3 ms·
DJI, who makes the majority of consumer drones, has already implemented broadcast-based radio ID, but that's not what the FAA proposal suggests and is not the p
by chrisdalke 6y ago
DJI, who makes the majority of consumer drones, has already implemented broadcast-based radio ID, but that's not what the FAA proposal suggests and is not the part of the regulation that is being criticized.
In fact, the FAA has explicitly stated that they don't want to use a radio-broadcast system like ADS-B (the equivalent for general aviation). The solution being proposed involves a proprietary internet-based system that has privacy/security implications among other issues -- The system would send the location of any user to a third-party company, would require a subscription, etc.
The solution does very little to alleviate the concerns you are discussing and many more reasonable proposals have been suggested which DO involve radio ID. My favorite solutions involve a combination of a radio beacon broadcasting GPS and registration # in the style of ADS-B for larger drones/aircraft, and for smaller aircraft an app-based system where users "check in" with a flight plan. But keep in mind that the outrage is not over any regulation by the FAA, it's that their proposal completely disregards existing industry standards like those put out by DJI and creates an expensive, hard to enforce system that favors large corporate interests.
Let's keep in mind that there are millions of drones in the US (1.1 million registered with the FAA, and many more that have not been registered because they are <250g or custom-built.) and have not had a single incident involving injury or death. Every single incident involving a drone has involved the concern of violation of someone's privacy or violation of an airspace, and even in those incidents there has been a lot of hysteria involved in the media response. In my opinion this absolutely does not justify preemptively building an expansive surveillance infrastructure around technology that has, so far, proven to be very safe.
- rtkwe 6y agoI do think requiring a specific 3rd party subscription is silly and over the top. I was generally defending the broad idea of drone regulations which I've seen a lot of reflexive push back to. And ADS-B style is probably the best and easiest option. It can be an easy add on to existing quads and probably done pretty cheaply. Places with airspace concerns can easily setup a base station to listen to their local area. > Every single incident involving a drone has involved the concern of violation of someone's privacy or violation of an airspace, and even in those incidents there has been a lot of hysteria involved in the media response They haven't yet (at least in a mass event, several have fallen on crowds etc) but violations of airspace, especially around airports, don't have to actually cause injury because the threat of an airliner engine eating one somewhere between their commit speed and their rudder authority speed or any time really during take off and landing requires airports be extremely cautious about drone sightings.
- chrisdalke 6y agoI agree, I think there's a much smaller pushback from the more dedicated community about the method for tracking and the limits around DIY aircraft -- If it was a plug-and-play transmitter that you had to pay for and register, I think that would be fine. It could be integrated into the RC receivers on your plane, powered via 5v servo cable, or part of your transmitter. But this odd system involving a proprietary cloud and "phone-home" style telemetry doesn't sit well, especially because it's specified in a way that makes it impossible for any DIY aircraft to comply.
- jjwiseman 6y agoI agree with you that we don't need an expansive surveillance infrastructure around drones (yet), but > have not had a single incident involving injury or death That is... very wrong. Don't do an image search on "drone injury" unless you have a strong stomach. Drone cuts off tip of photographer's nose: https://www.brooklynpaper.com/drone-strike-our-photographer-injured-by-tgi-fridays-mistletoe-copter/ https://www.brooklynpaper.com/drone-strike-our-photographer-... Drone injures Australian triathlete: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26921504 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-26921504 Drone injures bystanders in Virginia crowd: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/drone-crashes-into-virginia-bull-run-crowd/2013/08/26/424e0b9e-0e00-11e3-85b6-d27422650fd5_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/drone-crashes-into-virgi... RC plane kills spectator at football game: https://www.nytimes.com/1979/12/15/archives/fan-hurt-by-model-plane-at-halftime-at-shea-dies-disregard-charged.html https://www.nytimes.com/1979/12/15/archives/fan-hurt-by-mode... RC helicopter kills 19-year-old: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/nyregion/remote-controlled-copter-fatally-strikes-pilot-at-park.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/nyregion/remote-controlle...
- chrisdalke 6y agoThank you for collecting that list, I stand corrected. I've heard that original statement echoed several times in the RC community -- But I think sometimes people are separating out incidents from gas RC aircraft, RC helicopters, commercial operation etc. in a way that might be a little disingenuous.