8 ms·

Colorado Lawmakers Seek to Make Flying Drones Over Wildfires a Felony

34 points by mikece 8y ago

Circumnavigate 8y ago
I have heard this is a danger as the drone could hit the rotors of a helicopter causing a crash.
- dreamcompiler 8y ago
  They can also seriously damage low-flying fixed-wing tankers, which is why tankers must leave the area immediately if a drone is sighted.
- waterphone 8y ago
  Just as with a bird strike, a drone can cause harm to any low flying firefighting aircraft. Sighting any drone in the airspace of a wildfire causes all air operations to be suspended until it is gone.
- jobigoud 8y ago
  There is only one known instance of a drone / helicopter collision. The drone exploded and the helicopter got scratches. Still dangerous though, don't do it.
gremlinsinc 8y ago
Would this apply if your drone was used to fight fires? I wonder if some drone system that flies swarms of drones and drops nitrogen pellets that suck out oxygen could fight fires.
- jbob2000 8y ago
  If you manage to develop a drone swarm system that drops things, the last thing it will be used for is fighting fires. I'm waiting for someone to develop drones that swarm like starlings (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eakKfY5aHmY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eakKfY5aHmY). You could take down an entire battlegroup with a couple thousand suicide drones.
- mschuster91 8y ago
  > I wonder if some drone system that flies swarms of drones and drops nitrogen pellets that suck out oxygen could fight fires. You'd need way too much nitrogen for this. Basically it would heat up and change into gas form seconds after the pellet is anywhere near the fire. Fires, especially large ones, create massive amounts of hot air.
- kej 8y ago
  It's a question of authorization. If the fire department clears you to bring in your nitrogen swarm you'd be fine, but they want unauthorized drones out of the area so they don't interfere with other emergency operations.
- BenjiWiebe 8y ago
  I am a volunteer firefighter. Our county uses a drone to watch fires, and let the firefighters know where the fire is spreading to and how fast.
  - dreamcompiler 8y ago
    I'm sure your drone is coordinated with Incident Command, which makes it not a threat to the aerial tankers.
    - BenjiWiebe 8y ago
      It is coordinated, plus we very rarely/never have any other aerial support.
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  I would imagine drones being flown by the fire department would be exempted. However, that should not be taken to mean that a random person who modifies their drone should feel free to fly over the fire under the guise of "helping".
  - mkempe 8y ago
    In recent years, during wildfires in Colorado many homes have been saved by private firefighters because the owners had paid premiums to certain private insurance companies, which are determined to actively save assets not just pay for damages. Without these private efforts those houses would have been destroyed (we know this because the neighbors lost their homes and all their belongings when government officials told them to evacuate and they had no personal or private solution in place). Do you recommend that the State stop homeowners from saving their houses or hiring people to save their houses if their actions involve the use of drones? The government always resorts to banning or controlling new things. As a general rule, they're wrong; and their motivation is not the protection of your life, liberty, or property.
    - oh_sigh 8y ago
      > Do you recommend that the State stop homeowners from saving their houses or hiring people to save their houses if their actions involve the use of drones? Yes. You don't get to hold up containment efforts for potentially thousands of homes because you believe that your home is more important. Private firefighters are fine, but they can't impede real emergency personnel.
      - mkempe 8y ago
        Nice insult: "real". The thousands of people who lost their homes during Colorado fires while some of their neighbors did not -- these victims wished they had had the right private fire insurance instead of only your "real" personnel. Using drones to observe specific fire activity around one's private property is entirely legitimate and can save both lives and assets. The State should remain neutral -- or encourage their useful uses; neither limit nor ban them. [added] If you're downvoting this you obviously have not lived through a Colorado wildfire and do not personally know victims of those fires. Even the public firefighters have expressed appreciation for the private firefighters' work. And saving a home from the flames does not somehow disrupt containment! Do you know anything about fighting wildfires?
lifeisstillgood 8y ago
