4 ms·

I'm against a complete ban, but there should definitely be more restrictions than we have currently. Strict licensing requirements and a total ban on flying ove

by bjl 9y ago

I'm against a complete ban, but there should definitely be more restrictions than we have currently. Strict licensing requirements and a total ban on flying over private property (without explicit, written permission) seem like no-brainers to me.

Houshalter 9y ago
I hate this attitude. Many of the great technologies we have today were pretty dangerous and feared when they first appeared. I honestly think if electricity or automobiles were invented today, they would quickly be banned. Drones could be incredibly useful for many purposes and your proposal would basically kill them.
- bjl 9y ago
  How would it kill them? Getting permission of property owners is a hindrance, sure, but I'm not willing to give up privacy rights for the privilege of flying drones wherever I want. Its no different than hunting, where you already have to get a license and ask for permission before going on to private property.
  - Houshalter 9y ago
    How do you make a drone delivery service without having to get the permission of millions of property owners? If just a few don't consent your business is dead. It's absurd. Hunting is actually taking resources from someone's property. A drone flying over your property doesn't harm you at all. Airplanes don't have to get permission from me to fly overhead. They can even legally take photos of my property if they want. Just the other day some recreational pilot crashed in a field near me, and he didn't have to have a flight plan or anything. You don't even need a pilots license if it's something like an ultralight. Drones are vastly safety than that.
    - bjl 9y ago
      >A drone flying over your property doesn't harm you at all. Until it falls on your head. Not to mention the gross privacy violations that this allows.
      - Paul-ish 9y ago
        Light aircraft could always fly over your house and take pictures as far as I know.
        mikeyouse 9y ago
        But they couldn't hover just outside your window.. and unless I'm mistaken, they were forbidden from flying 1,000ft below the highest point in a half mile radius. And you need a pilot's license to fly.. and come to think of it, they're not remotely similar.
        Houshalter 9y ago
        Technically you don't need a pilots license for certain kinds of aircraft. I don't know what the height restrictions are, but I see recreational pilots get away with flying less than that all the time. One just crashed and died near my house and could have killed someone. But the point is that a small drone is orders of magnitude less dangerous than even the smallest aircraft. The regulations should reflect that and be far less strict on them, not more. I'm ok with height restrictions or regulations against hovering outside of someones window. That's probably already illegal under peeping tom laws anyway. If it's not it should be. But banning them entirely is just a knee jerk fear to new technology. This has potentially immense utility for delivery and other applications, just give it a chance. Despite all the media fear mongering the number of people killed by drones is negligible after more than 5 years.
    - ghaff 9y ago
      >How do you make a drone delivery service without having to get the permission of millions of property owners? Maybe you can't. And that's just fine?
      - Houshalter 9y ago
        It's not fine. As we continue to resist new technologies our country will stagnate and others will outcompete us.
        bjl 9y ago
        Right, because delivering expensive drinks to lazy yuppies is the most important thing in the world.
        myroon5 9y ago
        Drones can be the fastest way to deliver medicine in some situations.
    - njarboe 9y ago
      Flying drones are noisy and create visual distraction. If they became very popular they could definitely harm me. Wreck a beautiful sunset with flying drones going by. Wreck peaceful outside activity with drone buzzing. Industrial and commercial areas, sure. Maybe not residential. It would be interesting if people would try small, slow, quiet, wheeled drones on sidewalks for local delivery. Probably illegal with current laws, but those could be modified.
- bsder 9y ago
