Funny how they didn't have these problems and new laws, before the quad-copters came along and all of a sudden,everything that flew by radio control, were called drones......How many decades were people fling RC planes and helicopters , without all these new restrictive laws........A long time ago I built an RC airplane, and tried to fly it, did not need a registration or expensive flight school, just went out to the field and flew.....granted a quad-copter is easier to fly, and does not weigh as much as that plane.....but just as much fun to fly, and you don't need a quarter mile long field to fly it, I fly mine in my back yard, and my neighbors think it is cool........and I was one of the first to register, when it was required, my drones all have the FAA number, my name and phone number on them.......and if I hear a plane in the area, I will land my drone, until I am sure they are clear......and my drone is always in my sight, and I have only been up to 400 feet one time, thought it was a bit to high for comfort, I cut that in half, and feel better ....I am flying a Q500 4K..........I agree totally. While I hate restrictions, the other side of the coin is far worse. We're in an uphill battle all the way. Industry doesn't want to limit it's sales to only those who have proven their worthiness as an sUAV systems operator, so they market them to the lowest common denominator. A similar thing has/is happening in a different industry - motorcycles.
Used to be you could just walk in and buy any bike you wanted and ride out on a bike capable of astonishing performance - sub 9 second quarter mile runs. I don't know about other states but here in Florida, you now must get an endorsement by taking an MSF course to prove at least a little proficiency at riding a motorcycle. For a new rider this costs about the same as taking our part 107 and you will spend several hours in classroom and again outside on a closed course. And yet motorcycle sales have not plummeted.
I know I will take heat for this but; I think a similar path might be the way. (Que dream time)Maybe manufacturers could hire experienced pilots to hold the courses and certify new incoming pilots, let the newbs pay for, and earn; their entry into the hobby/profession. This is how it works with the MSF courses. Then, reorganize the UAV classification system entirely - NOT based on weight but rather on capability. Maybe make range, height, payload and speed, limitations on unrestricted "drones", then sell the restricted UAV's only to operators that have passed the minimum course. From there you could add more steps all the way up to a fully unrestricted 107 operator. Then all the geo fencing could be standardized based on the classification. I know, I'm just dreaming out loud.
Imagine this - A guy walks into a BestBuy and asks the "tech-expert", "hey, where are the drones" and he gets shown the corner display with all the pink and rainbow colored, starter drones. Then he sees all the good stuff and asks "I want one of these" and is told he needs to have his endorsement for UAV Pilot's Standards. I believe perspective pilots would in general go through the steps. The ones that wouldn't? Probably a good thing. Flying these aircraft is a little more serious than some can comprehend such as the DJI pilot in the Blackhawk incident.
I think its just going to take a long time for the system to adapt and organize because on one hand you have those who legislate and regulate, operating at a snails pace and on the other hand, the industry and technology are moving and growing at increasing speed.
Well, I will share an opinion on this. I think when a manufacturer knowingly manufactures an unbelievably complicated product under the hood and yet, externally, is dumbed down to the point where anyone can use it, then the manufacturer takes on extra liability due to the fact that they're taking on functions which are out of the operators control. Case in point, preventing arming the motors when in a flight restricted area. One point in the article was the drone pilot had a tablet without a cellular link so current flight data could only be gathered via WiFi. Ok, so how do you fix this? Maybe you prevent the motors from arming unless flight data is current. DJI does this with firmware updates (which I personally hate) but maybe making sure flight data is current and stored offline in the drone as well as ensuring the GPS almanac is current and current calibrations have been performed before allowing arming of the motors isn't such a bad idea.
I know the experienced among us hate the thought of more restrictions, and some have signed waivers to have them lifted via firmware which is fine. But for those who are inexperienced enough to not even realize an exemption is possible, maybe, just maybe, the drone should be prevented from flying unless certain conditions have been met.
This is just an opinion, but I'm trying to think of ideas which will protect our hobby and businesses so we can continue to enjoy the freedoms we do have before the ill informed and inexperienced, bring the heavy hand of restrictions down upon us and potentially kill our fun for good.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.