I understand the concerns of firefighters and the politicians trying to defend them but this is a piecemeal patch on something that needs a coherent response. Of course flying your drone where a fire copter is operating is just making their lives harder - they don't need a law specifically about wildfires. They just need a button that says "this ten square miles it off limits. The transponders that every drone made is now fitted with will tell us who you are and the fine is in the post" Drones are a real thing now. We can either require drones to have someone walking in front carrying a red flag, or we can introduce roads, traffic laws, police. The FAA is probably a good place to start, but someday soon every drone needs to have a registered id number, and to start screaming if it goes out the globally agreed geofences that are delegated to local administrations. Basically we can have the aero equivalent of Munich traffic or Mumbai traffic.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  This isn’t a bad idea. Give access to firefighters to issue TFRs (temporary flight restrictions) with an interface to allow them to create the necessary polygons on a map and feed that into the FAAs flight plan system, while enabling drones to receive that information rapidly.
  - waterphone 8y ago
    This is already standard procedure, wildfires with air operations put temporary flight restrictions in place as a matter of course, which apply to drones as well. People still fly drones and shut down operations regularly.
    - toomuchtodo 8y ago
      Felonies and shotguns it is then. Can’t argue with simple.
      - lifeisstillgood 8y ago
        Fairy Nuff I think that this is partly training (you get in a real aeroplane you are drilled to look up flight plan data, weather and restrictions) But it is also equipment - drones don't have transponders, the software to fly them ignores flight restrictions (or rather never has that) and so on - drones need this extra stuff out of the factory.
zlynx 8y ago
It's a good idea, but making it a felony is not. Is everything going to be a felony these days? Why? It attaches serious long term consequences, because a FELONY is widely regarded as a crime of direct, major harm against a person. Flying a drone that actually causes a collision, sure, maybe that's a felony. Just getting caught in the area, because the pilot is curious and maybe never even /heard/ of this law? No, that's not a felony, in my opinion.
- brian-armstrong 8y ago
  If you aren’t up to date on the applicable laws, you have no business flying the drone. Considering that drones have prevented planes from flying over with fire suppressant, this very much does meet the standard of causing harm.
  - GuiA 8y ago
    Flying a drone legally should require a license, much like operating a ham radio does. This would ensure that all drone operators have basic knowledge of what is expected of them (such as “don’t fly a drone over a wildfire”), and make it straightforward to fine/prosecute operators who are flying without a license. If the majority of operators are responsible, educated, and respect the rules, it could even help relax some of the rules around drone operation in the long run.
- mattsfrey 8y ago
  A college kid that has a fake id to buy booze with is guilty of a felony. Just because something is a felony rarely means it will be prosecuted as such. I'm sure in any case that doesn't result in actual harm the charges would be heavily reduced or dropped. Making it a misdemeanor almost by virtue makes it pretty much a joke, and it's actually a very serious issue.
  - kolpa 8y ago
    https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/felony.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/felony.asp "a misdemeanor is a lesser offense, punishable by imprisonment for up to a year." Is a year in prison a "joke"? A legal theory that says "I trust the authorities to ignore the law when I think they should" is a terrible theory.
dreamcompiler 8y ago
From TFA: "...could potentially become a federal crime" "Felony" does not equal "Federal Crime" and state lawmakers do not have the power to make anything a federal crime. Update: Above is correct, but article implied it is Colorado state lawmakers proposing this. In fact it is Colorado's federal congresspeople proposing it, and they are indeed proposing that it be a federal felony.
JustSomeNobody 8y ago
How about just imposing a very large fine instead? However, if it impedes rescue efforts, then make it a felony (as it already would be).
wyldfire 8y ago
How feasible/infeasible would it be to permit firefighting aviators to emit a regulatory alert beacon to any nearby drone and, if necessary, a regulatory override? Maybe it would trigger some kind of landing function? It's hard to imagine any kind of override function that doesn't introduce new hazards, though. If drone manufacturers could work with global spectrum allocation and emergency response agencies, maybe they could avoid big legislative hammers.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
opwieurposiu 8y ago
Private water bombers are paid a per-diem, regardless of whether they do any drops or not. Thus the safest way to make money is pretend you saw a drone. Aerial operations will shut down and you get your money with zero work and zero wear and tear on your aircraft. The vast majority of "Drones" spotted from aircraft are not really drones, they are birds or plastic bags or a figment of the imagination.

