5 ms·

Everything I've read and heard about this FAA rule is that it will more or less crush independent designers and pilots, leaving the skies to commercial companie

Everything I've read and heard about this FAA rule is that it will more or less crush independent designers and pilots, leaving the skies to commercial companies. I feel like this title is trying to spin a very, very bad thing.

emilfihlman 7y ago
100%. This is not a good thing and the article here is pretty much a bought piece.
hyperbovine 7y ago
Bad for whom? Aviation was much safer both for the passengers and the poor guy on the ground once it became professionalized.
- falcolas 7y ago
  And yet you can still fly under 1,200 feet Above Ground Level (where I am) without being controlled (Class G airspace). I (personally) feel like hobby and personal drones fall into this kind of "general use air space" usecase.
  - pc86 7y ago
    Some places. At some times. It's not a hard and fast rule and there are plenty of spaces where controlled airspace extends to the ground.
    - falcolas 7y ago
      Which also describes legal locations to use drones. You, without an exception, can’t fly a drone in class e or above airspace.
  - paulmd 7y ago
    That's the part this regulation is taking away, more or less. That airspace is being given to Amazon for commercial operations.
    - falcolas 7y ago
      Crop dusters, paraplanes, paragliders, kite flyers, and amateur rocket enthusiasts are all going to be mighty disappointed if that airspace is “given away”.
      - paulmd 7y ago
        It strongly appears that the FAA does not care what hobbyists think about it. The feedback has been near-universally negative and I doubt it will make any difference at all, any more than the commentary to the FCC changed Ajit Pai's stance.
- allovernow 7y ago
  Drones aren't carrying hundreds of passengers in machines that weigh hundreds of tons. The risk here is far removed from the severity of the regulations and the associated cost to hobby flight. There is also an argument to be made that the government may have interests in maintaining surveillance asymmetry - prying citizenry can see much farther through the eyes of a drone, and this can act as a minor check on government power.
  - jedberg 7y ago
    Just the other day some firefighters had to cancel a water drop because some moron was flying a drone over the fire. Because of that the fire spread more than it had to. So yes, there is real danger even with small unmanned drones.
closetohome 7y ago
Exactly. It's rent-seeking by existing aviation companies that don't want to share with drone startups. The FAA has spent the last two decades making sure the US is in last place when it comes to commercialized drones, and this is a continuation of those efforts.
paulmd 7y ago
Yes. This is an extremely contrived angle on a terrible regulation. Zoos: will they create a thriving new economy for animal cages? We report, you decide! Outline any hypothetical new regulation and of course there will be someone who specializes in helping you comply with it. Straight-up broken window fallacy.

emilfihlman 7y ago

100%. This is not a good thing and the article here is pretty much a bought piece.

hyperbovine 7y ago

Bad for whom? Aviation was much safer both for the passengers and the poor guy on the ground once it became professionalized.

falcolas 7y ago
And yet you can still fly under 1,200 feet Above Ground Level (where I am) without being controlled (Class G airspace). I (personally) feel like hobby and personal drones fall into this kind of "general use air space" usecase.
- pc86 7y ago
  Some places. At some times. It's not a hard and fast rule and there are plenty of spaces where controlled airspace extends to the ground.
  - falcolas 7y ago
    Which also describes legal locations to use drones. You, without an exception, can’t fly a drone in class e or above airspace.
- paulmd 7y ago
  That's the part this regulation is taking away, more or less. That airspace is being given to Amazon for commercial operations.
  - falcolas 7y ago
    Crop dusters, paraplanes, paragliders, kite flyers, and amateur rocket enthusiasts are all going to be mighty disappointed if that airspace is “given away”.
    - paulmd 7y ago
      It strongly appears that the FAA does not care what hobbyists think about it. The feedback has been near-universally negative and I doubt it will make any difference at all, any more than the commentary to the FCC changed Ajit Pai's stance.
allovernow 7y ago
Drones aren't carrying hundreds of passengers in machines that weigh hundreds of tons. The risk here is far removed from the severity of the regulations and the associated cost to hobby flight. There is also an argument to be made that the government may have interests in maintaining surveillance asymmetry - prying citizenry can see much farther through the eyes of a drone, and this can act as a minor check on government power.
- jedberg 7y ago
  Just the other day some firefighters had to cancel a water drop because some moron was flying a drone over the fire. Because of that the fire spread more than it had to. So yes, there is real danger even with small unmanned drones.

closetohome 7y ago

Exactly. It's rent-seeking by existing aviation companies that don't want to share with drone startups. The FAA has spent the last two decades making sure the US is in last place when it comes to commercialized drones, and this is a continuation of those efforts.

paulmd 7y ago

Yes. This is an extremely contrived angle on a terrible regulation. Zoos: will they create a thriving new economy for animal cages? We report, you decide! Outline any hypothetical new regulation and of course there will be someone who specializes in helping you comply with it. Straight-up broken window fallacy.