Slashdot Mirror
Drones Under 2kg May Be Set Free Under Forthcoming FAA Rules (suasnews.com)
garymortimer writes: The U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is establishing an aviation rulemaking committee with industry stakeholders to develop recommendations for a regulatory framework that would allow certain UAS to be operated over people who are not directly involved in the operation of the aircraft. The FAA is taking this action to provide a more flexible, performance-based approach for these operations than what was considered for Micro UAS. The committee will begin its work in March and issue its final report to the FAA on April 1.
So upgrade your tinfoil hat to a hardhat when at a concert or in some other crowd someone may want to film, because there's going to be a good risk of untrained idiots flying 2 kilos of weight around. Likely high enough that it's going to really, really hurt when it falls down and you're under it.
I watched some of the initial drone racing promotional videos and thought cool but kind of ignored them.
Since that time there's been many more videos come out and I'm beginning to get the idea as a video game player that these things can really be appreciated by the kinda 10->50y/o crowd who grew up with gaming.
With the FPV goggles the guys have for them, the performance of the things and the complexity of some of the 'tracks' they do actually seem kind of great.
I wonder if these things could be this generations F1 at some point?
Here's a couple of videos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcLk_uZe33w&feature=youtu.be
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkIGord9w8o&feature=youtu.be
You misunderstood. I wasn't referring to the subject itself (I'm a hobby RC pilot myself), but to the submitted post as you can read above.
It's based on speculation without any reference to why this speculation is justified.
There are fewer illiterates than people who can't read.
Everyone will have their favourites. Debian-testing would be my recommendation. Mint for the gaming machine.
This just shows exactly how America is really messed up. There is going to be massive regulation framework for the operation of a 2 kilo drone. But the operation of a gun with massive more kinetic energy doesn't require any regulation.
Isn't that more an argument for banning drones completely? Or at least for registering and licensing each and every one of them and permitting their use only for valid commercial or scientific missions.
Speaking of which:
- How big a Molotov cocktail can a 2 kg drone carry?
- What if someone decides to liven up an otherwise dull Sunday afternoon by flying drones with a payload of black paint into car windshields on the Interstate?
- And what happens when someone flies a four and a half pound drone into a spinning jet engine?
These things have real potential to be a major nuisance and quite possibly something of a threat. You sure you want to deal with the consequences of turning them loose? Might want to think through the pros and cons ahead of time.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Guns are dangerous and everyone knows it. Pools are even more dangerous but too few people seem to care. That's why far more children drown to death in the US every year than in accidents with weapons. A 2 kilo drone seems too much like a toy, so, many people may fly them carelessly, thence the need for regulations. I'm not advocating against gun regulation, but some drone must be put in place.
Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
Bicycles kill more in 1 year than mass shootings in 15 years.
Quite the imagination you have
Interesting. Do you mean more people are killed on bikes, or that bikers kill more (pedestrians, presumably)? My dad was hit by a bicyclist and suffered a world of hurt for it.... and, of course, the woman riding the bike didn't have "bicyclist" insurance, so my dad got nothing.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
It's the size of the swarm.
Are you telling me that people riding bicycles actually hit and kill more people than all of the gun killing? I seriously doubt that. Citation needed.
While I'm happy to see that the FAA is starting to work on UAS regulations, they're tackling one of the most complex, contentious, and largely irrelevant aspects of UAS: flying small drones over people.
Instead of addressing the commercial-use policies and incompatibilities with existing aviation law, they're going to tell us how much foam your drone needs to be covered with so that you can fly it over your kid's softball game.
I can save them some time: Don't do it. Short of mandating prop guards, no amount of frangibility will solve injuries from props. Also, some work has already been done on this in the form of the lower bounds for drone registration. The sub-250g/.55lb class was calculated to be "safe" should it fall out of the sky.
At best, the final law should involve some legalese like "you may only fly over other people if you have taken reasonable precaution to protect bystanders."
~JB
Get away from guns? That's as easy as going to a gun-free zone. Duh.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...
