7 ms·

I'm a pilot. We have a saying: that the FARs (Federal Aviation Regulations) are written in blood. It's very literal. The rulebook for manned flight is comprised

I'm a pilot. We have a saying: that the FARs (Federal Aviation Regulations) are written in blood. It's very literal. The rulebook for manned flight is comprised mostly of regulations enacted because someone died in a preventable way and we are a deliberately safety-conscious culture. Aviation has 115 years under its belt, and many of those are full of fatalities. One of the issues I see with drones as an emerging industry is that people seem unwilling to learn from our history. I've only been flying for a few years and myself and most of my friends have near-miss stories with other full size, fairly slow moving aircaft. How can we expect to see a drone head-on where there's no relative motion? Having the privileged of flying in the national airspace system means shouldering the responsibility of keeping yourself, your passengers, and the people around you safe. Knowing the airplane, weather, and terrain can keep you and your passengers safe. To keep everyone else safe, you need to work with the system so that we can manage increasingly congested areas around the country. TLDR: If drone companies and operators want to be treated like grownups, they'll need to grow up.

nybble41 8y ago
> the privileged of flying in the national airspace system This is exactly the core of the problem. You've claimed the entire atmosphere as your private domain, from the ground up. Territorial claims are founded on use; you have no right to exclude others from airspace which is not part of a routine flight corridor. Certainly nothing below 400' and not part of a standard takeoff or approach glide path should be considered part of the national airspace system or otherwise subject to FAA jurisdiction.
- inamberclad 8y ago
  It's not private, it's a national resource. Every time you fly any airliner you use this system. The reason the US airspace system is so expansive is that it's necessary to allow the level of freedom afforded to private aircraft (think Piper, not Gulfstream) while maintaining safety and coverage as top priorities. However, you're correct that most airspace below 400 feet AGL shouldn't be considered part of the system. Generally, that's not considered navigable unless it's being used takeoff and landing.
  - nybble41 8y ago
    > It's not private, it's a national resource. If you're setting rules for how something can be used then you're treating it as your private property. Even if you happen to be the U.S. government. So-called "public property" is nothing more or less than property the government has claimed for its own exclusive (i.e. private) use. > Every time you fly any airliner you use this system. Obviously. That's the same as saying "planes fly in the air". But commercial flights follow defined routes between specific airports; they don't need to claim the entire atmosphere for that, just the relatively tiny corridors they routinely fly through. > Generally, [below 400' AGL is] not considered navigable unless it's being used takeoff and landing. And yet here we are, with the FAA imposing onerous regulations on hobbyists flying model aircraft too small to pose any realistic threat to anything well below that altitude.

nybble41 8y ago

> the privileged of flying in the national airspace system This is exactly the core of the problem. You've claimed the entire atmosphere as your private domain, from the ground up. Territorial claims are founded on use; you have no right to exclude others from airspace which is not part of a routine flight corridor. Certainly nothing below 400' and not part of a standard takeoff or approach glide path should be considered part of the national airspace system or otherwise subject to FAA jurisdiction.

inamberclad 8y ago
It's not private, it's a national resource. Every time you fly any airliner you use this system. The reason the US airspace system is so expansive is that it's necessary to allow the level of freedom afforded to private aircraft (think Piper, not Gulfstream) while maintaining safety and coverage as top priorities. However, you're correct that most airspace below 400 feet AGL shouldn't be considered part of the system. Generally, that's not considered navigable unless it's being used takeoff and landing.
- nybble41 8y ago
  > It's not private, it's a national resource. If you're setting rules for how something can be used then you're treating it as your private property. Even if you happen to be the U.S. government. So-called "public property" is nothing more or less than property the government has claimed for its own exclusive (i.e. private) use. > Every time you fly any airliner you use this system. Obviously. That's the same as saying "planes fly in the air". But commercial flights follow defined routes between specific airports; they don't need to claim the entire atmosphere for that, just the relatively tiny corridors they routinely fly through. > Generally, [below 400' AGL is] not considered navigable unless it's being used takeoff and landing. And yet here we are, with the FAA imposing onerous regulations on hobbyists flying model aircraft too small to pose any realistic threat to anything well below that altitude.