4 ms·
Fair enough, I am not a pilot, just a nerd so I wasn’t aware of this! I’d agree the helicopter rules seem most appropriate, though I guess I’d still feel like
by appreciatorBus 1y ago
Fair enough, I am not a pilot, just a nerd so I wasn’t aware of this!
I’d agree the helicopter rules seem most appropriate, though I guess I’d still feel like that would still rule out operating anywhere near a building under construction.
That said, a regular helicopter that suffers a loss of power or other fault, still has options like autorotation to at least attempt a landing without killing anyone on the ground. Do drones have any equivalent ? I.e. if battery is below x% it returns to safe landing spot?
- wat10000 1y ago"Without hazard" is pretty subjective, but I agree that it probably shouldn't include casually flying around cranes. I don't know how drones are programmed, but landing immediately if the battery gets low certainly sounds like a sensible precaution. Electric motors might be reliable enough that you don't have to worry about gracefully handling failure of those. I hope so, because I don't think a quadcopter has much hope if any motor fails.
- cmurf 1y agoAs far as I'm aware 14 CFR 107 lacks anything like what applies to aircraft in case of power plant failure. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/part-91#p-91.119(a) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/part-91#p-91.119(a) The catch all under both regulations is anything that's "careless and wreckless" https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/part-107#p-107.23 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/part-107#p-107.23 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/section-91.13 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/section-91.13 Was this particular operation careless and wreckless? Could be. Someone else in the thread said the weather conditions included mist. I'm skeptical misty conditions also permits a minimum 3 miles of visibility, but what do I know I'm just a pilot. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/part-107#p-107.51(c) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/part-107#p-107.51(c) But also, it's possible the waiver I assume Amazon is operating under could include visibility. I assume this because Part 107 requires visual line of sight operation, but Amazon's operation sounds like beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS). I don't know anything about that. I'd like to think the waiver and the operating requirements are public information, but I don't know that either. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/section-107.31 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/section-107.31 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/part-107#p-107.205(c) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/part-107#p-107.205(c)