34 points by mikece 8y ago

Circumnavigate 8y ago

I have heard this is a danger as the drone could hit the rotors of a helicopter causing a crash.

dreamcompiler 8y ago
They can also seriously damage low-flying fixed-wing tankers, which is why tankers must leave the area immediately if a drone is sighted.
waterphone 8y ago
Just as with a bird strike, a drone can cause harm to any low flying firefighting aircraft. Sighting any drone in the airspace of a wildfire causes all air operations to be suspended until it is gone.
jobigoud 8y ago
There is only one known instance of a drone / helicopter collision. The drone exploded and the helicopter got scratches. Still dangerous though, don't do it.

gremlinsinc 8y ago

Would this apply if your drone was used to fight fires? I wonder if some drone system that flies swarms of drones and drops nitrogen pellets that suck out oxygen could fight fires.

jbob2000 8y ago
If you manage to develop a drone swarm system that drops things, the last thing it will be used for is fighting fires. I'm waiting for someone to develop drones that swarm like starlings (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eakKfY5aHmY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eakKfY5aHmY). You could take down an entire battlegroup with a couple thousand suicide drones.
mschuster91 8y ago
> I wonder if some drone system that flies swarms of drones and drops nitrogen pellets that suck out oxygen could fight fires. You'd need way too much nitrogen for this. Basically it would heat up and change into gas form seconds after the pellet is anywhere near the fire. Fires, especially large ones, create massive amounts of hot air.
kej 8y ago
It's a question of authorization. If the fire department clears you to bring in your nitrogen swarm you'd be fine, but they want unauthorized drones out of the area so they don't interfere with other emergency operations.
BenjiWiebe 8y ago
I am a volunteer firefighter. Our county uses a drone to watch fires, and let the firefighters know where the fire is spreading to and how fast.
- dreamcompiler 8y ago
  I'm sure your drone is coordinated with Incident Command, which makes it not a threat to the aerial tankers.
  - BenjiWiebe 8y ago
    It is coordinated, plus we very rarely/never have any other aerial support.
s73v3r_ 8y ago
I would imagine drones being flown by the fire department would be exempted. However, that should not be taken to mean that a random person who modifies their drone should feel free to fly over the fire under the guise of "helping".
- mkempe 8y ago
  In recent years, during wildfires in Colorado many homes have been saved by private firefighters because the owners had paid premiums to certain private insurance companies, which are determined to actively save assets not just pay for damages. Without these private efforts those houses would have been destroyed (we know this because the neighbors lost their homes and all their belongings when government officials told them to evacuate and they had no personal or private solution in place). Do you recommend that the State stop homeowners from saving their houses or hiring people to save their houses if their actions involve the use of drones? The government always resorts to banning or controlling new things. As a general rule, they're wrong; and their motivation is not the protection of your life, liberty, or property.
  - oh_sigh 8y ago
    > Do you recommend that the State stop homeowners from saving their houses or hiring people to save their houses if their actions involve the use of drones? Yes. You don't get to hold up containment efforts for potentially thousands of homes because you believe that your home is more important. Private firefighters are fine, but they can't impede real emergency personnel.
    - mkempe 8y ago
      Nice insult: "real". The thousands of people who lost their homes during Colorado fires while some of their neighbors did not -- these victims wished they had had the right private fire insurance instead of only your "real" personnel. Using drones to observe specific fire activity around one's private property is entirely legitimate and can save both lives and assets. The State should remain neutral -- or encourage their useful uses; neither limit nor ban them. [added] If you're downvoting this you obviously have not lived through a Colorado wildfire and do not personally know victims of those fires. Even the public firefighters have expressed appreciation for the private firefighters' work. And saving a home from the flames does not somehow disrupt containment! Do you know anything about fighting wildfires?

