New FAA Drone Rules coming... Things to know

[Dougcjohn]

I actually think most points are valid and I would support them. There are so many drone pilots breaking the laws, of course, there are many pilots that do not break laws. I do not agree with confiscating someone's property without a court hearing. Maybe a warning first, not confirmation. I don't think local law enforcement is educated enough in this field to do so. FAA is another thing.

It is unlawful to shoot down ANY aircraft without FAA authorization.

Thanks fir the info and I will send out an email to my senator in Colorado immediately.

Cheers

Keep in mind, all the rules just sited are FFA... but if the FFA changes it's rules to allow... then they would have the "Go" to neutralize a UAV and extend authority to local enforcement agencies. The concern is the alignment in regulations that would allow quick amendments or modifications.

Plus most... including media and politics, are thinking single layer, the RC environment spans a lot more than drones.

 

[Kacy]

Keep in mind, all the rules just sited are FFA... but if the FFA changes it's rules to allow... then they would have the "Go" to neutralize a UAV and extend authority to local enforcement agencies. The concern is the alignment in regulations that would allow quick amendments or modifications.

Plus most... including media and politics, are thinking single layer, the RC environment spans a lot more than drones.

I agree. I don't think there has been enough time for the Bill to be negotiated.

That is what I will say to Senate.

They are trying to send this through way too quickly.

 

[daylight99]

I work for a Auto Auction company and once a week the city police spend the day here on auction day. Anyway, I asked how the Police will handle these new drone laws and he said just like before, they will do nothing because they don't have the time to waste on it.

 

[PatR]

Regarding the LAANC system. It is not dependent on drone manufacturers to submit their products for approval as the FAA has not certified any drone for use in the NAS at this time. The closest drones to receiving such certification are those made by aerospace companies.

The LAANC system simply requires the applicant add their drone description and ID to an application document for identification when applying for a LAANC waiver/authorization. LAANC is currently a no fee system for the user, while those providing LAANC system access are being paid by the government for their efforts. We can submit any drone to a LAANC application regardless of who makes it or how it’s equipped.

 

[Dougcjohn]

Regarding the LAANC system. It is not dependent on drone manufacturers to submit their products for approval as the FAA has not certified any drone for use in the NAS at this time. The closest drones to receiving such certification are those made by aerospace companies.

The LAANC system simply requires the applicant add their drone description and ID to an application document for identification when applying for a LAANC waiver/authorization. LAANC is currently a no fee system for the user, while those providing LAANC system access are being paid by the government for their efforts. We can submit any drone to a LAANC application regardless of who makes it or how it’s equipped.

Are you targeting this reply to the other thread? That thread is indicating the LAANC with FAA approval has been incorporated into the app software and to provide communication & approval of flight activity quickly. It's providing a service of submission & communication for the pilot, thus providing efficiencies to allow for drone activity to operate without delays. It apparently provides a service and assistance to accomplish the filing promptly in a manor the FAA feels beneficial that it provides the recoonition as of October 1st.
Interesting Article on LAANC - FAA Approves DJI To Authorize Customer Flights In Controlled Airspace

 

[PatR]

The referenced thread reply was in error, but the facts are not. Indeed, DJI is making things easier for their users, if you have web access on site and elect to let DJI monitor your system, but the motive is not altruistic. They get paid by the feds for each application submission, just like everyone else. For DJI it’s just another revenue source, and perhaps another means to collect more user data.

 

[Dougcjohn]

The referenced thread reply was in error, but the facts are not. Indeed, DJI is making things easier for their users, if you have web access on site and elect to let DJI monitor your system, but the motive is not altruistic. They get paid by the feds for each application submission, just like everyone else. For DJI it’s just another revenue source, and perhaps another means to collect more user data.

Wow... ok, that's probably an accurate statement in both revenue and one of the incentives. Is there a company that doesn't align it's efforts providing a service or benefit to it's customer base that doesn't have an incentive to make a profit... development of product or services has costs and associated expenses... in addition to profit.

