4 ms·

Why is the FAA so against drones (or whatever you want to call them) is any case? Sure none of us want police drones circling our backyards, but there are so ma

Why is the FAA so against drones (or whatever you want to call them) is any case? Sure none of us want police drones circling our backyards, but there are so many positive uses that the FAA seems intent on stifling like search and rescue, agriculture and surveying.

bsder 12y ago
I suspect that the FAA's reaction is mostly just "Oh shit, we need a ruling on this before it gets out of hand and something becomes fait accompli. We'll default to no and let up later once we have some visibility." However, if you want reasons: 1) Hazard to the uninvolved A car is confined roughly to roads. A car failing on a road is unlikely to deviate much from the road (likely to encounter telephone poles, trees, curbs, guardrails, etc.) and is unlikely to kill unrelated people even it it hurts another motorist. A drone falling from the sky is a hazard to non-drone people--when it fails it IS coming out of the sky. Sure, you could confine the drones to over roads, but the disruptive effects, as you point out, are mostly about NOT being confined to a road. 2) Liability How do you trace that failed drone back to the person controlling it? It's wireless. Now all drones need to be registered. 3) Autonomy Do you want a drone to have some autonomy? Before you say no, I would personally rather have a functioning drone fly home safely if it loses radio link rather than drop out of the sky. Who's responsible for that autonomy? 4) Collisions Drones would be a huge hazard near where planes are flying. Sure, banning drones near airports can be done. However, commercial airplanes have fairly heavily traffic corridors by virtue of the ATC system, and some of the corridors go over land in the middle of nowhere where drones would like to be operating. 5) Law enforcement/military Drones render terrain control suspect. This has NOT sunk in to most law enforcement (and probably not much military, either, since the US hasn't yet fought an enemy armed with drones of its own.). Using a drone to put even something as simple as a flashbang behind a police line would cause total chaos. Police are used to winning by surrounding--smaller overall force, but only deployed as a greater number against a smaller number in terrain control. Drones can come from any direction, can be totally automated, and are extremely hard to target (we use shotguns for bird hunting instead of rifles for a reason). I would be stunned if some of the drug gangs aren't already deploying drones--we're talking about people who deploy submarines for crying out loud. There are good reasons for the FAA to knee-jerk to "NO! STOP!"
radnor 12y ago
I imagine the FAA is scared because drones require absolutely no training or licensing to buy and fly. Just check out all these downed drones, many of which crashed due to mechanical issues - http://makezine.com/magazine/drowned-drones-when-a-multicopter-hits-the-water/ http://makezine.com/magazine/drowned-drones-when-a-multicopt...

bsder 12y ago

I suspect that the FAA's reaction is mostly just "Oh shit, we need a ruling on this before it gets out of hand and something becomes fait accompli. We'll default to no and let up later once we have some visibility." However, if you want reasons: 1) Hazard to the uninvolved A car is confined roughly to roads. A car failing on a road is unlikely to deviate much from the road (likely to encounter telephone poles, trees, curbs, guardrails, etc.) and is unlikely to kill unrelated people even it it hurts another motorist. A drone falling from the sky is a hazard to non-drone people--when it fails it IS coming out of the sky. Sure, you could confine the drones to over roads, but the disruptive effects, as you point out, are mostly about NOT being confined to a road. 2) Liability How do you trace that failed drone back to the person controlling it? It's wireless. Now all drones need to be registered. 3) Autonomy Do you want a drone to have some autonomy? Before you say no, I would personally rather have a functioning drone fly home safely if it loses radio link rather than drop out of the sky. Who's responsible for that autonomy? 4) Collisions Drones would be a huge hazard near where planes are flying. Sure, banning drones near airports can be done. However, commercial airplanes have fairly heavily traffic corridors by virtue of the ATC system, and some of the corridors go over land in the middle of nowhere where drones would like to be operating. 5) Law enforcement/military Drones render terrain control suspect. This has NOT sunk in to most law enforcement (and probably not much military, either, since the US hasn't yet fought an enemy armed with drones of its own.). Using a drone to put even something as simple as a flashbang behind a police line would cause total chaos. Police are used to winning by surrounding--smaller overall force, but only deployed as a greater number against a smaller number in terrain control. Drones can come from any direction, can be totally automated, and are extremely hard to target (we use shotguns for bird hunting instead of rifles for a reason). I would be stunned if some of the drug gangs aren't already deploying drones--we're talking about people who deploy submarines for crying out loud. There are good reasons for the FAA to knee-jerk to "NO! STOP!"

radnor 12y ago

I imagine the FAA is scared because drones require absolutely no training or licensing to buy and fly. Just check out all these downed drones, many of which crashed due to mechanical issues - http://makezine.com/magazine/drowned-drones-when-a-multicopter-hits-the-water/ http://makezine.com/magazine/drowned-drones-when-a-multicopt...