Study finds drones flying into danger - AOPA
I have two issues with that piece.
"each marked with a maximum altitude (400 feet, 200 feet, or zero feet) below which a drone could be authorized to fly without creating unacceptable risk."
Wallace said. “At this point, we just don’t know.”
Is there a risk? YES! Well established.
Are you serious about mitigating it? NO!
Why publish something that has undetailed information. We find out that some of the drone sightings at Gatwick MAY have been their own surveillance drones. Really!
Putting regulations on fly areas that make no sense just encourages people to override them. Is 0 ft unacceptable? Only if it is flat ground with no access to humans, animals, fences, buildings, etc.
Can you fly IN your house in a NFZ? NO! Can you fly to 50Ft over your house? NO! What is the risk? That someone will override that? They will anyway if they are so disposed. Otherwise, it will just aggravate more people to ignore the restrictions and ruin the hobby.
I am 100% for bowtie zones. Makes all the sense in the world.
I am all for fly zones determined by a distance around and over the highest structure.
A runway should be 0 ft., but my house is not ON the runway so I should be able to fly 50' over my house to look at my roof, don't you think? If my house is located that close to a runway, I should move.
The NPS appears to be flat refusing to establish sensible regulations for a new use for the parks. After over 2 years, you would think that they would have come up with some ideas by now.
Numerous incidents of people and local police abuse always seems to be decided against the pilot. Do you think "always" is too strong a word?
It seems to me that the goal is to destroy the hobby, not to accommodate it. Let's scare the hell out of the public so we can pass the laws to eliminate hobby drones entirely.
Wallace said. “At this point, we just don’t know.”