FTA
"Death statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) coupled with crime statistics from the FBI show that bicycle and falling deaths far exceed deaths from “mass shootings.”
For example, on September 24 the FBI released a study showing there were 64 incidents of “mass killings” (mass shootings) for the years 2000 through 2013. The gunmen in these incidents took the lives of 418 people."
Guns are dangerous and everyone knows it. Pools are even more dangerous but too few people seem to care. That's why far more children drown to death in the US every year than in accidents with weapons.
All the gun nuts always bring up the "swimming pool argument" whenever someone brings up gun control. Here is why this argument is stupid:
1) There is actually a lot of regulation for having a swimming pool. In Europe at least there are building regulations that require among other things that private swimming pools be elevated from the ground specially so that young children don't fall in.
I'm not advocating against gun control and I was talking about the US. Anyway, even with regulations in place, there are still more accidents with pools than with guns, because responsible parents don't let their guns at a kid's reach. They know that guns were created for killing and they don't want any killing to happen near their children.
2) You can't fly the swimming pool or stick it in your pocket when going outside. It is restricted to a certain location. Usually private. 3) Swimming pools actually have a valid purpose. They are used for swimming lessons and are not designed to kill people. you might argue that they are dangerous when used for recreation, but then you always have to option of choosing of not going to a swimming pool. With guns you can't do that.
That's why people tend to consider swimming pools as completely innocuous, and because of that, a parent may not see a problem in leaving children unattended near a swimming pool for a short while, whereas the same person would never get a kid near a fire arm for even a second. Drones can be seem as a toy, and there lies the danger. There is no problem if drone regulation comes before gun regulation in the US.
Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
They are obviously not regulated enough when people who should not have guns get their hands on them and there are gun show loopholes around any regulations.
What? Did you just use a stupid Breitbart article where bicycle deaths and falling down are lumped together and compared them to mass shootings?
1) The mass shootings are just a tip of the iceberg. You can't just single those instances out and compare them with ridiculous things. You have to compare it at least with gun killings in general.
2) How in the world are we supposed to stop falling down accidents? Ban gravity?
3) You do realize that most bicycle deaths are because those on the bicycle where hit by a car. So you really should be use a comparison with car related deaths.
The Obama Administration has thus far not run into any problems with ignoring the Law. What makes you think that is suddenly going to change?
No info and an April 1st deadline? WTF /.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Since when has the US switched to metric?
Ah, but what about drones carrying guns? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://www.suasnews.com/2016/0...
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
This just shows exactly how America is really messed up. There is going to be massive regulation framework for the operation of a 2 kilo drone. But the operation of a gun with massive more kinetic energy doesn't require any regulation.
If you really think that, you're seriously misinformed.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
They are obviously not regulated enough when people who should not have guns get their hands on them and there are gun show loopholes around any regulations.
There is no "gun show loophole" - that's just propaganda.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
I find this interesting. There's talk of banning things, heavily licensing them, etc etc - all on the basis that someone *might* misuse them. In the case of drones, getting one to carry anywhere near enough paint (or petrol) to cause anything more than a nuisance on the freeway requires some very, very deliberate acts. You've got to seriously consider how that extra weight affects handling, flying time, etc. You've also got to figure out how to tip the paint out at the right time, and presumably only tip a bit of it at a time, or else you only get one shot at it before the cops get to hear about it and start looking for you. That all sounds pretty hard to me.
Contrast this with how little effort it takes to shoot someone (by accident or otherwise) when guns are freely available.
Seems to me if you want to liven up a dull afternoon, screw with an airliner, or generally cause trouble there are far easier ways to do so.
Interesting...
You are the one who is seriously misinformed:
https://www.faa.gov/news/press...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
As it currently is you need to register to own a hobby drone, but not to own a gun.
The problem with drones is that they have substantial potential for misuse and not all that positive uses. Moreover the positive uses -- surveying, search and rescue, (very small) package delivery are things where licensing wouldn't likely be much of a problem.