  The problem is that drones really are a nuisance to everybody except the drone flyer. They are noisy. They get in the way. They can fall out of the air. etc.
  - Houshalter 9y ago
    The same problems apply to cars and airplanes and imagine the world if those were banned early on.
    - bsder 9y ago
      Airplanes are not a great example. Airplanes were very much a hazard until the FAA finally got serious ( PSA 182 is cited as a turning point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSA_Flight_182 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSA_Flight_182) Cars, in fact, exhibited almost exactly the same kinds of problems we see in drones right now: http://amhistory.si.edu/onthemove/themes/story_86_1.html http://amhistory.si.edu/onthemove/themes/story_86_1.html In fact, cars caused far MORE fatalities and came under scrutiny very quickly. The idea that past technologies somehow got adopted in an "unfettered, unregulated field" is bogus revisionism.
      - Houshalter 9y ago
        I'm not sure what your point is. My whole point is that cars and airplanes were incredibly dangerous and unregulated when they first were introduced. Thank god they weren't banned or sued out of existence as a knee jerk reaction. If cars or planes were invented today I have no doubt they would be unable to take off. I doubt anyone would even invest in such technology. We now laugh at stories of cities that set car speed limits at 5 miles per hour and mandated an escort. But we are doing far sillier things today with every new technology.
        ghaff 9y ago
        I don't think anyone is proposing banning them. Among other things, many people are skeptical that they should be allowed to fly willy-nilly over everyone's private property. Which seems a reasonable question. After all, you can't typically drive and often even walk on someone else's property. I do think there are special circumstances where drone delivery of medicine and other urgently needed items may very well make sense. One hour Amazon delivery of a USB cable and a Red Bull? Probably not.
pfarnsworth 9y ago
I think it's a no-brainer that people don't own the airspace above their property. Ban on flying over private property is absurd.
- bjl 9y ago
  There's a big difference between flying 1000 ft above private property in a properly licensed aircraft and flying 50 ft above.
  - holycrapwhodat 9y ago
    > There's a big difference between flying 1000 ft above private property in a properly licensed aircraft and flying 50 ft above. In populated areas I can legally at ~520' above ground level (500' minimum above structures in the vicinity, and most structures are 1 or 2 stories) So a quiz: Cessna doing standard rate turns over your house at 500' above, or a drone passing over at 300' Which would you prefer?
    - ghaff 9y ago
      The odd private plane versus a continuous stream of drones? The odd private plane.
    - bjl 9y ago
      I'd take the Cessna every time.
holycrapwhodat 9y ago
> Strict licensing requirements I don't think there's any reason to prevent a hobbiest from flying a drone at lower altitudes over their own property. Wouldn't solve any problems and wouldn't gather any public support. But drone pilots engaging in most other types of activity should be qualified, with some regulation. That said... > A total ban on flying over private property (without explicit, written permission) seem like no-brainers to me The airspace in the US above a certain altitude is legally public space. It belongs to everybody. I'm a private pilot. With the exception of certain security sensitive areas and military operations, I can fly anywhere. Busier airspace is "controlled" in that I have to be in contact with ATC, announce my intentions, and follow their instructions... but they can't prevent me from using the airspace. I can take my small, slow Cessna to JFK and ask to land, and they have to keep my card on the board and slot me in when possible. So, with almost no exception, I can fly over any private property legally. A Recreational or Sport Pilot license is even easier to get than Private, and enables mostly the same situation wrt flying over private property. Ultralight aircraft can be flown without any pilot licensing whatsoever. They cannot be flown over "populated areas", but this includes a vast majority of the country that is still "private property" So my question is; Why should drones be so much more restrictive that actual person-carrying airplanes?

