air traffic regulators and law enforcement to identify the pilot or operator of a drone that isn’t complying with regulations.
As a concept, remote ID is like the actual license plates that law enforcement use to identify the owner of a motor vehicle, but it’s most similar to the IP addresses that identify us when we connect to the Internet.
In a Washington Post op-ed last summer, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen wrote, “Without congressional action, the U.S. government will remain unable to identify, track and mitigate weaponized or dangerous drones.”
Congress agreed, and in January the FAA began the process of creating a pilot program with industry partners to test remote ID technologies. The FAA expects to announce remote ID rules later this year."

Homeland security even made it about making the sky safe from the bad guys, even though like guns, only the law-abiding of us will follow the laws....

Please consider the possibility that this regulatory activity may have absolutely nothing nefarious behind it. In the case of some kind of ID system, surely it’s logically obvious that something like that would reduce the number of very dangerous and illegal drone activities that continue to occur. Yes, there may be costs imposed but geez...is that too much of a burden for us all to take on because others of “us” (some seen here actually!) dismiss everything as Big Gummint or that their 200years of flying RC planes, makes them too superior?

In the case of other regulatory activity, the choice to demarcate drone operations in reference to “commercial” operations is widely recognized (retroactively unfortunately), to have been a bad and hasty decision, that simply flowed from existing regulatory constructs. Around the world, governments and industry groups are working very hard (for the public) on understanding the potential for unmanned flight (both piloted and anonymous, SUAS and LUAS) going into the future, and how they might manage all that to insure both safety and commerce.

Please consider that.
 
Nope I just don’t have my head up my *** ?

It's both remarkable and disturbing that someone with your complete lack of understanding of this country, its laws, and even easily verifiable recent history, might be involved in LE.
 
Don’t compare the USA to Venezuela? Are you kidding me? Look at all the socialist democrats in office/ running for office....Then look at how great it worked in Venezuela.

You better hold on to your guns... you might need them. Todays college are teaching our kids to be embarrassed to be an American. Former President Obama went on an apology tour.. if we ever get attacked invaded by a foreign government, I’m afraid some of these people might join their cause not fight for ours.

You might be able to think “critically” but a lot of Americans can’t. If they think they are oppressed now, God help them if they have to learn to speak Chinese or N Korean or Russian... yes I know Chinese and N Korean aren’t languages, was making a point!!!!

Sorry off topic.....

“....a lot of Americans can’t”. Uh, well proven!

You prove my point about installed nonsense at least six times in that last post. Sweet!

Lastly, if you have any wish to be taken seriously, you might want to read up on the very significant difference between Democratic Socialism, and what they have in Venezuela. Not even remotely related (except the dictator in Venezuela used the word to gain initial populist backing). Seriously, get educated!
 
  • Like
Reactions: sar104
I personally am all about safety... which is why I flew RC airplanes (not quite 200 years) and never had an mishaps except my own fingers once.

Remote ID, I’m on board.

Rules and Regs, I’m on board.

Making 100,000 drone operators learn to read sectional charts because maybe 1 guy might fly at airport... silly. Consider this, if an airport wants to have a drone check something out, they are exempted just like the police are exempted.

That was my point..... I’m not anti law, but I have seen my share of silly laws over my 200 years of law enforcement ?. Plus I got my 107 and didn’t have to, I acquiesced, I capitulated, am not recalcitrant like some like to believe...sorry some petulant people like the big words ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheKestrel
“....a lot of Americans can’t”. Uh, well proven!

You prove my point about installed nonsense at least six times in that last post. Sweet!

Lastly, if you have any wish to be taken seriously, you might want to read up on the very significant difference between Democratic Socialism, and what they have in Venezuela. Not even remotely related (except the dictator in Venezuela used the word to gain initial populist backing). Seriously, get educated!



?
 
Democratic Socialism... kinda like “jumbo shrimp.” ;)

Like i said.....installed. Doh.

I cant let that go by....

"Democratic" refers to a type of government system such as what we currently (ostensibly) have in the US.

"Socialism" refers to an economic system such as what we essentially currently have in the U.S., though the vast (vast!)majority of the benefits go to the wealthy and the corporations.

Beware that which has been installed.
 
Last edited:
I apologize since I’ve gotten off topic in this thread. I just recently-read the OP post and here is my take:

I’m all about safety. If the FAA wants my drone to broadcast its identity to notify others around it so everybody can be more safe, I’m onboard. Hopefully it won’t be cost prohibitive for us common folk.

I’m just curious though, if the FAA is all about safety, why were we the last ones (or pretty far down the list if not last) to ground the Boeing 737 Max. There were 2 crashes with fatalities in relatively new airplanes (as I understand it less than 4 months old) and the FAA didn’t act until ordered to do so by the President.