For the Technician, instead of debating the angle of whom or how the process can be filed, authorized and cleared to "Go", the crew or individual that arrives to the site...often with short notice has the priority to deliver their product and meeting their own requirements to retain their clients or contracts. It's probably realistic to assume they'll find it a great efficiency and reduced burden to click a few screen buttons and get to work instead of rescheduling for 1-5 days later.

If that wasn't a desired or requested product to be delivered, I doubt there would have been an incentive to develop. I'm making assumptions based on business practices, zero experience in this particular avenue.

As with everything else, to be competitive a similar product should be offered by Yuneec. I view it as an incentive, a motivation to improve. Viewing what other companies do helps structure your direction is common business practice, especially when the market leader introduces the new product first.

I'm hopeful it's adopted by Yuneec too, it might be one variable of "many" if offered might strengthen the customer base... and profit.

I agree, for current time this probably has minimal impact, although I would assume it'll have more importance as it's accepted and various policies put into play... as with other developments.

 

[PatR]

Realistically, even a short notice call requires that airspace be reviewed prior to operating, and the call should have provided a location. It requires but a few minutes to review airspace and connect with a LAANC provider to complete an application and obtain clearance from the comfort of an office chair and computer. I can see where a crew on the move receiving a call during their movements could benefit but really they would not benefit much over a crew with a connected iPad as both could submit their filings quickly. The iPad crew could do it a little faster as they could file while enroute to the location, not wait until they arrived and started setting up.

As for Yuneec “keeping up with the Jones’s”, I just don’t see that happening as they’ve been running two years behind for too long to change now

I agree that businesses offer services to the public to generate profit. That’s what business is all about, but to think DJI came up with this idea as a public service is ludicrous. Any means they can find to embed themselves deeper into our government’s airspace system and customer data collection would, IMHO, have greater value to them, although there’s little they would not do for a $. They already had AirMap providing this service so they have in effect doubled down with the formal corporate entry.

 

[Dougcjohn]

I hear ya and agree with alternate methods... but from other readings, I don't think it's consistantly a short notice going with either way. The component that still requires the airspace request to be reviewed is from my understanding another component that is made more efficient... they've tested various automations and I believe that component is quicker too... they may receive a "No GO" or a "Go" but it's not much of a review process... in the test airports it's an automated response.

In comparison, when I planned on shooting downtown over the river to shoot bridge events; I called several hours early into the local city airport and it was a major time drag... I finally got to the party recommended in both software app and Airport website but then he requested I contact Tower and a few other points to coordinate the message. When I inquired why he couldn't send a message he indicated it wasn't something he could attend to at the moment. The event took over an 90 minutes to conclude.

I like the other household items that have improved efficiencies.... I have certain brands I don't like, but I do like any innovation that improves my operations. I think in time, as it's improved this will be a feature taken into consideration for some shops.

Sadly I agree with the Jones are running laps ahead and it's becoming harder for competition to catch them.

 

[PatR]

I think it’s a case of “want to”. No business will do anything they don’t want to. Either that or they are beyond clueless.

 

[Dougcjohn]

I think it’s a case of “want to”. No business will do anything they don’t want to. Either that or they are beyond clueless.

Like want to be behind the competition, want to have declining sales? Competition is one that "wants to", for every one else in the game is "has to catch up".

 

[PatR]

Evidently true for most, but not for at least one.

 

[Dougcjohn]

I concede... you have the floor on that one!

 

[PatR]

I wish the situation was different as they had the talent to do a lot more than they have done. I can only wonder about what might be hindering their development processes. It's possible their association with Intel might be influencing the direction they have taken. $60 million can be a lot of influence. Toss in an association with DroneCode, a group alos influenced by Intel, and perhaps theres some smoke for the gun. Unfortunately I doubt that's where their problems lay.

You brought something up in another post that may have considerable relevance, DJI's control, in one manner or another, of the necessary small part suppliers that manufacturer's must have access to in order to complete their system developments. If all the good stuff is controlled by a larger company the path to producing a quality drone by other manufacturers could be pretty tough.