3 ms·

They were flying in a remote area, low to the ground. If it wasn't by an airport and below 400 feet, I'm not sure there was any wrong-doing on the drone's part

They were flying in a remote area, low to the ground. If it wasn't by an airport and below 400 feet, I'm not sure there was any wrong-doing on the drone's part. Sometimes they're called 'accidents' aka s* happens.

cmurf 9y ago
That's deeply ignorant. Instead of speculating and arriving at the ridiculous idea that the only regulation is staying below 400 feet and away from airports and then anything goes, how about finding the regulation? §107.23 Hazardous operation. No person may: (a) Operate a small unmanned aircraft system in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another; §107.37 Operation near aircraft; right-of-way rules. (a) Each small unmanned aircraft must yield the right of way to all aircraft, airborne vehicles, and launch and reentry vehicles. Yielding the right of way means that the small unmanned aircraft must give way to the aircraft or vehicle and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless well clear. (b) No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft so close to another aircraft as to create a collision hazard. I mean come on. If there is an accident someone made a mistake. And if the regulations don't make clear who did what wrong, then the regulations have a mistake in them and need to be extended or clarified.
- kelchm 9y ago
  > staying below 400 feet As someone that has spent a lot of time flying model sailplanes, I want to point out that there is no regulation which prevents a hobbyist from flying above 400ft AGL, as long as you abide by the guidelines established by the AMA or another "nationwide community-based organization". The FAA boils everything from section 336 (the "Special Rule for Model Aircraft") as follows: - Fly for hobby or recreation ONLY - Register your model aircraft - Follow community-based safety guidelines and fly within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization Fly a model aircraft under 55 lbs. unless certified by a community-based organization - Fly within visual line-of-sight - Never fly near other aircraft - Notify the airport and air traffic control tower prior to flying within 5 miles of an airport - Never fly near emergency response efforts
  - cmurf 9y ago
    FAR 101.41 (b) subsumes any such guideline as a regulation. AMA's see and avoid guideline says any flight expected to go above 400 feet requires a spotter, so if you don't do that, you're violating FARs. Operating an sUAS with autopilot (among other things) has its additional advanced flight system programming guidelines, which have a hard 400 foot ceiling when operating within 5 miles of an airport. This is legally identical to having a regulation preventing operation above 400 feet AGL. If you violate the applicable community guidelines, you're violating FARs. That's what this part says. And then there is the catch all FAR 101.43, which is a big black hole of liability that you can also easily run into if you're unfamiliar with the national airspace system and your surroundings. If you fly a sailplane or m/sUAS above 1200' AGL in a published victor airway (this is Class E airspace), I'd argue that's a clear altitude violation of this regulations.
    - kelchm 9y ago
      I disagree with your interpretation. Here is the exact verbage you are referencing from the AMA: A spotter should be used to assist in monitoring the surrounding airspace for manned aircraft whenever a flight is expected to exceed 400 feet above the ground and that operation is expected to be in proximity to known manned aircraft traffic such as at a mixed-use facility or within three miles of an airport. The spotter must have sufficient visual acuity and be mature enough to take this responsibility very seriously. So unless you are operating at a mixed-use facility or within three miles of an airport, you do not need a spotter to fly a model aircraft above 400ft AGL.
- GiorgioG 9y ago
  > If there is an accident someone made a mistake. Yep the instructor smacked the chopper into a bush/tree/etc. The drone didn’t cause the crash, the instructor’s reaction caused it. We don’t know enough about what happened to know how far away and what actions the drone took which caused the instructor to panic (and overreact?)
- inamberclad 9y ago
  I think part 107 only applies to regulated commercial operation of drones/UASs. Private operation is still unregulated.
  - cmurf 9y ago
    No, in that case it's regulated under part 101.
cma 9y ago
They weren't flying in a remote area. It was a small island with a big residential development.
- GiorgioG 9y ago
  Maybe my reading comprehension skills fail me but here's what the article says: "In the Charleston incident, the student was practicing low-altitude hovering in a remote area, according to the police report. As she turned the aircraft around to continue the lesson, a small white drone appeared, the instructor told police."