I’ve become aware that some on this forum look to be offended, so chew on the above for a minute...

I would have been impressed with the FAA’s concern for safety if they didn’t blow off 2 737 Max plane crashes in a relatively short time period. But they are concerned about my toy drone? Sorry, unmanned aerial system.

Bottom line, I do what the law requires because I’m law abiding..., but the ones that aren’t, well we know how they act.

Example, Chicago has very strict gun laws.... has it helped their homicide rate? Nope, only affects the law abiding citizens....

Now I’m sure some on this forum are gonna say you can’t compare the two, I should be more educated, blah blah blah. I’m done posting in this thread.
 
I apologize since I’ve gotten off topic in this thread. I just recently-read the OP post and here is my take:

I’m all about safety. If the FAA wants my drone to broadcast its identity to notify others around it so everybody can be more safe, I’m onboard. Hopefully it won’t be cost prohibitive for us common folk.

I’m just curious though, if the FAA is all about safety, why were we the last ones (or pretty far down the list if not last) to ground the Boeing 737 Max. There were 2 crashes with fatalities in relatively new airplanes (as I understand it less than 4 months old) and the FAA didn’t act until ordered to do so by the President.

I’ve become aware that some on this forum look to be offended, so chew on the above for a minute...

I would have been impressed with the FAA’s concern for safety if they didn’t blow off 2 737 Max plane crashes in a relatively short time period. But they are concerned about my toy drone? Sorry, unmanned aerial system.

Bottom line, I do what the law requires because I’m law abiding..., but the ones that aren’t, well we know how they act.

Example, Chicago has very strict gun laws.... has it helped their homicide rate? Nope, only affects the law abiding citizens....

Now I’m sure some on this forum are gonna say you can’t compare the two, I should be more educated, blah blah blah. I’m done posting in this thread.

Being "all about safety" will never be able to reduce risk to zero. Unfortunately, no matter the extent of the due-diligence, lessons in life will sometimes be learned the hard way. That sucks but thats just the way it is; for all of us, no matter where we are or what we do. Some of us do try though - regardless.

I am also done.
 
I’m just curious though, if the FAA is all about safety, why were we the last ones (or pretty far down the list if not last) to ground the Boeing 737 Max. There were 2 crashes with fatalities in relatively new airplanes (as I understand it less than 4 months old) and the FAA didn’t act until ordered to do so by the President.

That's because under the current wisdom of deregulation and reduction in funding for agencies such as the FAA, and pressure to allow companies such as Boeing to regulate themselves, Boeing largely were allowed to test and certify their own aircraft and then put up stiff resistance to grounding it. And the President supported that position until the very last minute, when it became so completely untenable that he had to pretend to intervene.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fw190
That's because under the current wisdom of deregulation and reduction in funding for agencies such as the FAA, and pressure to allow companies such as Boeing to regulate themselves, Boeing largely were allowed to test and certify their own aircraft and then put up stiff resistance to grounding it. And the President supported that position until the very last minute, when it became so completely untenable that he had to pretend to intervene.

Actually, between the time of the second accident and when the aircraft were grounded, the fact that there was a technical root-cause was simply unknown. What definitely COULD be believed (with some reason), was that those airlines had insufficient training programs in place. No one knew.

Its always important to accurately remember sequence-of-events, else the wrong and sometimes irrelevant lessons are "learned". Of course Boeing was self-interested and probably had had undue success (via lobbying efforts) to have their voice amplified, but that doesn't mean, in any way, that what was then known, was not what was then known.

And i am no fan of Trump.
 
Actually, between the time of the second accident and when the aircraft were grounded, the fact that there was a technical root-cause was simply unknown. What definitely COULD be believed (with some reason), was that those airlines had insufficient training programs in place. No one knew.

Its always important to accurately remember sequence-of-events, else the wrong and sometimes irrelevant lessons are "learned". Of course Boeing was self-interested and probably had had undue success (via lobbying efforts) to have their voice amplified, but that doesn't mean, in any way, that what was then known, was not what was then known.

That was the argument made, of course, but the fact remains that most other countries grounded the aircraft based on the information available. Even the cursory review of the publicly available flight telemetry made the similarities of the two incidents very obvious, and the existing information on the first crash had already cast serious doubt on whether this was just a lack of training by the airlines. And the US decision to follow suit did not appear to result from the development of any new information - more a belated acknowledgement of the obvious. There is no way to spin this well for Boeing, the FAA or the administration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gringorio

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,356
Members
104,934
Latest member
jody.paugh@fullerandsons.