Slashdot Mirror
Game of Drones: As US Dithers, Rivals Get a Head Start
Amanda Parker writes Drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), are a hot ticket in Silicon Valley, but U.S. government dithering over regulations has given overseas companies a head-start in figuring out how best to exploit them. Global spending on drones could add up to close to $100 billion over the next decade, with commercial uses — from farming and filming to pipelines and parcels — accounting for around an eighth of that market, according to BI Intelligence. But for years, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the authority largely responsible for regulation in the United States, has dragged its feet, only last month issuing draft rules on who can fly drones, how and where. It's likely to be a year or more before the regulations are in place — good news for companies operating outside the U.S. and looking to build a business around drones.
It's likely to be a year or more before the regulations are in place — good news for companies operating outside the U.S. and looking to build a business around drones.
Is that good news, really? I'm not sure I see why - if drones are unregulated enough in your country for you to start your business, what difference does it make what the US does?
In fact, is it possibly even bad news? Might potential investors see the US as "leading the way" by regulating/dithering against drones, and that might put them off investing in companies in countries where there is currently little/no regulation?
It's likely to be a year or more before the regulations are in place
So what's the current situtation? Is it unregulated, or is commercial drone flying blanket banned?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
different rules for different folks.
The US is very flexible when it comes to aviation regulations. When you hear on the news "No flight plan was filed..." it is because not flight plan is required for most flights. Aircraft are allowed to fly where they want most of the time (500ft away from objects, unless congested areas). Other countries are more constrained with current manned aircraft systems, so it is easier to control where the manned systems operate, keeping them away from the unmanned systems.
Now the UAS community wants to mix it up. Flying manned and unmanned aircraft in the same airspace, will be a challenge. Keeping them separated will take special processes and procedures. Quantified right of way rules, operating in see (sense) and avoid situations. Today the only technology that will keep UAS and manned aircraft systems separate are the eyeballs in the pilot/operators heads.
Then there are all kinds of considerations beyond that. Maintenance is a big one. The batteries in drones are similar to phone batteries. From the factory, they run for a day, but after a year of regular use, they don't have the same capacity, and your typical quad copter has only one mode when the batteries die, and it isn't a glide mode.
How about coordination with other operators. The big wreck on the freeway needs a EMS helicopter to evacuate a victim, but there are 6 UAS systems (3 TV stations, 2 newspapers and a dude with his for the heck of it) filming the carnage. How do you tell the UAS systems to get out of the way?
So to make all this work, there are operator training items to consider, maintenance requirements, communications requirements, accident reporting considerations, insurance and stuff most folks haven't thought about. If you think the FAA can knock that out in a weekend, you are fooling yourself. Go have a read of the proposed Part 107 regulations. Lots of things are missing, it is just a start, and it is well thought out.
I'm a firm believer in technology. But I am also a firm believer that just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
Just because I have a high power zoom lens on my camera doesn't mean I should be able to take pictures of my hot neighbor in the shower.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.