4 ms·

Clickbait title. > The drones can be flown only during the day and can't be flown over people who aren't somehow related to the flight. They can fly only up to

Clickbait title. > The drones can be flown only during the day and can't be flown over people who aren't somehow related to the flight. They can fly only up to an altitude of 400 feet, a speed of up to 100 miles per hour and they have to stay within visual contact of the operator. In other words, it's not legal to do any kind of comercially interesting drone flights

tombert 10y ago
I was about to comment that: how exactly is this useful? In New York, there's not a lot of places you could fly that aren't over a person unrelated to flight?
- burkaman 10y ago
  I've read a lot of articles about farmers using drones to remotely view their fields, with stuff like thermal cameras so they know what needs to be watered. Can't immediately think of any other common uses, but people are creative. And as the article says, the rules should loosen a little by the end of the year.
  - falcolas 10y ago
    Search and Rescue, cinematography (which includes things like filming flybys of houses for realtors, in addition to making films), remote mapping (including mapping out fires), agriculture (frequently using IR and other camera technologies), delivering small payloads to remote locations (such as tools or materials to smokejumpers or mountain climbers), remote inspection... Think of anything we use a helicopter for now, and drones will probably help cheaply supplant those uses wherever possible.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
dceddia 10y ago
I wonder if "they are gonna be in the movie that this drone is taking" is enough for "somehow related to the flight" ;)
falcolas 10y ago
With exemptions being offered by the FAA to those who need to operate outside any of those restrictions. Just like it always has been. You could get an exemption and fly a drone commercially before this was signed into law as well. All you had to do is write to the FAA and ask for an exemption, with an explanation of why you needed it and how you'd do it safely.
- lucb1e 10y ago
  If that's the case and the FAA can overrule laws prohibiting it, then why bother changing the law at all? In fact, doing a ctrl+f for "law" right now in that article, it's not in there, it only mentions "rules". I'm becoming more confused the more I read.
  - falcolas 10y ago
    Because now you don't need an exemption to monetize your videos of flying a drone up on YouTube. Or to film the outside of a home on contract with a realtor trying to sell that home. Or make a commercial movie/TV show. Exemptions take time to get, and frequently can cost you fees to get a properly written request (I was quoted $1500). For a company wanting to do more, it's well worth it, but this lets anybody get started.
    - lucb1e 10y ago
      Oh right, I hadn't considered that there might be a cost for getting the exemption.
      - robotresearcher 10y ago
        It's the worst kind of work. Time consuming, dull and repetitive, but requiring skilled site-specific research every time so you can't just mail in the same package every time. Awful. It's very important that companies are super careful about safety, so it's not pointless. But it is a non-trivial cost of doing business that currently rules out lots of low-cost applications. It's a real challenge to get the balance right between safety, privacy and freedom to make new applications. Very interesting to watch it develop.
detaro 10y ago
really, any kind? A lot of things are still commercially interesting, even if you can't do them everywhere. (Aerial photography or movie productions, inspection work (agriculture, powerlines), ...) While they say "not over", the article doesn't mention any distance requirements.

tombert 10y ago

I was about to comment that: how exactly is this useful? In New York, there's not a lot of places you could fly that aren't over a person unrelated to flight?

burkaman 10y ago
I've read a lot of articles about farmers using drones to remotely view their fields, with stuff like thermal cameras so they know what needs to be watered. Can't immediately think of any other common uses, but people are creative. And as the article says, the rules should loosen a little by the end of the year.
- falcolas 10y ago
  Search and Rescue, cinematography (which includes things like filming flybys of houses for realtors, in addition to making films), remote mapping (including mapping out fires), agriculture (frequently using IR and other camera technologies), delivering small payloads to remote locations (such as tools or materials to smokejumpers or mountain climbers), remote inspection... Think of anything we use a helicopter for now, and drones will probably help cheaply supplant those uses wherever possible.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

dceddia 10y ago

I wonder if "they are gonna be in the movie that this drone is taking" is enough for "somehow related to the flight" ;)

falcolas 10y ago

With exemptions being offered by the FAA to those who need to operate outside any of those restrictions. Just like it always has been. You could get an exemption and fly a drone commercially before this was signed into law as well. All you had to do is write to the FAA and ask for an exemption, with an explanation of why you needed it and how you'd do it safely.

lucb1e 10y ago
If that's the case and the FAA can overrule laws prohibiting it, then why bother changing the law at all? In fact, doing a ctrl+f for "law" right now in that article, it's not in there, it only mentions "rules". I'm becoming more confused the more I read.
- falcolas 10y ago
  Because now you don't need an exemption to monetize your videos of flying a drone up on YouTube. Or to film the outside of a home on contract with a realtor trying to sell that home. Or make a commercial movie/TV show. Exemptions take time to get, and frequently can cost you fees to get a properly written request (I was quoted $1500). For a company wanting to do more, it's well worth it, but this lets anybody get started.
  - lucb1e 10y ago
    Oh right, I hadn't considered that there might be a cost for getting the exemption.
    - robotresearcher 10y ago
      It's the worst kind of work. Time consuming, dull and repetitive, but requiring skilled site-specific research every time so you can't just mail in the same package every time. Awful. It's very important that companies are super careful about safety, so it's not pointless. But it is a non-trivial cost of doing business that currently rules out lots of low-cost applications. It's a real challenge to get the balance right between safety, privacy and freedom to make new applications. Very interesting to watch it develop.

detaro 10y ago

really, any kind? A lot of things are still commercially interesting, even if you can't do them everywhere. (Aerial photography or movie productions, inspection work (agriculture, powerlines), ...) While they say "not over", the article doesn't mention any distance requirements.