cmurf 9y ago

That's deeply ignorant. Instead of speculating and arriving at the ridiculous idea that the only regulation is staying below 400 feet and away from airports and then anything goes, how about finding the regulation? §107.23 Hazardous operation. No person may: (a) Operate a small unmanned aircraft system in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another; §107.37 Operation near aircraft; right-of-way rules. (a) Each small unmanned aircraft must yield the right of way to all aircraft, airborne vehicles, and launch and reentry vehicles. Yielding the right of way means that the small unmanned aircraft must give way to the aircraft or vehicle and may not pass over, under, or ahead of it unless well clear. (b) No person may operate a small unmanned aircraft so close to another aircraft as to create a collision hazard. I mean come on. If there is an accident someone made a mistake. And if the regulations don't make clear who did what wrong, then the regulations have a mistake in them and need to be extended or clarified.

kelchm 9y ago
> staying below 400 feet As someone that has spent a lot of time flying model sailplanes, I want to point out that there is no regulation which prevents a hobbyist from flying above 400ft AGL, as long as you abide by the guidelines established by the AMA or another "nationwide community-based organization". The FAA boils everything from section 336 (the "Special Rule for Model Aircraft") as follows: - Fly for hobby or recreation ONLY - Register your model aircraft - Follow community-based safety guidelines and fly within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization Fly a model aircraft under 55 lbs. unless certified by a community-based organization - Fly within visual line-of-sight - Never fly near other aircraft - Notify the airport and air traffic control tower prior to flying within 5 miles of an airport - Never fly near emergency response efforts
- cmurf 9y ago
  FAR 101.41 (b) subsumes any such guideline as a regulation. AMA's see and avoid guideline says any flight expected to go above 400 feet requires a spotter, so if you don't do that, you're violating FARs. Operating an sUAS with autopilot (among other things) has its additional advanced flight system programming guidelines, which have a hard 400 foot ceiling when operating within 5 miles of an airport. This is legally identical to having a regulation preventing operation above 400 feet AGL. If you violate the applicable community guidelines, you're violating FARs. That's what this part says. And then there is the catch all FAR 101.43, which is a big black hole of liability that you can also easily run into if you're unfamiliar with the national airspace system and your surroundings. If you fly a sailplane or m/sUAS above 1200' AGL in a published victor airway (this is Class E airspace), I'd argue that's a clear altitude violation of this regulations.
  - kelchm 9y ago
    I disagree with your interpretation. Here is the exact verbage you are referencing from the AMA: A spotter should be used to assist in monitoring the surrounding airspace for manned aircraft whenever a flight is expected to exceed 400 feet above the ground and that operation is expected to be in proximity to known manned aircraft traffic such as at a mixed-use facility or within three miles of an airport. The spotter must have sufficient visual acuity and be mature enough to take this responsibility very seriously. So unless you are operating at a mixed-use facility or within three miles of an airport, you do not need a spotter to fly a model aircraft above 400ft AGL.
GiorgioG 9y ago
> If there is an accident someone made a mistake. Yep the instructor smacked the chopper into a bush/tree/etc. The drone didn’t cause the crash, the instructor’s reaction caused it. We don’t know enough about what happened to know how far away and what actions the drone took which caused the instructor to panic (and overreact?)
inamberclad 9y ago
I think part 107 only applies to regulated commercial operation of drones/UASs. Private operation is still unregulated.
- cmurf 9y ago
  No, in that case it's regulated under part 101.

cma 9y ago

They weren't flying in a remote area. It was a small island with a big residential development.

GiorgioG 9y ago
Maybe my reading comprehension skills fail me but here's what the article says: "In the Charleston incident, the student was practicing low-altitude hovering in a remote area, according to the police report. As she turned the aircraft around to continue the lesson, a small white drone appeared, the instructor told police."