Why you should stop using AirMap

[mrhinman]

AirMap is probably one of the more popular apps that many UAS pilots use to determine airspaces and obtain LAANC approvals.

Unfortunately, most folks don't know that AirMap is working against the drone industry (USA).

That's right, the people at AirMap are supporting harmful legislation that, if enacted, will be detrimental to both the hobby and commercial drone industry.

AirMap and their co-founders have been supporters of two things: 1) The "patchwork of laws" scenario, where municipalities will be able to control airspaces below 400 feet and 2) The Tort Law Relating to Drones (Uniform Law Commission).

The "patchwork of laws" basically would allow for a variety of airspaces that municipalities and other entities could create. Imagine living in an area like Dallas where little cities are all connected to each other, and every few miles having a completely different set of airspace rules and permits to go along with that.

The Tort Law Relating to Drones would allow for property owners to file civil litigation against any drone pilot who "trespasses" by air over their property. Again, an effort to basically take the NAS and give it to anyone they want. And, allowing someone to sue you for photography that includes their property in any shape or form.

These reasons are why I constantly preach against AirMap and their co-founders (especially Gregory McNeal). These people, despite their outward appearance of supporting drone operators, are working behind the scenes to control it much to detriment of drone pilots across the USA.

If you're seeking alternatives to LAANC and airspace information, some good alternatives include Kittyhawk and Skyward.io. It should be noted that Kittyhawk and DJI recently separated themselves from AirMap.

It's your choice if you wish to continue using AirMap. But just remember if you do, you are supporting a company who does not have your best interests in mind.

Links:

Backlash Against ULC Proposal to Ban Drones from Flying Below 200 Feet

ULC attempts to ban drones from flying below 200 feet above private property. Drone industry leaders pen letter in opposition to proposed law.

uavcoach.com

The biggest threat to drone innovation is a group you’ve never heard of | TechCrunch

A little-known but highly influential group of attorneys from across the country will soon meet in Detroit and could change our skies forever. They claim their draft model legislation concerning drones will help protect privacy. However, their actions could have far-reaching effects on...

techcrunch.com

A tussle over airspace. Could news drones be collateral damage? | RJI

New proposed regulations may chill the media’s use of drones for newsgathering purposes.

www.rjionline.org

A new proposed law would turn drone journalism into a swarm of lawsuits and make it easy to sue over news photography

Imagine if a news photographer at a football game had to get permission from every single person in the stadium before taking a single shot — or else face hundreds of civil lawsuits. That's what new model legislation wants to bring to public airspace.

www.niemanlab.org

 

[PhantomFandom]

AirMap is probably one of the more popular apps that many UAS pilots use to determine airspaces and obtain LAANC approvals.

Unfortunately, most folks don't know that AirMap is working against the drone industry (USA).

That's right, the people at AirMap are supporting harmful legislation that, if enacted, will be detrimental to both the hobby and commercial drone industry.

AirMap and their co-founders have been supporters of two things: 1) The "patchwork of laws" scenario, where municipalities will be able to control airspaces below 400 feet and 2) The Tort Law Relating to Drones (Uniform Law Commission).

The "patchwork of laws" basically would allow for a variety of airspaces that municipalities and other entities could create. Imagine living in an area like Dallas where little cities are all connected to each other, and every few miles having a completely different set of airspace rules and permits to go along with that.

The Tort Law Relating to Drones would allow for property owners to file civil litigation against any drone pilot who "trespasses" by air over their property. Again, an effort to basically take the NAS and give it to anyone they want. And, allowing someone to sue you for photography that includes their property in any shape or form.

These reasons are why I constantly preach against AirMap and their co-founders (especially Gregory McNeal). These people, despite their outward appearance of supporting drone operators, are working behind the scenes to control it much to detriment of drone pilots across the USA.

If you're seeking alternatives to LAANC and airspace information, some good alternatives include Kittyhawk and Skyward.io. It should be noted that Kittyhawk and DJI recently separated themselves from AirMap.

It's your choice if you wish to continue using AirMap. But just remember if you do, you are supporting a company who does not have your best interests in mind.

Links:

Backlash Against ULC Proposal to Ban Drones from Flying Below 200 Feet

ULC attempts to ban drones from flying below 200 feet above private property. Drone industry leaders pen letter in opposition to proposed law.

uavcoach.com

The biggest threat to drone innovation is a group you’ve never heard of | TechCrunch

A little-known but highly influential group of attorneys from across the country will soon meet in Detroit and could change our skies forever. They claim their draft model legislation concerning drones will help protect privacy. However, their actions could have far-reaching effects on...

techcrunch.com

A tussle over airspace. Could news drones be collateral damage? | RJI

New proposed regulations may chill the media’s use of drones for newsgathering purposes.

www.rjionline.org

A new proposed law would turn drone journalism into a swarm of lawsuits and make it easy to sue over news photography

Imagine if a news photographer at a football game had to get permission from every single person in the stadium before taking a single shot — or else face hundreds of civil lawsuits. That's what new model legislation wants to bring to public airspace.

www.niemanlab.org

If true, I would totally agree and support your stance on boycotting AirMap. However, there are many important facts you have left out:

• The articles you pointed to are all very old and the current proposed reform from ULC has changed since then.
• The ULC proposal for drone tort law reform has changed so that it is now trying to just deal with nuisance to the land owner since it quickly realized that only the FAA can regulate the NAS. Even in its current state, it is unlikely that the proposal will pass any legal challenges since it is overly aggressive in defining land owner rights to airspace above their property.
• The ULC annual meeting is in fact this week, and we will see what comes out of it as far as this proposal is concerned.
• Where is the documentation that verifies AirMap's support for the ULC drone tort reform? I have seen no mention of that support anywhere.

