3 ms·

After reading this thread, i thought of a sort of obvious solution. Require some amount of liability insurance. There are all sorts of complex regulations tha

by jfoutz 8y ago

After reading this thread, i thought of a sort of obvious solution. Require some amount of liability insurance. There are all sorts of complex regulations that could be put in place, but this is an easy, low effort one.

sokoloff 8y ago
Are you assuming that the insurance industry will sufficiently regulate safety to achieve a safe overall outcome? (Note that this is in significant parts true today in the manned, piston-engine aircraft world.) Or just suggesting insurance so that the injured get paid?
- jfoutz 8y ago
  I’m suggesting it’s a very lightweight regulation. We are in this weird time, where actual safety is hard to ascertain. The safest solution is to simply ban drones. But, there might be some utility there. Building up a history of risk would be super helpful. Some things are obvious. A six ounce toy is less dangerous than a 12 rotor monster. But that toy can still cause problems when it’s floating over the freeway. I think insurance would create a data collection environment that could drive more realistic, useful regulations. FWIW, movie studios generally require 5 million liability for drone shots. It’s pretty cheap to purchase, but those pilots are professional. Expanding to amateurs is complicated. Insurance gives some visibility into that complexity.
cmurf 8y ago
There is no regulation requiring private pilots obtain insurance. Such a requirement comes from the bank whose loan made it possible to acquire said plane; and most any airport with hangars will require evidence of it. I'm not sure what buying insurance does. It certainly provides no standardization of rules or training. Have you read any FARs? There are FARs for flying kites and ultralights. What about any of that do you think is so complicated? Feel free to use a regulation in FAR 91 as an example for something onerous that insurance can obviate. One of my favorite regulations in these UAV conversations is: § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General. Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes: (a)Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface. There is no reason at all why a drone should ever hurt someone, other than sheer incompetency and lack of imagination. Now where are you going to get that imagination? And how are you going to obtain competency? Insurance doesn't get you either of those things.

by jfoutz 8y ago

sokoloff 8y ago

Are you assuming that the insurance industry will sufficiently regulate safety to achieve a safe overall outcome? (Note that this is in significant parts true today in the manned, piston-engine aircraft world.) Or just suggesting insurance so that the injured get paid?

jfoutz 8y ago
I’m suggesting it’s a very lightweight regulation. We are in this weird time, where actual safety is hard to ascertain. The safest solution is to simply ban drones. But, there might be some utility there. Building up a history of risk would be super helpful. Some things are obvious. A six ounce toy is less dangerous than a 12 rotor monster. But that toy can still cause problems when it’s floating over the freeway. I think insurance would create a data collection environment that could drive more realistic, useful regulations. FWIW, movie studios generally require 5 million liability for drone shots. It’s pretty cheap to purchase, but those pilots are professional. Expanding to amateurs is complicated. Insurance gives some visibility into that complexity.

cmurf 8y ago

There is no regulation requiring private pilots obtain insurance. Such a requirement comes from the bank whose loan made it possible to acquire said plane; and most any airport with hangars will require evidence of it. I'm not sure what buying insurance does. It certainly provides no standardization of rules or training. Have you read any FARs? There are FARs for flying kites and ultralights. What about any of that do you think is so complicated? Feel free to use a regulation in FAR 91 as an example for something onerous that insurance can obviate. One of my favorite regulations in these UAV conversations is: § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General. Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes: (a)Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface. There is no reason at all why a drone should ever hurt someone, other than sheer incompetency and lack of imagination. Now where are you going to get that imagination? And how are you going to obtain competency? Insurance doesn't get you either of those things.