lifeisstillgood 8y ago

I understand the concerns of firefighters and the politicians trying to defend them but this is a piecemeal patch on something that needs a coherent response. Of course flying your drone where a fire copter is operating is just making their lives harder - they don't need a law specifically about wildfires. They just need a button that says "this ten square miles it off limits. The transponders that every drone made is now fitted with will tell us who you are and the fine is in the post" Drones are a real thing now. We can either require drones to have someone walking in front carrying a red flag, or we can introduce roads, traffic laws, police. The FAA is probably a good place to start, but someday soon every drone needs to have a registered id number, and to start screaming if it goes out the globally agreed geofences that are delegated to local administrations. Basically we can have the aero equivalent of Munich traffic or Mumbai traffic.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
This isn’t a bad idea. Give access to firefighters to issue TFRs (temporary flight restrictions) with an interface to allow them to create the necessary polygons on a map and feed that into the FAAs flight plan system, while enabling drones to receive that information rapidly.
- waterphone 8y ago
  This is already standard procedure, wildfires with air operations put temporary flight restrictions in place as a matter of course, which apply to drones as well. People still fly drones and shut down operations regularly.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    Felonies and shotguns it is then. Can’t argue with simple.
    - lifeisstillgood 8y ago
      Fairy Nuff I think that this is partly training (you get in a real aeroplane you are drilled to look up flight plan data, weather and restrictions) But it is also equipment - drones don't have transponders, the software to fly them ignores flight restrictions (or rather never has that) and so on - drones need this extra stuff out of the factory.

zlynx 8y ago

It's a good idea, but making it a felony is not. Is everything going to be a felony these days? Why? It attaches serious long term consequences, because a FELONY is widely regarded as a crime of direct, major harm against a person. Flying a drone that actually causes a collision, sure, maybe that's a felony. Just getting caught in the area, because the pilot is curious and maybe never even /heard/ of this law? No, that's not a felony, in my opinion.

brian-armstrong 8y ago
If you aren’t up to date on the applicable laws, you have no business flying the drone. Considering that drones have prevented planes from flying over with fire suppressant, this very much does meet the standard of causing harm.
- GuiA 8y ago
  Flying a drone legally should require a license, much like operating a ham radio does. This would ensure that all drone operators have basic knowledge of what is expected of them (such as “don’t fly a drone over a wildfire”), and make it straightforward to fine/prosecute operators who are flying without a license. If the majority of operators are responsible, educated, and respect the rules, it could even help relax some of the rules around drone operation in the long run.
mattsfrey 8y ago
A college kid that has a fake id to buy booze with is guilty of a felony. Just because something is a felony rarely means it will be prosecuted as such. I'm sure in any case that doesn't result in actual harm the charges would be heavily reduced or dropped. Making it a misdemeanor almost by virtue makes it pretty much a joke, and it's actually a very serious issue.
- kolpa 8y ago
  https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/felony.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/felony.asp "a misdemeanor is a lesser offense, punishable by imprisonment for up to a year." Is a year in prison a "joke"? A legal theory that says "I trust the authorities to ignore the law when I think they should" is a terrible theory.

dreamcompiler 8y ago

From TFA: "...could potentially become a federal crime" "Felony" does not equal "Federal Crime" and state lawmakers do not have the power to make anything a federal crime. Update: Above is correct, but article implied it is Colorado state lawmakers proposing this. In fact it is Colorado's federal congresspeople proposing it, and they are indeed proposing that it be a federal felony.

JustSomeNobody 8y ago

How about just imposing a very large fine instead? However, if it impedes rescue efforts, then make it a felony (as it already would be).

wyldfire 8y ago

How feasible/infeasible would it be to permit firefighting aviators to emit a regulatory alert beacon to any nearby drone and, if necessary, a regulatory override? Maybe it would trigger some kind of landing function? It's hard to imagine any kind of override function that doesn't introduce new hazards, though. If drone manufacturers could work with global spectrum allocation and emergency response agencies, maybe they could avoid big legislative hammers.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

opwieurposiu 8y ago

Private water bombers are paid a per-diem, regardless of whether they do any drops or not. Thus the safest way to make money is pretend you saw a drone. Aerial operations will shut down and you get your money with zero work and zero wear and tear on your aircraft. The vast majority of "Drones" spotted from aircraft are not really drones, they are birds or plastic bags or a figment of the imagination.