 

[mrhinman]

The problem still exists that the ULC's proposal is still a "Tort Law Relating to Drones". And Greg McNeal (AirMap co-founder) is still on the Committee.

I reached out to AirMap some time ago concerning their support for anti-drone legislation. I told them I would gladly begin using their apps again if I knew that they were not supporting the patchwork concept or the Tort Law anymore. They basically told me "bye".

It was clear they have no interest in backing off their stance. No one at AirMap (including Ben Marcus) have rebutted any of the aforementioned articles (also see other links psoted on MavicPilots.com), nor have they come out and said anything public to state their support of the drone operator.

Yes, the ULC has altered the language of the proposal, but it still has the overarching purpose of making a civil suit possible for every drone operator. This has to stop.

The dots are easily connected, but as I said before, each person can make up their own mind and research all the facts before they decide to use or not use any software or support any company. I for one will not until they publicly change their position.

Best Wishes.

If true, I would totally agree and support your stance on boycotting AirMap. However, there are many important facts you have left out:

• The articles you pointed to are all very old and the current proposed reform from ULC has changed since then.
• The ULC proposal for drone tort law reform has changed so that it is now trying to just deal with nuisance to the land owner since it quickly realized that only the FAA can regulate the NAS. Even in its current state, it is unlikely that the proposal will pass any legal challenges since it is overly aggressive in defining land owner rights to airspace above their property.
• The ULC annual meeting is in fact this week, and we will see what comes out of it as far as this proposal is concerned.
• Where is the documentation that verifies AirMap's support for the ULC drone tort reform? I have seen no mention of that support anywhere.

 

[DroneB]

There is almost a cult following of people who diss on AirMap. Always, the competitor Skyward is mentioned and, to connect the dots, Skyward appears to be part of the negative campaign. I'd encourage those interested to try AirMap vs. Skyward. Skyward still doesn't work on Android, is bloated and strongly hints that they will start charging for services. I like Kittyhawk for tracking flights and maintenance logs but fails miserably on mobile phone LAANC approval. I've used AirMap for over two years. It is easy, responsive and continually works to make it better. Doesn't act like a company trying to put droning out of business.

 

[mrhinman]

There is almost a cult following of people who diss on AirMap. Always, the competitor Skyward is mentioned and, to connect the dots, Skyward appears to be part of the negative campaign. I'd encourage those interested to try AirMap vs. Skyward. Skyward still doesn't work on Android, is bloated and strongly hints that they will start charging for services. I like Kittyhawk for tracking flights and maintenance logs but fails miserably on mobile phone LAANC approval. I've used AirMap for over two years. It is easy, responsive and continually works to make it better. Doesn't act like a company trying to put droning out of business.

Well I don’t work for Skyward or any other. And AirMap is a good app, but on principle I cannot support their company as long as they are working behind the scenes against us.

 

[N017RW]

The ULC can only propose uniform laws.

The states' legislators have to make them law.
This can include amending which can change, inc. eliminating, any provision of the proposal.

 

[PhantomFandom]

The ULC can only propose uniform laws.

The states' legislators have to make them law.
This can include amending which can change, inc. eliminating, any provision of the proposal.

Not only that, but only a small percentage of their proposals ever get enacted into law by any states. Plus any proposal still would need to withstand scrutiny in the courts if it were to counter FAA regulations.
The ULC in general seems to be a group of self important lawyers with nothing better to do. They have no mandate from any Federal or State governing body and their proposals never end up in any sort of UNIFORM laws across all 50 states.

 

[Nightwolf]

The Tort Law Relating to Drones would allow for property owners to file civil litigation against any drone pilot who "trespasses" by air over their property. Again, an effort to basically take the NAS and give it to anyone they want. And, allowing someone to sue you for photography that includes their property in any shape or form.

That will never fly


sorry

 

[Adamborz]

That will never fly


sorry

Hey, I get it, never fly haha that’s a pun!!!

I use AirMap to before every part 107 flight I do. Easy to use and I get immediate FAA authorization!!

I tried to use Kittyhawk the other day, I just checked and it still says pending.

 

[MPPilot]

Well I don’t work for Skyward or any other. And AirMap is a good app, but on principle I cannot support their company as long as they are working behind the scenes against us.

You say that the AirMap co-founder is still on the committee. That does not mean he is necessarily for or against the drone regulations. The reason committees are used is to get differing opinions and come to a consensus if possible. I don't know, he may be personally against drones (seems strange for someone who co-founded a drone app) but just because he is on the committee doesn't mean he is against them. Better to have facts. Believe it or not, not everything on the Internet is true.

Just my thoughts, for what they are worth.

 

[Phantom Pirate]

Believe it or not, not everything on the Internet is true.

I am blown away! All this time I thought that what we read on the internet (or watch on the news) was true! I'm broken, in pieces, crushed I tell you! LOL

 

[Adamborz]

Well I use it to for all my part 107 flights, never had a problem!

 

[dangerd]

Airmap have an interest in making the NAS for complicated for drones. I have problems with some of their positions. I have written to them in the past, with that said their product is the best Mobil solution at this time. I like skyward but am sometimes unable to use them.
I have been watching and communicating with the ULC for a while and don’t agree with everything they have tried to do in the past but what is there now is somewhat reasonable.
In the end the FAA will rule the sky. The cities etc are always going to make problems for us but at least with the ULC you know what is coming.
The bigger problem to come will be when giant corporations want to clear the small operations out of their way in the sky and independent operators have to defend against them.
This is all old news.
If you want to change things you have to get involved early.