I'll bet that if the folks in 1789 had been aware what the clumsy, inaccurate, and not very reliable flintlocks, wheellocks , and matchlocks of their day were going to evolve into, they'd have been a lot more careful how they worded the US second amendment. BTW, some folks (and I'm one of them) think the second amendment was intended to prevent the government from disarming the town militias, not to protect some individual right to bear arms. Disarming the militia was, if you will recall, the proximate cause of the unpleasantness at Lexington Common and Concord's North Bridge that started the American Revolution.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
there's quite a bit of difference between a patchwork of localized regulations that change every few miles, and a universal regulation applicable to the entire nation.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
The drone is well trained at keeping itself in the air. (The pilot isn't flying it, he's only telling it where to go).
Training wouldn't fix the reasons the drone goes down. And when it falls, its not like 2kg dead weight, it falls under prop spin to make rather boring news items about what might have been.
Hardly further from the truth. Look at the UAV forums - "Why did my Phantom crash" is a perennial source of amusement to the regulars.
And, in order to help Timothy out, This is the document that small UAV enthusiasts are pinning their hopes on.
The good: Minimal or no registration, no complex GeoFencing (UAV won't start in certain places, stops flying, complains loudly, software crashes because the idjits set it up wrong).
The bad: Daylight only. Visual distance only (how far can you see a 10 cm object?)
The Ugly: It's only a recommendation. Somebody will screw it up royal before it gets established.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
You might want to double check your physics. I haven't gone through and done the math, but I wouldn't be surprised that a drone moving at full speed has more kinetic energy than a bullet. The bullet just seems like it has more as it's not very massive, so thus the energy translates into a very high velocity.
What is the terminal velocity of an unladen Phantom 3?
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
You must really hate cars.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
here is a good discussion:
http://amablog.modelaircraft.o...
4wdloop
You are the one who is seriously misinformed:
https://www.faa.gov/news/press... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
As it currently is you need to register to own a hobby drone, but not to own a gun.
You can buy a drone with cash, anywhere, no questions asked. You cannot buy a gun without 2 forms of identification, a federal background check, and possibly a wait a few days for the background check to clear. Lots of people cannot buy the gun at all and will be arrested for trying. MANY states ALSO require you to have a license before you can buy a gun - for instance, in you need a license first to buy a gun.
Maybe you are trolling, or stupid. But now you are at least a little more informed.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
Disarm you?
With some top notch humor of course.
But seriously, I'd go for preventative measures that reduce to a minimum the likely hood of that kind of 'armed' behavior happening in the first place, and if need be with the effective threat containment and deescalation measures carried out by well trained and competent individuals.
We like big drones and we can't deny ....
those other fellows might get by
with an itty bitty drone with no heft or strength
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
How much did the the pressure cooker bombs used in the Boston marathon attack weigh? Finding, capturing and prosecuting the perpetrators of that attack was bad enough. Let's not give any potential copycats the benefit of remote attack capabilities.
Not sure. You can ask my first cousin. They took one of the pressure cooker fragments out of her leg that they used to prove who did it.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
You can blame the founding fathers for that, for you should know the second amendment strongly limits what any government can do regulating firearms.
Especially since the NRA transformed itself from an organization dedicated to elevating the skill level of riflemen from "can't hit the broadside of a barn" to "potential sharpshooter" to a more "guns for all" organization. (Yes, the early days, the NRA was formed because it was one thing to be allowed to own a gun. It was quite another to be able to use it properly, and most people who owned guns were terrible shots. So the NRA held courses and all that other stuff to teach people how to operate guns safely and to actually be able to shoot worth a damn. They were quite successful at the time, too).
Guns probably aren't a good basis for comparison, as their status is enshrined in the Constitution. So like it or not they get an automatic pass. Toy helicopters - I don't like calling them drones because that seems to stoke public hysteria - not so much.
Hey, Windows users, there is no such thing as "forward" slash, there is only slash and backslash.
And that is exactly why America is messed up. Either the 2nd amendment needs to be revoked or it should be clarified to only allow muskets as it was originally intended.