by bjl 9y ago

Houshalter 9y ago

I hate this attitude. Many of the great technologies we have today were pretty dangerous and feared when they first appeared. I honestly think if electricity or automobiles were invented today, they would quickly be banned. Drones could be incredibly useful for many purposes and your proposal would basically kill them.

bjl 9y ago
How would it kill them? Getting permission of property owners is a hindrance, sure, but I'm not willing to give up privacy rights for the privilege of flying drones wherever I want. Its no different than hunting, where you already have to get a license and ask for permission before going on to private property.
- Houshalter 9y ago
  How do you make a drone delivery service without having to get the permission of millions of property owners? If just a few don't consent your business is dead. It's absurd. Hunting is actually taking resources from someone's property. A drone flying over your property doesn't harm you at all. Airplanes don't have to get permission from me to fly overhead. They can even legally take photos of my property if they want. Just the other day some recreational pilot crashed in a field near me, and he didn't have to have a flight plan or anything. You don't even need a pilots license if it's something like an ultralight. Drones are vastly safety than that.
  - bjl 9y ago
    >A drone flying over your property doesn't harm you at all. Until it falls on your head. Not to mention the gross privacy violations that this allows.
    - Paul-ish 9y ago
      Light aircraft could always fly over your house and take pictures as far as I know.
      - mikeyouse 9y ago
        But they couldn't hover just outside your window.. and unless I'm mistaken, they were forbidden from flying 1,000ft below the highest point in a half mile radius. And you need a pilot's license to fly.. and come to think of it, they're not remotely similar.
        Houshalter 9y ago
        Technically you don't need a pilots license for certain kinds of aircraft. I don't know what the height restrictions are, but I see recreational pilots get away with flying less than that all the time. One just crashed and died near my house and could have killed someone. But the point is that a small drone is orders of magnitude less dangerous than even the smallest aircraft. The regulations should reflect that and be far less strict on them, not more. I'm ok with height restrictions or regulations against hovering outside of someones window. That's probably already illegal under peeping tom laws anyway. If it's not it should be. But banning them entirely is just a knee jerk fear to new technology. This has potentially immense utility for delivery and other applications, just give it a chance. Despite all the media fear mongering the number of people killed by drones is negligible after more than 5 years.
  - ghaff 9y ago
    >How do you make a drone delivery service without having to get the permission of millions of property owners? Maybe you can't. And that's just fine?
    - Houshalter 9y ago
      It's not fine. As we continue to resist new technologies our country will stagnate and others will outcompete us.
      - bjl 9y ago
        Right, because delivering expensive drinks to lazy yuppies is the most important thing in the world.
        myroon5 9y ago
        Drones can be the fastest way to deliver medicine in some situations.
  - njarboe 9y ago
    Flying drones are noisy and create visual distraction. If they became very popular they could definitely harm me. Wreck a beautiful sunset with flying drones going by. Wreck peaceful outside activity with drone buzzing. Industrial and commercial areas, sure. Maybe not residential. It would be interesting if people would try small, slow, quiet, wheeled drones on sidewalks for local delivery. Probably illegal with current laws, but those could be modified.
bsder 9y ago
The problem is that drones really are a nuisance to everybody except the drone flyer. They are noisy. They get in the way. They can fall out of the air. etc.
- Houshalter 9y ago
  The same problems apply to cars and airplanes and imagine the world if those were banned early on.
  - bsder 9y ago
    Airplanes are not a great example. Airplanes were very much a hazard until the FAA finally got serious ( PSA 182 is cited as a turning point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSA_Flight_182 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSA_Flight_182) Cars, in fact, exhibited almost exactly the same kinds of problems we see in drones right now: http://amhistory.si.edu/onthemove/themes/story_86_1.html http://amhistory.si.edu/onthemove/themes/story_86_1.html In fact, cars caused far MORE fatalities and came under scrutiny very quickly. The idea that past technologies somehow got adopted in an "unfettered, unregulated field" is bogus revisionism.
    - Houshalter 9y ago
      I'm not sure what your point is. My whole point is that cars and airplanes were incredibly dangerous and unregulated when they first were introduced. Thank god they weren't banned or sued out of existence as a knee jerk reaction. If cars or planes were invented today I have no doubt they would be unable to take off. I doubt anyone would even invest in such technology. We now laugh at stories of cities that set car speed limits at 5 miles per hour and mandated an escort. But we are doing far sillier things today with every new technology.
      - ghaff 9y ago
        I don't think anyone is proposing banning them. Among other things, many people are skeptical that they should be allowed to fly willy-nilly over everyone's private property. Which seems a reasonable question. After all, you can't typically drive and often even walk on someone else's property. I do think there are special circumstances where drone delivery of medicine and other urgently needed items may very well make sense. One hour Amazon delivery of a USB cable and a Red Bull? Probably not.

pfarnsworth 9y ago

I think it's a no-brainer that people don't own the airspace above their property. Ban on flying over private property is absurd.

bjl 9y ago
There's a big difference between flying 1000 ft above private property in a properly licensed aircraft and flying 50 ft above.
- holycrapwhodat 9y ago
  > There's a big difference between flying 1000 ft above private property in a properly licensed aircraft and flying 50 ft above. In populated areas I can legally at ~520' above ground level (500' minimum above structures in the vicinity, and most structures are 1 or 2 stories) So a quiz: Cessna doing standard rate turns over your house at 500' above, or a drone passing over at 300' Which would you prefer?
  - ghaff 9y ago
    The odd private plane versus a continuous stream of drones? The odd private plane.
  - bjl 9y ago
    I'd take the Cessna every time.

holycrapwhodat 9y ago

> Strict licensing requirements I don't think there's any reason to prevent a hobbiest from flying a drone at lower altitudes over their own property. Wouldn't solve any problems and wouldn't gather any public support. But drone pilots engaging in most other types of activity should be qualified, with some regulation. That said... > A total ban on flying over private property (without explicit, written permission) seem like no-brainers to me The airspace in the US above a certain altitude is legally public space. It belongs to everybody. I'm a private pilot. With the exception of certain security sensitive areas and military operations, I can fly anywhere. Busier airspace is "controlled" in that I have to be in contact with ATC, announce my intentions, and follow their instructions... but they can't prevent me from using the airspace. I can take my small, slow Cessna to JFK and ask to land, and they have to keep my card on the board and slot me in when possible. So, with almost no exception, I can fly over any private property legally. A Recreational or Sport Pilot license is even easier to get than Private, and enables mostly the same situation wrt flying over private property. Ultralight aircraft can be flown without any pilot licensing whatsoever. They cannot be flown over "populated areas", but this includes a vast majority of the country that is still "private property" So my question is; Why should drones be so much more restrictive that actual person-carrying airplanes?