yossarians tree

September 20th, 2014 at 10:14 AM ^

Maybe I should go to work for the FAA because I agree with this. I don't like the optics. Yes, I'm paranoid, and yes, I've felt vulnerable in that stadium (I was at the first game post 9/11). I think drones are cool and I KNOW they are here to stay, but I don't like to see one hovering over a 115,000 person crowd. That's creepy.

Joined: 08/19/2010

MGoPoints: 22247

Everyone Murders

September 19th, 2014 at 2:56 PM ^

No surprise whatsoever here.  Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS's) for non-military use are tremendously under-regulated, especially outside of the military and law enforcement realms.  When you dig into it, it's really tough to get approval for drone activity.  So unless you're the cops or the military, you start with a "this flight is disallowed" and have to work backward from there.

The FAA is slated to get new UAS regs out next year, so perhaps this will be less of a hurdle moving forward.

Joined: 12/14/2010

MGoPoints: 65552

JediLow

September 19th, 2014 at 3:31 PM ^

There's a way around it though... you can use the RC excemption/rules (which a lot of people are using to get around some of the regulations) - if it's under a 400 ft ceiling, in line of sight, and if there's control by an operator then it's allowed (I know a lot of people are using switchover systems - having it go from UAS mode to RC mode).

Joined: 11/11/2008

MGoPoints: 1221

Everyone Murders

September 19th, 2014 at 4:26 PM ^

I think that's only for model aircraft.  For a while, people were thinking "cool, I'll just keep my commercial or civilian purpose UAS under 400' and it will be cool", but in 2007 the FAA clarified that a bit.  So it's not the end-around that a lot of people think it is (and were arguably correct in thinking it was up until 2007).

See HERE if curious.

Joined: 12/14/2010

MGoPoints: 65552