Slashdot Mirror
FAA Has Approved More Than 1,000 Drone Exemptions
coondoggie writes: The Federal Aviation Administration today said it has issued 1,008 exemptions to businesses wanting to fly unmanned aircraft in the national airspace. Such small drones have been on the bad side of the news in the past few days: there have been at least three complaints about the diminutive aircraft flying near the flight path of JFK airport in New York. All three of the flights landed safely but the events prompted New York Senator Charles Schumer to call for "tougher FAA rules on drones," as well as geofencing software that could prohibit a done from flying higher than 500 feet, and keep it two miles away from any airport or sensitive area.
"...geofencing software that could prohibit a done from flying higher than 500 feet, and keep it two miles away from any airport or sensitive area."
...for those law-abiding drone operators who choose to use it.
FAA also approved this first post exemption.
1) Have the legislature pass a law against X with exemptions to be granted by agency Y and get the executive to sign it. (Ideally, X outlaws everyone from doing anything - see below.)
2) As an employee of agency Y, get into a position of power to grant exemptions
3) Accept bribes (quietly, the "invest $500K in my brother-in-law's fishing charter" kind) to grant exemptions to the law
4) PROFIT!
I am assuming they mean above ground, because otherwise it would be a stupid idea (I'm not saying that's impossible). Do you require drones to be equipped with laser or radar altimeters? Do you require them to use DTED?
You are all giraffes. Giraffes say ????. ????! ????! ???? giraffes ????! ???? say the giraffes. YOU GIRAFFES!!
... to fly drones outside your own personal property. That would solve many of these issues very quickly. Pilots are trained to understand airspace restrictions, to file flight plans, and to look up TFRs before they fly. Obviously, you can't trust normal people to do these things, so licenses should be required. Flying a drone without a license should be a prosecutable criminal offense, and even worse if you bust airspace.
Perhaps a drone shooting automated turret at the airport is in order.
It could also take out those pesky geese!
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
This is SO FUCKING STUPID!! Is the FAA now opening a new division and hiring more bureaucrats just to process drone exception paperwork? What a stupid waste of money! That's how you know it was invented by government employees.
The real solution is very simple: just declare that drones are only allowed to fly in class Gulf airspace, knock it off with the bullshit bureaucracy, and watch sales of sectionals, airspace databases, and GPS units increase. THERE! I fixed that for ya.
Oh, and as common sense, don't piss people off by flying too close over their property. If you do, there's an increasing likelihood the property owner will pull out a gun or a net and bring your drone down. As with everything else in life, live in peace and don't piss off your neighbors! Government people, that last part is true but falls within the realm of "common sense", so it doesn't need to be codified in your regs.
See there? We made life easier for everyone involved and gave the economy a shot in the arm which increases the income tax base. More money for less work! Come on, government guys... WAKE UP!
So, how 'bout it, Slashdot community? Who's going to write some open source autopilot software that automatically keeps drones out of controlled airspace? How about an open source 3D airspace database? How about an open hardware ATC mode C transponder Arduino shield that also participates in TCAS and AIS-B to alert other aircraft of your drone's presence?
I wish that I could install some variation on a radio beacon in my house, and know that it was illegal for drones to fly within 500 feet of it without my permission.
That way - the kentucky thing, whether they were gang-peeping on his teenage daughter or not, would not happen to me without me being strongly legally justified in blowing the hunk-o-junk to bitz.
After decades, the government has apparently convinced a sleeping public, yourself included, that IT owns all the air and that individuals need licenses to use it (sigh)
When a couple of bicycle builders set out to invent the airplane, there was ZERO government regulation/interference; They had NO obstructions in their way by government - no regulations, no fees, no license requirements, etc. If the Wright bros tried to invent the plane today, the FAA would prevent it in the name of public safety and utilizing hundreds of rules and regulations that are enforced as though they are laws even though the congress never voted on a single one of them and no President signed them into law. Aviation in America advanced rapidly with many companies and many innovators with no government oversight - even after government asserted that pilots ought to have licenses they left it to Wilbur and Orville to issue them as they saw fit to people they trained (I had a relative who had one of these, signed by one of the brothers).
Over the decades, politicians and bureaucrats convinced the public to allow increasing levels of regulation ("for safety" of course) to the point where they converted the space over everybodys' heads into a fully-owned and controlled government asset which they effectively lease to the airlines. The public is left to assume it has no rights to the air, even though the airlines are operating right near airports at low altitude but at 20K ft everywhere else. This is in part a relic of a pre-computer era when air traffic controllers and radar were important, but much of this is already (or rapidly becoming) obsolete.
These "waivers" are a symptom of a bureaucratic fiction colliding with modern reality: The FAA cannot stop drones which are so cheap that they will become ubiquitous (unlike aircraft which government regs artificially inflate the price of), so small people can fly them in violation of rules (leaving the scene before regulators arrive), so plentiful the FAA could never effectively regulate them (they'd have to hire thousands of new bureaucrats), so toy-like that the public might see a heavy regulatory hand as crazy (leading to deeper public questioning), and more. Their solution is what governments usually do in such situations: issue waivers as a form of political relief valve. Rather than back-off and extricate themselves from the mess with a handful of very simple and clear rules, they will build their usual complex mess making drones nearly impossible and then issue waivers to companies they approve.
Companies with enough money to contribute to campaigns will find it easier to get waivers. Companies with employees in critical congressional districts will get waivers. Waivers will get churned-out like gumballs until the pressure is off, but before the average Joe gets one. The average Joe is never supposed to ask questions like "who gave the air over my head and my property to all those companies and why can't I use it?" and "why does the government get to sell permits to use the air over my head?". It's vital to the crony capitalists in government (who benefit from the exercise of regulatory power) and industry (who benefit from regs that suppress competitors) that the public never question these hand-in-glove deals and NEVER ask "if you can issue THOUSANDS of waivers, why can't you just write simpler rules that work for EVERYONE EQUALLY and require NO waivers?" This gradual slide into totally-regulated lives is how freedom has been dying in the US since the 1930's, and part of how the richest and most powerful have been growing the gap between the "haves" (who can do what they want in business and individually) and "have nots" (who are unable to get around the rules and therefore just submit like sheep).
We kill 30,000 people per year with drunk driving, and yet the federal govt does not license or test car drivers or drinkers.
Over 40,000 gay and bisexual men in the US get AIDS each year, should we require federal licenses for men to have gay sex?"
For that matter, over 50 people die per year in the US doing roofing work, should we require roofers to have federal licenses and get their equipment approved by the feds?
Tell me: how many people per year are killed by drones?
yeah, I get it, people are being frightened into thinking a drone will take out an airliner ... something that could happen, but is less likely than a bird-strike given that birds are far more plentiful and even less predictable. If we are to apply federal regulations to every nightmare might happen scenario, then there is no limit to the size and power of government.
There were incidents with drones, but did that ones fly with a FAA exemption? Or were they unwarranted flyers?
An UAV license for buying a drone should be a law.
I am an UAV pilot myself. Flying a multi-rotor and fixed-wing UAV well is not that simple. It requires extensive theoretical and practical training.