That is my point.
If these drones are as dangerous as people are up in arms about then what about other low level flying aircraft?
I live near a hospital that has a helipad and has medevac helicopters coming and going all the time. What happens when someone is flying a drone in what I can only assume to be a 'legal' manner (FAA regulation is what anything below 400 feet is fine?) and hits a copter? Is the drone operator negligent in that situation and face serious charges? If there's such a huge risk is there any type of license program? Can anyone go out and buy a drone and fly up to 200 feet and hit a low flying aircraft and have no way to trace it back to them?
Are we saying that the only place drones can't fly is near wild fires? Are we suggesting that its ok for them to ground all firefighter planes because they spot a drone thats flying 50 feet off the ground and they don't want to risk it? Is there any system in place other than someone making a judgement call when they see a drone in the area to say the fire fighter planes are grounded? Do we have bird spotters doing the same thing?
Any time a medevac helicopter is taking off or landing is there an alert put out to drone owners to land their toys? What about news helicopters or police helicopters?
Seems to be a lot of questions and again, no solid information being provided other than these drones are evil.
that's controlled airspace. Not supposed to be there, if flying within 5 miles of controlled airspace there is already a requirement to notify the operator.
the regulations already exist. The problem is educating people about them before they do something really dumb.
you're the one that keeps saying there's nobody putting out information. I'm telling you the information, and it's freely available on the AMA and FAA website.
Don't be obtuse.
Let's say you're traveling at 150 MPH on the freeway and I drop a 2 kilo rock into your windshield.
That's what it would be like for a full scale aircraft to hit a quad.
and yes, it's not generally a problem because in the rest of the world, where firefighting isn't happening, full scale aircraft stay above 500 feet.
We stay below 400. no issues.
Before you go spouting off about things you obviously don't know jack about, why don't you go and do some reading before you talk out of your ass?
Here's the AMA guidelines.
https://www.modelaircraft.org/files/105.pdf
here's the existing FAA regulations
https://www.faa.gov/uas/model_aircraft/
http://knowbeforeyoufly.org/
and the letter regarding our "special rule"
https://www.faa.gov/uas/media/model_aircraft_spec_rule.pdf
They already deem model aircraft under their purview, they just have chosen not to bother us.
Historically, the FAA has considered model aircraft to be aircraft that fall within the
statutory and regulatory definitions of an aircraft, as they are contrivances or devices that
are “invented, used, or designed to navigate, or fly in, the air.” See 49 USC 40102 and 14
CFR 1.1. As aircraft, these devices generally are subject to FAA oversight and
enforcement. However, consistent with FAA’s enforcement philosophy, FAA’s
oversight of model aircraft has been guided by the risk that these operations present. The
FAA first recognized in 1981 that “model aircraft can at times pose a hazard to full-scale
aircraft in flight and to persons and property on the surface,” and recommended a set of
voluntary operating standards for model aircraft operators to follow to mitigate these
safety risks. See Advisory Circular 91-57, Model Aircraft Operating Standards (June 9,
1981). These operating standards included restricting operations over populated areas,
limiting use of the devices around spectators until after the devices had been flight tested
and proven airworthy; restricting operations to 400 feet above the surface; requiring that
the devices give right of way to, and avoid flying near manned aircraft, and using
observers to assist in operations.
So as I said, a "gentleman's agreement" that as long as we pose no risk they leave us alone.
see how it says that they partnered with leading advocacy organization? Yeah, that means we as a community are responsible for policing our own.
which is why people that aren't morons attempt to educate morons on the safe usage. It is a big deal, because if we fail the FAA is going to start forcing regulations down our throat. they have the authority to do so. they could with one letter shut down our entire industry. So yeah, those of us that have been in the hobby for a long time take it very serious.
Avoiding manned aircraft is rule #1. My flying field is near a county airport, and occasionally they get curious, and they come below 500 feet to have a look. Now that's entirely their fault, our location is known to the airport, as we are required to notify them of our operation by law. That still doesn't change a damned thing, if there's the possibility, even through a full scale pilot being dumb, that I may strike a manned aircraft I have an obligation to crash my shit to avoid them. No questions, no hesitation, I will put my very expensive model into the ground to avoid striking a full scale aircraft.
Hopefully I've cleared all of this up for you. It's not that regulations don't exist, they do, it's just that we'd like for the FAA to continue seeing us as a no/low risk user and not decide to place all of their weight on the hobby. It's entirely possible though that if some idiot with a quad brings down a firefighting plane that the public outcry would be enough for them to change their opinion, and then we would be subject to every single regulation that affects full scale aircraft. It's best not to poke the bear.
